But you forgot the Kenyans. As Monbiot has repeatedly pointed out, if we are to reduce our energy consumption in the first world AND assume that we share energy equitably across the global population, the first world has to decrease its energy consumption by something on the order of 90%. Nothing you propose will achieve that.

I think you're on the right track but it does not have to be equitable on a per capita basis it has to be equitable initially at a resource level.

What I have proposed is that every time you build a windmill or pv panel or deploy any other alternative energy project a second version is made and sent to the third world. On a grander scale say at the small city level you effectively adopt a city in the third world thats the same size. Thus if a first world city paves a road it also paves a road in its adopted city.

Even better and more effective is the teach a man to fish approach. If you build a PV plant in the US you build one in and adopted country.

On a per capita basis your still heavily weighted to the first world but I'm pretty sure if you simply shared as I had outlined the third world would be beyond themselves with joy. Eventually they can do the same and adopt other cities and villages and share.

You can see that by excepting the real burden that a country with advanced technology and infrastructure should shoulder at first its tough but if you make it drives you to share the means of production which is critical to ensuring that everyone begins to have a livable base standard of living.

I'd say that its a extension to ELP. Economize Localize Produce Share. The last little bit is what makes the world a better place for future generations.

The American Lifestyle IS what is at issue. We not only have to radically change the auto fleet to one that is more fuel efficient, we need to drastically reduce the daily dependence on the automobile.

We need to set a goal of say, reducing VMT by 80% by 2050. To do this we will need to rebuild our neighborhoods to be walkable. We could use increased gas taxes, as proposed by President Rapier, to do this.

Of course, the automobile industry will be drastically reduced. They will argue that what is good for Toyota is good for the country. They will be wrong. Economic disruption could be offset by a massive reallocation/restructuring/rebuilding program in which relocalization and walkable neighborhoods (i.e. all necessities are available within walking distance for all, and a massive increase in telecommuting) are the main objective.

I don't think reaching your 2050 target will be difficult at all-what will be more challenging IMO is not reducing the VMT by 80% by 2050 (that is where all the energy will be spent).

In 1950 the global population was about 2.5 billion. Today it is over 6.6 billion. The US had a population of 151 million in 1950. We just about doubled and much of that was immigration from other countries where people have more babies. In 1950 Kenya was about 6.3 million. It is now about 6 times that amount. Kenyan women have more babies today (4.9) than they did in the 1990s (4.7).

No, I am not going to continually lower my living standard while other people keep making lots of babies.

Need
Greed
& Breed

are a disastrous combination.