Abstract
The view that widespread improvements in energy efficiency can by themselves do anything to halt the build-up of greenhouse gases around the globe is fundamentally unsound. It is based on the same fallacies that underlie the claim that energy savings from improving efficiency can substitute for new energy supply. The paper by Keepin and Kats 1 claiming that, per tonne of coal not burned, improvements in energy efficiency are more cost-effective than substituting nuclear for coal-fired power is therefore an irrelevancy as far as this debate is concerned. Reductions is energy intensity of output that are not damaging to the economy are associated with increases, not decreases, in energy demand at the macroeconomic level. Even within the boundaries of their own flawed approach, their attempt 2 to refute the critique of their thesis made by Jones 3 was little more than misdirected grape shot with no discernable connected thread of argument.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
