Renewable Revolution

2. You may explain your answer to question 1 here.

All energy scenarios with 100% ER requires a strong decrease of consumption  .  Who wants that?

Amory Lovins and yours truly disagree with the premise that ALL 100% Renewable Energy Scenarios require a strong decrease of consumption. Yes, much less ENERGY will be used, but the assumed sine qua non correlation of less energy with dead people and lower standard of living is what I strongly find fault with.

As I stated in the survey (and Amory Lovins has fastidiously laid out in peer reviewed, hard ball, no details left out published plans to transition to 100% Renewable Energy STEP BY STEP), about 3 billion people would probably die needlessly IF an overnight transition to RE occurred.

HOWEVER, if the transition matches manufacturing replacement of vehicles and other machines with RE infrastructure over a ten to 15 year period, nobody has to die and, although CONSUMPTION of fossil fuels and nuclear power goes to a statistically insignificant amount, the STANDARD of LIVING is actually IMPROVED while the ENERGY CONSUMED is reduced over 80% from EFFICIENCY IMPROVEMENTS in the use of the available Renewable Energy.

Amory Lovins does not DO "pie in the sky". AND NEITHER DO I!