Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: [Phys-l] Energy use (was CFLs)



I meant to add that we cannot lead the way to the development of new technologies without having the
economy and the energy supply to make that happen.



On 8 Apr 2009 at 14:07, marx@phy.ilstu.edu wrote:

There is a strong correlation between GDP and energy use. We enjoy our standard of living and pay
for the energy we use to maintain that standard. There are many though that want us to revert to a
standard of living that this country hasn't seen for more than a century. That is ridiculous. What we
can do is find ways for people around the world to generate enough energy to improve their standard of
living - which would also go a long way to reduce the birth rate in many countries - without necessarily
causing great harm to the Earth.



On 8 Apr 2009 at 11:30, Rick Tarara wrote:


----- Original Message -----
From: "Shapiro, Mark" <mshapiro@Exchange.FULLERTON.EDU>


I disagree with your analysis. By not charging the ratepayers for the
external costs, you reduce the incentive to conserve. Thereby driving the
cost up for everyone. Here in southern California we have tiered rates for
residential electric consumption to encourage conservation.

US energy policies have led to profligate consumption of energy. We have
about 5% of the world's population, yet we consume 25% of the world's
energy resources.

I get really tired of this one as well--(and the percentage is falling
quickly as China rapidly moving to become king of the energy use hill). Our
energy use per person is about the same as Canada and Australia. Not too
far above Germany. Big, developed nations, use energy. Its why they are
developed. The larger the physical size of the country, the more energy
necessary to move people and goods. The more industry that resides within
the country, and the more that raw materials are mined, processed, and used
within a country, the higher the energy use. Switzerland seems to use no
energy--but it lives off the energy burned in France, Germany and Italy.
You also have population density and (more to your point) life-style
differences. If all Americans would put their family of four into a 1000
square foot apartment, with that apartment stacked on top of and surrounded
on all sides by other such apartments--sure the energy usage would drop.
Yes, we can use less energy--but I repeat that reducing by more than 25% is
tough. As a country of 300+ million people, stretching 3000 miles coast to
coast and 1000 miles border to border, with (still) the biggest economy in
the world and a 21st century technology, the U.S. does not do all that bad.
The problem is really not that the U.S. uses too much energy (OK, a little
too much), it is that the rest of the world uses too little to provide a
21st century living standard to their people. The comparison to be made is
between the developed world and the 'third world'--average out the
variations for population, area, population density, percentage of 'home
grown' economy versus imported resources and then do your comparisons.
Spare us, please, from the 5%--25% mantra. It really is not useful.

Rick

_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l



_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l