NegaWatt scenario, a sober and clean energy future

[Christophe]

NegaWatt 2006 scenario for a sober, efficient and renewable energy future

The negaWatt association brings together today 110 experts and practitioners, all involved in a professional capacity in the control of energy demand or the development of renewable energies. All express themselves and engage in the association on a personal and independent basis.

The association is at the initiative of a "Manifesto for a sober, efficient and renewable energy future" which is based on a "negaWatt 2000-2050 scenario", developed in 2003 by a panel of 23 experts, the " Compagnie des négaWatts ". It is again this group that is the master of the present update of this scenario.

Beyond the prospective analysis, the association works on the development of concrete, innovative and pragmatic proposals and measures that it submits to political and economic decision-makers, community leaders and all those who are concerned about our future. energy. A first partnership was thus concretized with the WWF-France and various foundations and associations.

The work presented here is the result of a reflection undertaken since 6 month to update the scenario already realized in 2003. We present here only a first summary: other documents on the negaWatt 2006 scenario, explaining the hypotheses retained and analyzing in detail the possible trajectories will be published during the year.

NegaWatt Association
22 comic book Foch, 34140 Mèze • www.negawatt.org •

To download:

a) Negawatt 2006 Scenario: https://www.econologie.com/scenario-nega ... -4428.html

b) Powerpoint style document on the electric power peak: https://www.econologie.com/chauffage-ele ... -4427.html

c) Negawatt 2011 Scenario: https://www.econologie.com/scenario-nega ... -4425.html

d) Video presentation of Negawatt 2011: https://www.econologie.com/scenario-nega ... -4426.html

(...) there is very nice info and curves in it, especially the annual consumption without the electric heating page 4 (almost constant astonishing thing moreover seen the holidays of certain industries in summer)

See 6 page between 2001 and 2009 there is 2 000 000 new electric heated fireplaces is simply SCANDAL!
(...)

Source: http://www.negawatt.org/V5%20docs%20nW/docnW.htm

[Did67]

I hope this thread will not "go out" of the "news" box before the release of the new script scheduled for this summer!

[dedeleco]

Why nega that is pejorative and unconvincing, it would be better effectiveWatts, sobrewatts, progressWatt, intelligentWatt, etc., any positive term for a progress, but not a negative term that demotivates and scares and believe that we go back.

The future requires much more progress and not to return to the stone age, without energy, as the term negaWatt suggests, wrongly.

In my opinion it is a serious mistake that scares the non-ecological who think that these negative environmentalists completely derail!

This misleads people because there are solutions that change the sources of energy but do not force to tighten to death belt like some people think.

The solar energy received from the sun is enormous, 1KW / m2 perpendicular to the rays and it is enough to use it.

Thus on the roof of each house one receives in summer full of solar heat which stored in the earth serves to heat the winter, as with
http://www.dlsc.ca/DLSC_Brochure_f.pdf
http://www.dlsc.ca
without reducing the number of Watts, but only the source, we simply use solar heat that falls on our head and is wasted.
In addition, this positive solution really works !!!

It is unfortunate that the Negawatt scenario (term that annoys me) does not speak at all and remains in the conventional well known !!

The term Negawatt is the game of nuclear who say that we can not do without nuclear without removing all energy with an archaic way of life, unacceptable solution. !!

[sen-no-sen]

The term Negawatt is the game of nuclear who say that we can not do without nuclear without removing all energy with an archaic way of life, unacceptable solution. !!

This is your analysis Dedelco.
Why live with less, be bad?

the NegaWatts proposes neither more nor less than a solution of Decay (without using this term directly, largely dirty by some).

You tend like many people to make an amalgam between decay and return to the Stone Age.
Besides, it is perfectly possible to live better with less, it is "voluntary simplicity".

It seems to me that you are a Dedelco cyclist "colleague"?
Well assuming that 20% of car trips are less than 1km, and 70% (74% in Rhône Alpes) home / work trips are made in cars for distances mostly less than 20km, if its last were replaced by the good old muscular propulsion would save the oil equivalent of the whole nuclear fleet in energy.
If this sweet utopia were realized (allowing a drastic reduction of pollution, accidents, health problems etc ...) we would cause a significant decrease at the national level, without losing anything to our standard of living, and contrary, gaining health, money, love (a well-muscled body goes better on the beach than a "fast food" profile).
This is proof that we can decrease (materially) and grow well, right?

[dedeleco]

Going by bike is not negative as the term nega gives the impression, but it is good for your health (and I treat my sciatica and avoid overweight, avoiding 2 macro back operations and the Antalgic that will miss him) !!

So this term nega is to change quickly !!!

[kumkat]

negawatt is a word game with megawatt of one and two that expresses the idea that the greenest watts are the ones that are NOT eaten!
we must not be fooled by the fact that the target negawatt is not people like us who are already hunting waste
but rather those who leave everything on permanently, halogens, TV, computer, etc etc etc.
there is just way to make big savings by just paying attention and without going back on the comfort

[Aumicron]

Why negatives that are pejorative and unconvincing, it would be better effectiveWatts, sobrewatts, progressWatt, intelligentWatt, etc.

The energy has been, is and will always be dirty. Whatever its origin. And that's the reason why we must consume the least possible.

the good old muscular propulsion

Unfortunately, even this one is dirty. On the one hand, because it comes from food and the food chain as a whole is a horror and also because a bike is energy gray, tires, sports shoes, clothing protection ... it's oil.

Besides, it is perfectly possible to live better with less, it is "voluntary simplicity"

Of course. But it is difficult to convince people and this kind of remark inevitably generates the same comments from people trapped in Liberalism.

[sen-no-sen]

the good old muscular propulsion

Unfortunately, even this one is dirty. On the one hand, because it comes from food and the food chain as a whole is a horror and also because a bike is energy gray, tires, sports shoes, clothing protection ... it's oil.

Could you describe to me a mode of clean propulsion, because there I dry?
The food chain has existed since the beginning of life on earth, so happy or not it's the same (although I understand that farming / industrial agriculture is an abomination, but that's another subject).

The use of industrial products to manufacture a bicycle (or rollerblades, scooters etc) ... would have little impact on the environment if they were a replacement for the current model, because everything is a question of "threshold of tolerance ".
A bike is 10-15 kilos of metals, a car is between 800 and 1500 kilos, there is a factor 100, for the end result the same result: move some tens of pounds of meat on short routes generally.

If tomorrow, 70% of French people made the effort to take their legs to get around, or at least to get to the nearest means of transport, and well know that the energy equivalent saved would be greater than the whole of the nuclear production (which, I would remind you, represents "only" 17% of the energy produced in France, the rest being mainly oil) ... and that is not the fault of the government ... even if the dogma of any car is blowing us in a subliminal way.

[Christophe]

I name dedeleco 1er official chipoteur of the forum !!

Frankly, considering the job Negawatt is doing, criticizing them for their name is just the counter raillery ...

I find that the concept of Negawatt is interesting, it is the negative watt in relation to our current consumption. I have no complaints about this name ... because their goal is to show that we can consume less and better ...

ps: for animal propulsion, the subject has been widely discussed, I invite you to search here https://www.econologie.com/forums/search.php

[Did67]

without reducing the number of Watts, but only the source, we simply use solar heat that falls on our head and is wasted.
In addition, this positive solution really works !!!

It is unfortunate that the Negawatt scenario (term that annoys me) does not speak at all and remains in the conventional well known !!

The term Negawatt is the game of nuclear who say that we can not do without nuclear without removing all energy with an archaic way of life, unacceptable solution. !!

1) glad that the thread is at the top of the "box"!

2) but negawatt is interested in electricity; so it is normal that they are not interested in the method you are so dear ...

3) when they will be the last to play the nuclear game, we will have advanced! [frankly, it's a little insult them - in their absence, in addition]