The Department of Energy claims that cutting down on energy usage is important in the fight against climate change. So why don’t we simply use less energy to improve the environment? It turns out that implementing this plan might not be straightforward. Research indicates that in the coming decades, the combination of rising temperatures and growing urban populations will significantly change how energy is used, with the demand for electricity to cool urban buildings expected to rise by at least 20% in specific regions.

Straight Arrow News contributor Peter Zeihan expands on this dilemma and explains that while there have been some advancements in energy efficiency, such as cleaner appliances, these improvements are relatively minor.

Excerpted from Peter’s March 18 “Zeihan on Geopolitics” newsletter:

Some European economists came up with a super-duper-hyper-revolutionary solution to the green problem… just use less energy! Crazy, right? Before we write off this idea completely, let’s break it down.

One of the big problems facing the green transition is that we must double our energy output in order to make it feasible. What if we didn’t need to ramp up output and could just cut energy usage? With all the efficiency gains we’ve made over the years, it seems like a possibility.

Unfortunately, it’s not that simple. With the correlation between economic activity and energy usage remaining strong, the “use less” solution loses its legs. And then you start to break down populations and climates, and things get even harder. Sure, there are places where using less might work, but good luck getting everyone to move to Iowa…