For a single machine, improved fuel efficiency lowers the cost of fuel consumption. Historically the number of fuel-consuming devices in a particular industry usually increases as the costs decline. Each individual machine is more efficient then earlier technology, but overall fuel consumption rises when their increased numbers outstrip the individual fuel savings.
The article also mentions the failures of government enterprise (an oxymoron, IMHO) to solve these problems in the 1980's. Energy is the single most important factor for standard-of-living, so I question the agenda of anyone that wants to strangle the energy economy with taxes, regulation, etc.
Ultimately, the possible ways to structure the energy economy has two extremes: rely on centralized decision making from "government intelligence" or rely on the unregulated and distributed decision making of "market intelligence." (The many options along this spectrum include nationalization, public corporations, regulation, tax structuring, etc.) The expectation that "market forces" are preferable to "government control" has been ascendant for the last few decades, and I expect it will continue to be so for a good part of the 21st Century. For more on this point, I redirect you to a well-known public corporation:
This review versus the original.
on
Blink, Take 2
·
· Score: 1
This review doesn't strike me as diametrically opposed to the original review, which said, "His assertions are based on recent scientific findings, but are always presented as a story. This makes good conversation fodder, but can frustrate readers who prefer direct presentation of scientific arguments."
This review is different and tangential. The first review was slightly positive, but more intended to focus on describing the structure and content instead of passing judgment.
Whatever you think about this bestseller, it's definitely making waves, for better or worse, in the Noosphere. Besides, there's supposedly no such thing as bad publicity, I think it's ironic that this review will keep the book in the public eye for at least a modicum longer.
Slashdot Mirror
http://www.uh.edu/engines/epi984.htm
For a single machine, improved fuel efficiency lowers the cost of fuel consumption. Historically the number of fuel-consuming devices in a particular industry usually increases as the costs decline. Each individual machine is more efficient then earlier technology, but overall fuel consumption rises when their increased numbers outstrip the individual fuel savings.
The article also mentions the failures of government enterprise (an oxymoron, IMHO) to solve these problems in the 1980's. Energy is the single most important factor for standard-of-living, so I question the agenda of anyone that wants to strangle the energy economy with taxes, regulation, etc.
Ultimately, the possible ways to structure the energy economy has two extremes: rely on centralized decision making from "government intelligence" or rely on the unregulated and distributed decision making of "market intelligence." (The many options along this spectrum include nationalization, public corporations, regulation, tax structuring, etc.) The expectation that "market forces" are preferable to "government control" has been ascendant for the last few decades, and I expect it will continue to be so for a good part of the 21st Century. For more on this point, I redirect you to a well-known public corporation:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/commandingheights/
This review is different and tangential. The first review was slightly positive, but more intended to focus on describing the structure and content instead of passing judgment.
Whatever you think about this bestseller, it's definitely making waves, for better or worse, in the Noosphere. Besides, there's supposedly no such thing as bad publicity, I think it's ironic that this review will keep the book in the public eye for at least a modicum longer.