http://michaelbluejay.com/electricity/cost.html
2. This is questionable. I have yet to see any data that California's loss of manufacturing jobs is the result of power rates in the state. In any case the loss is insufficient to explain the fact that Californians per capita electricity use is only 2/3 that of the US as a whole.
Additionally, a recent study shows that by investing in green jobs California can create 200,000 new high paying jobs.
http://www.cleanpower.org/reports_pdf/Harvesting_California_Renewable_Energy_Resources_080815_FINAL_ 1st_Ed.pdf
For France and Switzerland and US see here:
http://www.iea.org/Textbase/nppdf/free/2007/key_stats_2007.pdf
For Sweden see here:
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/pls/portal/docs/PAGE/PGP_PRD_CAT_PREREL/PGE_CAT_PREREL_YEAR_2006/PG E_CAT_PREREL_YEAR_2006_MONTH_07/8-14072006-EN-AP1.PDF
I don't really understand the point of your comment. It it's that things aren't perfect in California, that's a straw man, since I never said they were. My post argues that generating alternative energy alone is insufficient, that it must be combined with measures to enhance energy efficiency. Our goal should be to stop using fossil fuels in order to avoid Climaticide. To do that we need alternative non-fossil fuels and energy efficiency in order to do more with less. The goal isn't to consume more energy, it's to achieve more with less energy. "My True Religion Is Kindness" -- The Dalai Lama
Focusing on saving energy in the pulp and paper industry etc. may not seem very exciting at first glance, but you never know what a country might do to pick up an easy extra trillion bucks (and cut greenhouse gas emissions at the same time)
I agree completely here, except I'd like to add that these companies have energy as one of their biggest costs (often a bigger cost than wages) and hence try very hard to minimize their consumption. The kind of companies which are often criticised for being energy in-efficient are usually those that don't use very much power, like manufacturing.
And from a climate point of view the goal is not to use less energy, because the thing that allegedly changes the climate is not energy consumption but greenhouse gas emissions. I'm all for using more energy as long as we don't emit more CO2. Remember something like half out two thirds of all people on the planet still lack access to electricity. Using more energy is a given. Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.
