Skip to main content

View Diary: EIA Renewable Energy Forecast Isn't Just Wrong, It's Wildly, Laughably Too Low (13 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Forecasting is actually very easy (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Calamity Jean

    Forecasting correctly is near impossible - especially when the forecast is more than 5 years out.

    The most important way to protect the environment is not to have more than one child.

    by nextstep on Fri Dec 20, 2013 at 12:07:40 PM PST

    •  Who said, "It's hard to make predictions, (0+ / 0-)

      especially about the future."?

      "My country, right or wrong; if right, to be kept right; and if wrong, to be set right." -- Sen Carl Schurz 1872

      by Calamity Jean on Fri Dec 20, 2013 at 01:05:51 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Not Yogi Berra... (0+ / 0-)

        Wikipedia claims that physicist Neils Bohr is responsible for Prediction is very difficult, especially about the future.

        It sure sounds like a Yogi Berra-ism, tho'.

        •  Also (0+ / 0-)
          If you think you understand Quantum Mechanics, that is evidence that you don't.
          We have the same problem with Republican "understanding" of economics, religion, the Constitution, morality, family values…

          All of the climate models have been wrong in their predictions of Global Warming. It has been consistently much worse.

          All of the economic models for energy have been wrong in their predictions for growth of renewables. It has been consistently much better.

          Where that leaves us, I don't know. I can see a path to the all-renewable future for electricity, transportation, and chemicals, and to starting to reverse Global Warming. I do not see the path to restoring our environment in this century or the next. There are some untested and potentially dangerous ideas of geoengineering to bring down temperatures.

          Ceterem censeo, gerrymandra delenda est

          by Mokurai on Fri Dec 20, 2013 at 11:45:18 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Don't be too hard on the economists. Economics is (0+ / 0-)

            , ultimately, a study of human behavior, no matter how many numbers economists try to stuff into however many equations.  If the people in the economy change -- say, they get concerned about global warming and start driving smaller cars fewer miles and putting solar panels on their roofs because they think it's the right thing to do, the models might just miss the fact.

            LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

            by dinotrac on Sat Dec 21, 2013 at 02:08:23 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Oh, I'm fine with real economists (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              eyesoars, JeffW

              such as Adam Smith

              Everything for ourselves, and nothing for other people, seems, in every age of the world, to have been the vile maxim of the masters of mankind.
              or John Kenneth Galbraith
              The modern Conservative is engaged in one of the oldest philosophical occupations known to man—the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.
              who do not pretend to have all of the answers.

              It's Voodoo Reaganomics; austerity quacks who believe that only bleeding the patient can cure anything (or rather that only bleeding the patient can get them their fees and enrich their real clients); Ayn Rand Devil-Take-The-Hindmost Beggar-Thy-Neighbor economics; Hayek's claim that Single Payer = Stalinism; and a number of others like them that I was referring to.

              Ceterem censeo, gerrymandra delenda est

              by Mokurai on Sat Dec 21, 2013 at 03:07:03 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Then I guess I would add Paul Krugman to that (0+ / 0-)

                list. Not for philsophy so much as pretending to have all the answers.

                LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

                by dinotrac on Sat Dec 21, 2013 at 03:20:15 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Huh. (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  JeffW

                  I'd be adding him to the other list. He does at least seem to look at the evidence, is clear about his models, and has been known to change his mind.

                  I personally think he's wrong to think there's not much evidence linking inequality and poor economic growth, but that's just me.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (132)
  • Community (53)
  • Baltimore (45)
  • Bernie Sanders (36)
  • Civil Rights (35)
  • Culture (25)
  • Freddie Gray (21)
  • Elections (20)
  • Racism (20)
  • Education (20)
  • Hillary Clinton (19)
  • Law (19)
  • Economy (18)
  • Labor (17)
  • Politics (16)
  • Rescued (16)
  • 2016 (15)
  • Texas (14)
  • Media (14)
  • Environment (13)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site