Why the energy transition is not enough

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-66396/v2

Download PDF

Article

Why the energy transition is not enough

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-66396/v2

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

Version 2

posted

You are reading this latest preprint version

Efforts to accommodate the growth in global energy consumption within a fragile biosphere are primarily focused on managing the transition towards a low-carbon energy mix. We show evidence that a more fundamental problem exists through a scaling relation, akin to Kleiber’s Law, between society’s energy consumption and material stocks. Humanity’s energy consumption scales at 0.78 of its material stocks, which implies predictable environmental pressure regardless of the energy mix. If true, future global energy scenarios imply vast amounts of materials and corresponding environmental degradation, which have not been adequately acknowledged. Thus, limits to energy consumption are needed regardless of the energy mix to stabilize human intervention in the biosphere.

Environmental Policy

Energy Engineering

Energy

Mass

Kleiber´s Law

Social Returns to Energy

Humanity’s rate of energy consumption (i.e., power) of 16.1 TW in 2010 is projected to increase by 94 – 247% by 2050, with a reference scenario at 140% given by SSP2 and RCP 4.5 (van Ruijven et al., 2019). On track with these expectations, humanity reached 18.9 TW in 2018 - a yearly 2% growth since 2010. Such growth is confronted by the well-documented realities of climate change (Tong et al., 2019), persistent 80% share of fossil fuels in the global energy mix (IEA, 2019), and declining quantity and quality of fossil fuel reserves (Chapman, 2014; Mohr et al., 2015). These issues have highlighted the need for an energy transition towards low-carbon energy sources (Grubler, 2012; Smil, 2016; Sovacool, 2016) such as renewables and nuclear (Moriarty & Honnery, 2016; World Nuclear Association, 2019). The main obstacles for such transition discussed in the literature have been slow deployment (Moriarty & Honnery, 2009), low energy return over investment (Murphy, 2014; Rye & Jackson, 2018), and the material requirements of new energy technologies, specifically metals such as cobalt and lithium (Giurco et al., 2019; Moreau et al., 2019; Valero et al., 2018).

We show evidence that the continued increase of energy throughput faces a more fundamental problem. The use of energy requires prime movers such as people, engines, computers, etc. that are built from materials found originally in nature. Moreover, the use of energy inevitably rearranges materials in the environment. This posits a problem that goes beyond the carbon content and specific material requirements of given technologies, and thus cannot be solved through substitution. Higher power rates need and provoke more materials (metals and others) being rearranged from otherwise healthy ecosystems into social structures such as firms, cities, and governments and into goods such as furniture, electronics, and food. In fact, the 20th century witnessed a 9-fold increase in humanity’s power alongside a 16-fold increase in its material stocks (Krausmann et al., 2017). We contend that the ecosystem degradation (MEA, 2005), biodiversity loss (IPBES, 2019), and dangerous human intervention in the Earth system (Steffen et al., 2015) that followed from such harvesting of the biosphere could have only partially been avoided with a low-carbon energy mix.

We evaluate what we believe is the first preliminary evidence of a coupling, akin to Kleiber’s Law in biological organisms, between power and the material stocks of social systems. Previous social allometric scaling relationships have not related power to mass, but power to birthrate and child mortality (Burger et al., 2011), and power to GDP/capita (Brown et al, 2011). Moreover, material constraints to the energy transition have been pointed out for specific materials (Giurco et al., 2019; Moreau et al., 2019; Valero et al., 2018), but not in a general approach as allowed through allometric scaling. We use a newly compiled dataset from published estimates of power and material stocks of Human civilization between 1900-2010 and the USA and Japan between 1980 and 2005. Like Kleiber’s Law, we use ordinary least squares on the logarithms of these variables to estimate the scaling parameter between them and then compare the resemblance to relationships found in biological organisms.

If true, this relation implies a strict limit to power growth that cannot be addressed with low-carbon energy sources. Using our results, we demonstrate that current projections of energy consumption and population growth imply unsustainable levels of material stocks as they imply considerable additional harvesting of the biosphere. We then suggest that current material stocks can be maintained while accommodating population growth through 2050 if a 2.0 kW/capita limit is established. Although this limit has been shown to be enough for a dignified life, it implies a considerable degrowth in more than half of the world´s countries.

Extended Kleiber’s Law

Biological organisms use foodstuff through mitochondria, cells, and muscles to rearrange carbon, hydrogen, and other elements into the components of a functional body and use that body to intervene in the world. Macroecological theory and Kleiber’s Law in particular show that a biological organisms’ power (P) is allometrically proportional to its mass (M) such that with and for intraspecific and interspecific species, respectively (Feldman & McMahon, 1983; Heusner, 1982; Kleiber, 1961).

Similarly, social systems act as super-organisms that also use energy to rearrange mass into living support structures, and then use those structures to modify the environment (Fig. 1) (Haberl et al., 2019; Krausmann et al., 2017; Rees, 2012). In a very real sense both animals and economies have “metabolisms”. Both consume, transform, and allocate energy to maintain complex adaptive systems far from thermodynamic equilibrium” (Brown et al., 2011). The main difference is that social systems use more types of energy sources (e.g., foodstuff, biomass, fossil fuels, electricity), through a broader set of prime movers (e.g., people, gas turbines, computers) to rearrange a wider set of materials (e.g., biomass, gravel, iron, silicon) into the components of a functional society (e.g., people, products, buildings, infrastructure).

Our data shows that power and material stocks in social systems seem to be related in a manner consistent with Kleiber’s Law in the USA [ 0.67 (95% CI 0.58-0.75, 95)], Japan [ 0.61 (95% CI 0.54-0.69, 94.3)], and globally [ 0.78 (95% CI 0.76-0.80, 98.6)] (Fig. 2.A). We combine these three super organisms with a sample of biological ones to relate power and material stocks over 14 and 17 orders of magnitude respectively and obtain 0.86 (95% CI 0.85-0.86, 99.9) (Fig. 2.B). This higher-than-expected exponent is a numerical artifact due to the different y-intercepts of the individual series’ best-fit curves. Independently centering each series eliminates the regression constants and yields 0.74 (95% CI 0.71-0.77, R² = 96.7) (Fig. 2.C). Whereas the results for the USA and Japan corresponds to biological intraspecific scaling (0.67 and 0.61 versus 0.67), Humanity’s scaling corresponds to biological interspecific scaling (0.78 versus 0.75), and the combined social and biological scaling is identical to Kleiber’s original result in 1961 (i.e., 0.74).

Why do social systems´ power and mass scale this way? One idea is based on fractal geometry (West et al., 1999), where the invariant “length” could be given by the individual person. Brown et al. (2011) use this idea arguing that “The energy and other resources that sustain these systems [animals and economies] are supplied by hierarchically branching networks, such as the blood vessels and lungs of mammals and the oil pipelines, power grids, and transportation networks of nations. Models of these networks suggest that three-quarter-power scaling optimizes distribution of resources”. Another idea is based on size-dependent limitation of resource storage (Maino et al., 2014; Thommen et al., 2019), where the role of macromolecules could be played by energy goods. A third idea is based on the interaction of physiological features with environmental conditions (Koziowski & Weiner, 1997), where growth and reproduction could be given by an economy´s aggregate investment and consumption. In any case, noting that the theoretical basis of Kleiber’s Law remains controversial after 80 years of research (Escala, 2019; Hulbert, 2014), finding a theoretical explanation for an extended Kleiber´s Law remains as future research that may become foundational science towards Humankind´s sustainability. In the meantime, further data on mass and energy of nations is important to broaden the empirical basis of this relationship.

The main implication of this proposal is that, regardless of the energy mix, future energy growth scenarios are fundamentally proportional to the rearrangement of prodigious amounts of materials given . For a projected population of 9.7 billion and per capita power consumption of 4 kW/capita, the resulting global power growth of 140% between 2010 and 2050 will result in Humanity´s material stocks increasing by 1109 Gt (95% CI 959 – 1271 Gt). The actual amount of raw materials taken from nature would be higher because more than one ton of materials must be extracted from nature per ton of materials included in civilization (Krausmann et al., 2018). Given that Humanity’s current material stock is roughly 800 Gt, how can an increase by 1109 Gt to 1909 Gt take place while maintaining the biosphere’s integrity? Estimates of Earth’s green matter, for example, vary from 268 to 901Gt C with 500-800 Gt C being the generally accepted range.

Trivially, the Extended Kleiber´s Law implies that material stocks simultaneously scale with per capita power and population growth (yellow plane, Figure 3A). The levels of growth in material stocks are shown in 50-year intervals (black, gray, blue, and red planes). The level of material stocks in 1950 (gray) coincide with the onset of the Great Acceleration. The increasing distances between the material-stock planes at 50-year durations depicts the changing speed in material use of the Great Acceleration.

The maximum sustainable level of material stock is currently unknown and undefined. It is likely that 1901 Gt (projected 2050 level) is unsustainable and dangerous, while 81 Gt (1950 level, just before the Great Acceleration) is likely sustainable and safe. The 2010 level of 792 Gt might already be unsustainable, considering that by then humanity had trespassed at least two planetary boundaries, yet it may could be sustainable if ecosystem protection, greener agriculture and low-carbon energy sources were implemented. In any case, setting that year´s material stocks as the maximum sustainable level helps begin the discussion of tradeoffs between per capita power and population. If the Extended Kleiber’s Law is true, the balance of these tradeoffs is foundational for sustainability science. For example, a goal to maintain material stocks in 2050 at the 2010 level (792 Gt) with a projected population of 9.7 billion would require no more than 2.0 kW/capita (Figure 3B, dotted line, red marker).

These results include technological progress and thus the tradeoffs cannot be avoided through it. For example, during the 20th century Humanity’s power scaled at 0.78 and not proportionally to mass at 1 because, for example, the energy cost of ammonia dropped from over 100 to 33 MJ/kg (Smil, 2001), of iron from over 50 to 10 MJ/kg (Smil, 2008), of aluminum from 50 to 13 MJ/kg (Smil, 2005), light bulbs’ efficiency improved from less than 25 to more than 175 lumen/W (Smil, 2003), and engines reduced their mass-to-power ratios from 90 to less than 1 g/W (Smil, 2005). Without these and other technological achievements power would have scaled proportionally to mass, and with 1 humanity’s 2010 material stock level would have been associated with power 8,000 times higher. If social systems obey an extended Kleiber’s Law as suggested, this relation between power and mass becomes a constraint for social metabolism as fundamental as in animal metabolism (West & Brown, 2005), and technological innovation plays a role in the former as important as evolution has played in the latter.

If population reductions are not an option, the most reasonable response would be a worldwide 2.0 kW/capita limit. The implementation of such limit poses gargantuan technical and political challenges. Given the difficulty and invasiveness of individual measurements of energy consumption, how could a country enforce it? And thus, how could a community of countries do so? Moreover, even if technically possible, it is unlikely that any country would willingly reduce its average per capita power (Smil, 2008). Historically this has only happened under extreme circumstances such as the fall of the Roman Empire and the breakdown of the Soviet Union. A peaceful and ordered lowering to 2.0 kW/capita would be unprecedented in medium-high-powered countries with 3.0 kW/capita (e.g., China, Chile), let alone in very-high-powered countries with more than 10.0 kW/capita (e.g., USA, Australia). In all, 53% of the 151 countries with data in 2014 had more than 2.0 kW/capita. In 2019 such percentage rises to 78% between the 80 countries with data, due to the growth in per capita power and selection bias among countries with most updated information.

Although unprecedented, we contend that such reduction of per capita power is needed regardless of the energy mix given the relation of mass and energy found here. Failing to do so risks disrupting the biophysical foundations of human civilization, and triggering waves of civil unrest and violent conflict in the process (Ahmed, 2017). Fortunately, there is extensive literature documenting asymptotic social returns to power for the Human Development Index (HDI) (Annila & Kuismanen, 2009; Arto et al., 2016; Lambert et al., 2014; Martínez & Ebenhack, 2008) and other indicators such as political freedom and improved water access (Arto et al., 2016; Goldemberg et al., 1985; Pasten & Santamarina, 2012; Schulz et al., 2008; Smil, 2008). Intuitively, while at low levels of per capita power (e.g., < 1.0 kW/capita) more power helps secure the necessities of life, over a certain threshold (e.g., > 5.0 kW/capita) the data shows such necessities have already been satisfied. Historically, early hunter-gatherers used just enough energy to satisfy their metabolic needs of ~0.1 kW/capita. Power per capita increased throughout the agricultural and successive industrial revolutions such that the current global average is ~2.3 kW/capita and surpasses 10kW/capita in some high-income countries. A specific limit at 2.0 kW/capita has been proposed by the 2000-watt society since 1998 based on the per capita power of western Europe during the 60s and the dignified life it enabled, and according to our results, it is coincidentally the value required to maintain material stocks in check below 800 Gt globally by 2050 given expected population levels.

Moreover, radical increases in resource productivity as outlined in Grubler et al. (2018) and Circular Economy proposals (e.g., Ellen MacArthur Foundation (2013)) could enable some growth in per capita consumption without more energy and material throughput, or their reduction without sacrificing living standards. In any case, such approach must be accompanied by strict limits to aggregate energy use and material stocks to avoid the rebound effect (e.g., Jevons paradox) that has prevented previous efficiency gains to translate into lower environmental pressure. Another approach would be to directly reduce working time and per capita consumption of good and services, which could be welfare-enhancing in high-powered societies (Pullinger, 2014) but would require a profound paradigm shift (Brand-Correa & Steinberger, 2017; Daly, 2014; Kuhn, 1962; Schmelzer, 2015; Vanhulst & Beling, 2014). Perhaps such shift, characterized by a voluntary reduction of overconsumption and the goal of a simpler life, is more critical than the energy transition for Humankind´s sustainability (Wiedman et. al, 2020).

All codes and data are available as supplementary information.

Humanity’s material stocks come from Krausmann et al. (2017) and those of the USA and Japan from Fishman et al. (2014)(Fishman et al., 2014). Both sources contain roughly the same non-human types of mass. A human type of mass was included by multiplying yearly population by yearly average weight. This type of mass accounts for virtually 0% of total material stocks. More detail is available upon request.

Humanity’s power comes from Smil (2017) and BP (2019). Data between 1900 and 1910 was linearly extrapolated. Power for the USA and Japan comes from U.S. Energy Information Administration (2019). Mass and power for biological organisms comes from Ramsey & Schafer (2013).

The Extended Kleiber’s Law model was estimated with Ordinary Least Squares using Eicker–Huber–White standard errors. Fig. 2A was obtained by independently regressing the series for Humanity, the USA and Japan; Fig. 2B by regressing those three series together alongside the series with biological organisms; and Fig. 2C by regressing these four series together after demeaning them independently.

The mass associated with future power levels was estimated with the inverse of the Extended Kleiber´s Law, i.e. with . The range of additional material stocks was estimated with the lower bound of the conservative future power prediction and the upper bound of the generous future power prediction.

The mass associated with different population levels at 2.0 kW/capita and with current projections were estimated with the inverse of the Extended Kleiber´s Law. This equation is also used to obtain the three-dimensional graphs depicting the relation between a continuum of materials, population, and per capita power levels.

Acknowledgments

Benjamin Leiva received funds from CONICYT PFCHA/DOCTORADO BECAS CHILE/2015–72160256 while completing this article. The funding source was not involved in the conduct of the research, preparation of the article, study design, data collection, analysis and interpretation of data, in the writing of the report or in the decision to submit the article for publication. The views expressed here, as well as any errors and/or omissions, are entirely the responsibility of the authors.

Ahmed, N. (2017). Failing States, Collapsing Systems: BioPhysical Triggers of Political Violence. Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-47816-6

Annila, A., & Kuismanen, E. (2009). Natural hierarchy emerges from energy dispersal. BioSystems, 95(3), 227–233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biosystems.2008.10.008

Arto, I., Capellán-Pérez, I., Lago, R., Bueno, G., & Bermejo, R. (2016). The energy requirements of a developed world. Energy for Sustainable Development, 33, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esd.2016.04.001

BP (2019). BP Statistical Review of World Energy. Published Online at OurWorldInData.Org. Retrieved from: ‘https://Ourworldindata.Org/Energy-Production-and-Changing-Energy-Sources [Online Resource Accessed November 14th, 2019].

Brand-Correa, L. I., & Steinberger, J. K. (2017). A Framework for Decoupling Human Need Satisfaction From Energy Use. Ecological Economics, 141, 43–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.05.019

Brown, J. H., Burnside, W. R., Davidson, A. D., DeLong, J. P., Dunn, W. C., Hamilton, M. J., Mercado-Silva, N., Nekola, J. C., Okie, J. G., Woodruff, W. H., & Zuo, W. (2011). Energetic Limits to Economic Growth. BioScience, 61(1), 19–26. https://doi.org/10.1525/bio.2011.61.1.7

Burger, O., DeLong, J. P., & Hamilton, M. J. (2011). Industrial energy use and the human life history. Sci. Rep., 1(56), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep00056

Chapman, I. (2014). The end of Peak Oil? Why this topic is still relevant despite recent denials. Energy Policy, 64, 93–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.05.010

Daly, H. (2014). From Uneconomic Growth to a Steady-State Economy (E. Elgar (ed.)). Northampton.

Ellen MacArthur Foundation. (2013). Towards the circular economy: Economic and business rationale for an accelerated transition.

Escala, A. (2019). The principle of similitude in biology From allometry to the formulation of dimensionally homogenous “Laws.” Theoretical Ecology, 12, 415–425. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12080-019-0408-5

Feldman, H. A., & McMahon, T. A. (1983). The 3/4 mass exponent for energy metabolism is not a statistical artifact. Respiration Physiology, 52, 149–163.

Fishman, T., Schandl, H., Tanikawa, H., Walker, P., & Krausmann, F. (2014). Accounting for the Material Stock of Nations. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 18(3), 407–420. https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12114

Giurco, D., Dominish, E., Florin, N., Watari, T., & McLellan, B. (2019). Requirements for minerals and metals for 100% renewable scenarios. In Achieving the Paris Climate Agreement Goals: Global and Regional 100% Renewable Energy Scenarios with Non-Energy GHG Pathways for +1.5C and +2C (pp. 437–457). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-05843-2_11

Goldemberg, J., Johansson, T., Reddy, A., & Williams, R. (1985). Basic needs and much more with one kilowatt per capita. Ambio, 14(4/5), 190–200. http://econpapers.repec.org/paper/hdrhdocpa/ hdocpa-2001-02.htm

Grubler, A. (2012). Energy transitions research: Insights and cautionary tales. Energy Policy, 50, 8–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2012.02.070

Grubler, A., Wilson, C., Bento, N., Boza-Kiss, B., Krey, V., McCollum, D. L., Rao, N. D., Riahi, K., Rogelj, J., De Stercke, S., Cullen, J., Frank, S., Fricko, O., Guo, F., Gidden, M., Havlík, P., Huppmann, D., Kiesewetter, G., Rafaj, P., … Valin, H. (2018). A low energy demand scenario for meeting the 1.5 °c target and sustainable development goals without negative emission technologies. Nature Energy, 3(6), 515–527. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41560-018-0172-6

Haberl, H., Wiedenhofer, D., Pauliuk, S., Krausmann, F., Müller, D. B., & Fischer-Kowalski, M. (2019). Contributions of sociometabolic research to sustainability science. In Nature Sustainability (Vol. 2, Issue 3, pp. 173–184). Nature Publishing Group. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-019-0225-2

Heusner, A. A. (1982). Energy metabolism and body size. I. Is the 0.75 mass exponent of Kleiber’s equation a statistical artifact? Respiration Physiology, 48, 1–12.

Hulbert, A. (2014). A Sceptics View: “Kleiber’s Law” or the “3/4 Rule” is neither a Law nor a Rule but Rather an Empirical Approximation. Systems, 2(2), 186–202. https://doi.org/10.3390/systems2020186

IEA. (2019). Global Energy & CO2 Status Report 2018: The latest trends in energy and emissions in 2018. https://webstore.iea.org/download/direct/2461?fileName=Global_Energy_and_CO2_Status_Report_2018.pdf

IPBES. (2019). Summary for policymakers of the global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. (S. Díaz, J. Settele, E. S. Brondizio, H. Guèze, J. Agard, A. Arneth, P. Balvanera, K. A. Brauman, S. H. M. Butchart, K. M. A. Chan, L. A. Garibaldi, K. Ichii, J. Liu, S. M. Subramanian, G. F. Midgley, P. Miloslavich, Z. Molnár, D. Obura, A. Pfaff, … C. N. Zayas (eds.)). IPBES secretariat.

Kleiber, M. (1961). The Fire of Life: an Introduction to Animal Energetics (Revised ed). Wiley.

Koziowski, J., & Weiner, J. (1997). Interspecific allometries are by-products of body size optimization. Am. Nat, 149(2), 352–380. http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c

Krausmann, F., Lauk, C., Haas, W., & Wiedenhofer, D. (2018). From resource extraction to outflows of wastes and emissions: The socioeconomic metabolism of the global economy, 1900–2015. Global Environmental Change, 52(April), 131–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2018.07.003

Krausmann, F., Wiedenhofer, D., Lauk, C., Haas, W., Tanikawa, H., Fishman, T., Miatto, A., Schandl, H., & Haberl, H. (2017). Global socioeconomic material stocks rise 23-fold over the 20th century and require half of annual resource use. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114(8), 1880–1885. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1613773114

Kuhn, T. (1962). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. University of Chicago Press.

Lambert, J. G., Hall, C. A. S., Balogh, S., Gupta, A., & Arnold, M. (2014). Energy, EROI and quality of life. Energy Policy, 64, 153–167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.07.001

Maino, J. L., Kearney, M. R., Nisbet, R. M., & Kooijman, S. A. L. M. (2014). Reconciling theories for metabolic scaling. Journal of Animal Ecology, 83(1), 20–29. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2656.12085

Martínez, D. M., & Ebenhack, B. W. (2008). Understanding the role of energy consumption in human development through the use of saturation phenomena. Energy Policy, 36(4), 1430–1435. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2007.12.016

MEA. (2005). Ecosystems and human well-being: synthesis. Island Press.

Mohr, S. H., Wang, J., Ellem, G., Ward, J., & Giurco, D. (2015). Projection of world fossil fuels by country. Fuel, 141, 120–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2014.10.030

Moreau, V., Dos Reis, P. C., & Vuille, F. (2019). Enough metals? Resource constraints to supply a fully renewable energy system. Resources, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.3390/resources8010029

Moriarty, P., & Honnery, D. (2009). What energy levels can the Earth sustain? Energy Policy, 37, 2469–2474. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2009.03.006

Moriarty, P., & Honnery, D. (2016). Can renewable energy power the future? Energy Policy, 93, 3–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2016.02.051

Murphy, D. J. (2014). The implications of the declining energy return on investment of oil production. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 372(20130126). https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2013.0126

Pasten, C., & Santamarina, J. C. (2012). Energy and quality of life. Energy Policy, 49, 468–476. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2012.06.051

Pullinger, M. (2014). Working time reduction policy in a sustainable economy: Criteria and options for its design. Ecological Economics, 103, 11–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2014.04.009

Ramsey, F. L., & Schafer, D. W. (2013). The Statistical Sleuth: A Course in Methods of Data Analysis (3rd editio). Cengage Learning.

Rees, W. E. (2012). Cities as Dissipative Structures: Global Change and the Vulnerability of Urban Civilization. In M. Weinstein & R. Turner (Eds.), Sustainability Science. Springer. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-3188-6_12

Rye, C. D., & Jackson, T. (2018). A review of EROEI-dynamics energy-transition models. Energy Policy, 122, 260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2018.06.041

Schmelzer, M. (2015). The growth paradigm: History, hegemony, and the contested making of economic growthmanship. Ecological Economics, 118, 262–271.

Schulz, T. F., Kypreos, S., Barreto, L., & Wokaun, A. (2008). Intermediate steps towards the 2000 W society in Switzerland : An energy – economic scenario analysis. Energy Policy, 36, 1303–1305. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2007.12.006

Smil, V. (2001). Enriching the Earth: Fritz Haber, Carl Bosch, and the Transformation of World Food Production. MIT Press.

Smil, V. (2003). Energy at the crossroads: Global Perspectives and Uncertainties. MIT Press.

Smil, V. (2005). Creating the Twentieth Century: Technical Innovations of 1867-1914 and their lasting impacts. Oxford University Press.

Smil, V. (2008). Energy in Nature and Society: General Energetics of complex systems. The MIT Press.

Smil, V. (2016). Examining energy transitions: A dozen insights based on performance. Energy Research and Social Science, 22, 194–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2016.08.017

Smil, V. (2017). Energy Transitions: Global and National Perspectives. Published Online at OurWorldInData.Org. Retrieved from: ‘https://Ourworldindata.Org/Energy-Production-and-Changing-Energy-Sources’[Online Resource Accessed November 14th, 2019].

Sovacool, B. K. (2016). How long will it take? Conceptualizing the temporal dynamics of energy transitions. Energy Research and Social Science, 13, 202–215. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2015.12.020

Steffen, W., Richardson, K., Rockström, J., Cornell, S. E., Fetzer, I., Bennett, E. M., Biggs, R., Carpenter, S. R., De Vries, W., De Wit, C. A., Folke, C., Gerten, D., Heinke, J., Mace, G. M., Persson, L. M., Ramanathan, V., Reyers, B., & Sörlin, S. (2015). Planetary boundaries: Guiding human development on a changing planet. Science, 347(6223). https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1259855

Thommen, A., Werner, S., Frank, O., Philipp, J., Knittelfelder, O., Quek, Y., Fahmy, K., Shevchenko, A., Friedrich, B. M., Jü Licher, F., & Rink, J. C. (2019). Body size-dependent energy storage causes Kleiber’s law scaling of the metabolic rate in planarians. ELife, 8, 1–29. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.38187.001

Tong, D., Zhang, Q., Zheng, Y., Caldeira, K., Shearer, C., Hong, C., Qin, Y., & Davis, S. J. (2019). Committed emissions from existing energy infrastructure jeopardize 1.5 °C climate target. Nature, 1. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1364-3

U.S. Energy Information Administration. (2019). International Energy Statistics. Published Online at TheShiftProject.Org. Retrieved from: ‘http://Www.Tsp-Data-Portal.Org/Energy-Consumption-Statistics#tspQvChart’[Online Resource Accessed November 14th, 2019].

Valero, A., Valero, A., Calvo, G., Ortego, A., Ascaso, S., & Palacios, J.-L. (2018). Global material requirements for the energy transition. An exergy flow analysis of decarbonisation pathways. Energy, 159, 1175–1184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2018.06.149

van Ruijven, B. J., De Cian, E., & Sue Wing, I. (2019). Amplification of future energy demand growth due to climate change. Nature Communications, 10(1), 2762. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-10399-3

Vanhulst, J., & Beling, A. E. (2014). Buen vivir: Emergent discourse within or beyond sustainable development? Ecological Economics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2014.02.017

West, G. B., & Brown, J. H. (2005). The origin of allometric scaling laws in biology from genomes to ecosystems: Towards a quantitative unifying theory of biological structure and organization. In Journal of Experimental Biology (Vol. 208, Issue 9, pp. 1575–1592). https://doi.org/10.1242/jeb.01589

West, G. B., Brown, J. H., & Enquist, B. J. (1999). The fourth dimension of life: Fractal geometry and allometric scaling of organisms. Science, 284(5420), 1677–1679. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.284.5420.1677

World Nuclear Association. (2019). Harmony: What would power our electric future? http://www.world-nuclear.org/our-association/what-we-do/the-harmony-programme.aspx

Supplementary Information was not provided with this version of the manuscript.

There is NO Competing Interest.

Download PDF

Version 2

posted

You are reading this latest preprint version

Why the energy transition is not enough

Status:

Version 2

Abstract

Figures

Introduction

Results

Considerations

Materials And Methods

Declarations

Acknowledgments

References

Supplementary Information

Additional Declarations

Status:

Version 2