Thank you for your comments. I can tell this makes you angry, and I am actually sorry that’s the case. We need some concerted global action to tackle a very large problem, and it would be good to have all thoughtful people on board.
But, it would be hard to answer every incorrect statement you’ve makde, but I’ll address a few critical ideas.
- Energy efficiency is not “creating more energy with fewer jobs.” It’s getting some level of work you want done (a temperature, moving a vehicle, etc.) using less energy. In theory, yes, there would be fewer people back in the supply chain doing energy production work. But there are also people doing jobs related to energy efficiency —building retrofits, vehicle design and building parts for hybrids and EVs, etc — literally millions of jobs. See https://www.aee.net/ for their reports on the size of the Advanced Energy Economy.
- Of course lowering CO2 lowers energy costs if you do it right. Energy efficiency means spending less. And renewables in many, many locations are now cheaper. Big companies that are buying gigawatts of renewables are doing it to control risk and costs.
- Yes, less CO2 in the air is directly related to less burning of fuels which create particulate matter that worsen all kinds of health conditions. So less CO2 means healthier air.
- My premise is not a bald assertion without evidence — there’s boundless evidence if you’re willing to read it. My other medium post a few days ago addresses the assumption that tackling carbon will be expensive and refers to one important study by Citi (of many, many studies and analyses) that estimated the cost to the global economy of NOT reducing carbon at tends of trillions of dollars. Within that analysis was also an important point. Building the clean energy economy instead of the business as usual actually saved trillions as well.
- Finally, yes, there are two different, but related, scientific conversations (and more than that) on whether there’s ‘benefit’ to reducing CO2 and whether humans impact the climate. The vast, overwhelming consensus of science and economic studies on both questions is crystal clear, whether you accept it or not.