Why the energy transition is not enough | Research Squarehttps://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-66396/v1Efforts 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 previously acknowledged. Given this reality, we also show evidence that a worldwide lifestyle limit at 2.0 kW/capita enables a dignified life for all while stabilizing human intervention in the biosphere to current levels, yet the political viability of establishing such limit is very low.
...
Biological organisms use foodstuff through mitochondria, cells, and muscles to rearrange carbon, hydrogen, and other elements into the components of a functional body. 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 (19–21). Similarly, social systems act as super-organisms that also use energy to rearrange mass into living support structures (Fig. 1) (22, 23). The main difference is that social systems use a wider array of energy goods (e.g., foodstuff, biomass, fossil fuels, electricity) through diverse prime movers types (e.g., people, gas turbines, computers) to arrange a broad set of materials (e.g., biomass, gravel, iron) into the components of a functional society (e.g., products, infrastructure, firms, governments).
Our data shows that power and material stocks are 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)
...
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. Such an increase has brought ample social benefits, yet at a diminishing rate as documented with the Human Development Index (HDI) (24-27) and other indicators such as political freedom and improved water access (26, 28, 29).
Moreover,
most social gains are generally obtained from increasing power up to 1.0 kW/capita (approximately the per capita power level of Western Europe in the mid-1970s), milder gains accrue between 1.0 and 5.0 kW/capita, and almost none after 5.0 kW/capita. For example, we find that the HDI (driven by schooling and life expectancy) increases rapidly up to 1.0 kW/capita, slower up to 5.1 kW/capita, and then ceases to improve (Fig. 3A). Similar thresholds also exist for female fertility (1.0 and 4.5 kW/capita), yet for murder rates and exposure to PM 2.5 only the upper threshold exists at 4.9 and 5.4 kW/capita respectively. (Fig. 3B). GDP per capita also shows the upper threshold only at 5.1 kW/capita. Variation from these stylized thresholds exist, with self-reported satisfaction showing improvements up to 8.4 kW/capita.