forums energies: society, ecology and clean technologies

A small image (IEA figures) extracted from below maps on energy to see here:
https://www.econologie.com/l-energie-dan ... -3883.html


This image says a lot about current eco-friendly speeches (including catastrophists and "green" policies), 80% of the energy consumed in 2030 will be fossil:



Attention I did not say that it was a reason to do nothing: just that gas oil and coal there are even more than enough ... for decades and the effect of tight in all this?

yeah, and it's not nuclear that will help us do without it ...

Another little "nice" reminder that is cold in the back (or rather hot), number of cars per inhabitant:

Could not help but make a new one: https://www.econologie.com/perspectives- ... -3884.html

Very good this little document. At the same time synthetic, but without forgetting much

There are still scenarios that are based on a massive development of energy saving technologies, they lead to very different results.

For example Greenpeace in the report energy revolutionthey set a scenario for a decline in overall consumption, but the proportion of fossil energy remains the majority.




The conjectures are also made without having real visions on the quantity of oil and gas still available. Without prejudice of how much, I think unfortunately that there is too much but it only binds me.

Minguinhirigue, the IEA (and the OECD) have made several possible senarii, the bottom of the cards had to take average figures.

Here are some senarii by the CME (World Energy Council):



Evolution according to 5 scenarios more or less ecologists (A Strong growth, B current reference, Ecologist) A1, A2 and A3 indicate more or less substitution for fossil fuels. (Source: World Energy Council).

In the best case C) the consumption increases ... The scenario of greenpeace foresees that gross overall consumption decline is therefore not very credible (except major breakage)!

Details and continuation: https://www.econologie.com/la-pollution- ... es-53.html

I think the reality will be much closer to that of the IEA than to that of Greenpeace. Besides Greenpeace zon to start showing the example: how much wind turbine to their name? Do their cargoes run on vegetable oil (at least partly)?

I think we must listen and listen to his conclusion: he understands that without major geopolitical break (or philosophical but we can dream!), The reality will be close to this one ... and it can not be denied.

Otherwise if Remundo, he forgot this: oil Laigret

And that too
https://www.econologie.com/forums/solaire-je ... t1520.html

Toutafé!

Oh but I know .... he forgot to come ... on Econologie.com simply!

hehehe

I know that the scenario of Greenpeace is unlikely, I also know your moods in front of their group. But they are trying to fight on the same table as economists globally, and they present a global alternative that is reflected in their chart. Their study is long and expanded, not to say it will happen as it is presented, but rather it can happen as desired ...

Because decision-makers, like world leaders, remain spectators of the macro-economy when everything is there to be actors. But it is not in their interests (financial among others, understood that renewable energies are "expensive" today ...)

Otherwise, the alternatives present on the site also question the very notion of gas or oil as fossil fuels. If the will is there, gas and oil can become renewable energy, synthesized from biomass!