Frankly, I couldn't care less how much energy we use to produce GDP as I have a hard time believing in this global warming tripe (which is the underpinning for such a statistic). Additionally, a lot of it depends on what industries compile your economy. A tax haven/financial center is obviously going to use less energy than an industrial/mining/steel mill country. Not to mention if you have a large country and goods require transport, and thus fuel.
Regardless, seems the US isn't terribly efficient with its energy. Ireland (a small, but kick ass island) manages to produce the same amount of GDP with 1/2 the energy. Of course, Iceland (another small island) requires 4 times the energy to produce an equivalent amount of GDP as Ireland.
Of course this all irrelevant as all good economists know what truly matters is which country is more proficient as producing attractive women per unit of energy. Alas, while Ireland may be more efficient at producing GDP per unit of energy, I'm torn between Ireland's ability to produce attractive women per unit of energy;
versus that of Iceland's;
This requires further study.
4 comments:
Iceland is on a lot of geothermal, which is cheap and "clean". Maybe we should compare oil consumption only.
GDP per unit of energy is not as relevant as it seems. If all of our energy intensive goods are manufactured elsewhere, our energy consumption is grossly understated. How much energy does China use to make the goods we buy from them?
Ireland has benefitted greatly from tax haven status, attracting financial services that would otherwise be elsewhere. This is no real contribution to the world economy - just the hijacking of GDP from other (higher tax) countries.
However, you have presented the case for Iceland quite well.
Yeah, it's a compelling argument they tender.
I dunno, Captain; I think Australia is catching up quickly under the Howard governemnt, and perhaps presenting their arguments should be in order.
Post a Comment