Energy commentary is often burdened with what Smil (2011a, 1) describes as “a surfeit of shallow generalities ... uncritical proffers of naive solutions ... [and] the persistence of many seemingly ineradicable myths.” This is surely the case, and the stubbornness of this problem can be traced to the inescapable reality that the complex solutions available are sometimes not easily implementable for the non-specialists (politicians in particular) that are often tasked with formulating them. Must policymakers use their tools to facilitate the adoption of electric car infrastructure, or should they prioritize the development of higher efficiency internal combustion engines? What is the place of wind generation, solar power, or geothermal sources in the electricity systems of the future? Is the world really around the corner from a revolutionary hydrogen-fueled economy? And what needs to be done about energy supply and demand if we hope to address worrisome anthropogenic climate change in the timely manner it so urgently requires?
[1]
Tony Sharp,et al.
Shattered Peace: The Origins of the Cold War and the National Security State
,
1979
.
[2]
Daniel Yergin,et al.
Russia 2010: And What It Means for the World
,
1993
.
[3]
Thomas J. Campanella.
The Concrete Dragon: China's Urban Revolution and What it Means for the World
,
2008
.
[4]
Leslie Daryl Danny Harvey,et al.
Energy efficiency and the demand for energy services
,
2010
.
[5]
A. A. Oluoko-Odingo,et al.
Vulnerability and Adaptation to Food Insecurity and Poverty in Kenya
,
2011
.
[6]
Energy: Burning desires
,
2011,
Nature.
[7]
Vaclav Smil,et al.
America's Oil Imports: A Self-Inflicted Burden
,
2011
.