It is very strange talking to someone in the future.

He once described the energy use since the middle ages.  Humanity has consistently improved energy efficiency on a per capita basis.  With all our machines, we now use one-third the energy of that used during the beast of burden era.  We will easily make the same efficiency leap again.

Lovins gets what so many enviros don't.  Energy efficiency and conservation are only going to catch on when clear profit motive can be seen.  We are a capitalist society and that's not going to change anytime soon.  It doesn't have to be an either/or proposition.

I once thought a lot about this.  What I figure Amory is missing is an appreciation for what Karl Von Clauswitz (in "On War") called "friction."  That is to say, things just don't work out, in practice, not in the smooth way you think they're going to.  Reality is to multivarient, too contradictory, too ornery.

Thus the general, dreaming over his charts, does not consider muddy tracks, missed rendevous, divided loyalies.

Also, you gotta think that Lovins, just because he is so bright, might be particularly prone to this sort of error.

On the other hand, he might just be doing what he does best.  After all, he has his greatest impact by stayone on message.

-- toma

Tom Athanasiou (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) //= 0; i=i-1){ if (l[i].substring(0, 1) == ' ') output += "&#"+unescape(l[i].substring(1))+";"; else output += unescape(l[i]); } document.getElementById('eeEncEmail_qnBISPtaQc').innerHTML = output; //]]>

One of my favorite Amory quotes is the first paragraph in Natural Capitalism.  Sure, he co-authored that book, but the technoscientic utopia he paints is truly breathtaking in its one-dimensionality.

Amory thinks like an engineer -- he really believes good design can save all.  This is an underlying flaw of so much rhetoric in the "sustainabiility" movement.

Sure, we can to some degree "engineer" our way out of ecological crises such as global warming.  What is not adequately appreciated is that political power relationships go a long way toward determining design outcomes.  Here Amory has always been tone deaf.  Frankly, so have some other major sustainability voices.

We need to get beyond bright white guys designing cool new toys.

I had never read about Amory Lovins so this was a wonderful revelatory article for me.  It's great to hear a consistent positive voice, and a person who looks for solutions.  If 10% of his ideas work, we'll be on the road to sustainability.  

There may be political forces that are resistant, but I do think industrial/corporate America is starting to move toward the idea that energy efficiency is better for the bottom line.

Aunt Phyllis

Yes, there's a propane tank at Amory Lovin's residence. But it is not used for heating the house, as the poster suggests. Instead, it's used for the cooking stove. Check it out yourself: the house is open to the public for tours.

I have reached the point where I guess I'm reflecting Klausewitz's insight, for the sake of addressing Neoliberal economics' hold on so many people.
    I am thankful for Lovins' work and attitudes.  While he promotes the efficiency imperatives within Neoliberalism's false, but powerful, premises, I support the reform and alternatives of what might be called  "democratic-maximization economics".  As William Greider discusses in his book The Soul of Capitalism, the solution lies in the obvious focus on responsible ownership practice, as promoted by ESOP's and more.