Can you give me a serious reference demonstrating that we have insufficient energy to build enough solar plants to duplicate the current generating capacity? I am not going to underestimate the many problems in actually doing so, but, really, a lack of energy?

Well, that's hard to do. I don't know of any one reference which covers all of this. But I can get you started (see below).

One more thing - we probably do have enough energy for such a transition, but it would be a massive, massive undertaking, which would certainly take energy away from pursuits that we consider normal, like taking vacations, driving as much as we do, etc. The scale is difficult to express. The dollar cost will probably be in the tens of trillions. We probably can afford that over 20 years, but not without some pain.

Here are some references to get you started - if you look into them, you'll get lots of links for further info.

In general, The Oil Drum is a fantastic web site which covers these issues:

http://www.theoildrum.com/

More specifically, here is a list of articles covering the EROEI topic:

http://www.theoildrum.com/tag/charles_hall

Charles Hall is someone who has devoted his research to these kinds of issues.

Lastly, I suggest the following article at the Post Carbon Institute:

http://www.postcarbon.org/rnd-requirements

Laws against power consumption, which can only be enforced through more authoritarianism, are not the answer zero.

You might be right. Personally I prefer high taxes on carbon based energy. But the government has to be involved, either via laws or taxation or something - people will not do it voluntarily.

But really--you don't have to legislate conservation. Just increase prices and conservation becomes its own reward.

I agree. Taxation is the best way to discourage carbon based energy use.

I still think we need government to help build any renewable energy infrastructure too though - help fund research, give grants, just go ahead and build power plants, whatever.

No you can't have any TARP funds. Nice fearmongering there.

What are you talking about?

Now let me fast forward 25 years and make up stuff. Fast forward 25 years. There was an energy innovation and your fearmongering is no longer relevant.

What is the basis for your 25 year scenario? Mine is based on current projections of future oil production. It's also based on Jeffrey Brown's Export Land Model, which has correctly predicted the time to zero exports of individual countries like the UK and Indonesia.

Your scenario is based on magic, apparently.

Do you work for a financial giant by chance? Are you making an argument for TARP funds? Because it is the same argument. "Don't do what we say and the following will happen... [insert above quote]

No, and no. Where did the obsession with TARP funds come from?

Not really. All I see are your assumptions that there will be no energy innovations within the next 25 years.

Go read up on the subject - you are clearly an ignorant Libertarian who believes the market can create natural resources out of thin air.

You might want to start with Matt Simmons (Mike Sulzer - there is another source for you). He used to be (and might still be, for all I know), a Republican and an entreprenuer, so maybe you'll actually listen to him.

to scare us and justify why we have to commit trillions of dollars to prop of thieves that just got done robbing us.

Except I'm not asking for any money - I'm asking for the opposite. I'm asking the government to make me poorer, to lower my standard of living, because I won't do it voluntarily, nor will anyone else. But if we don't, we seal our fate.

So you will voluntarily disarm when the government tells you that its time to turn the lights, and be perfectly ok with that? Yeah, sure you will.

Of course I won't do it voluntarily, and you clearly won't either. That's why the government needs to step in and MAKE me do it. And you too. Raise taxes, limit imports, whatever it takes.

And regarding your "speed of light" comment. Perhaps you should do some research yourself and see that, in fact, experiments have observed what appear to be faster than light phenomena. Mathematical models and theories are just that, models and theories, but that is some mighty fine hubris you have on display. Physicists can't even reconcile quantum mechanics and relativity, yet we claim we know oh so much about everything, when we don't.

Whatever. You go ahead and work on the speed of light airplane. Or the perpetual motion machine. Good luck with that.

I just thought of 2 more references for you.

Look up the Hirsh report:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hirsch_report

This was a study of what it would take to transition our economy away from oil, and is probably the closest thing you will find that would be a direct answer to your question. I remember the time frame being about 20 years, but I don't recall any cost estimates.

Also, Google Matt Simmons, and you'll get a wealth of information to look at on peak oil and the oil industry generally. I can't remember which powerpoint presentation it is, but one of the presentations on his web site states it will take over $10 trillion just to meet the ifrastructure needs of the oil and gas industry over the next couple of decades. The number might have been as high as $50 trillion.