WELCOME

However, it is not clear that the AEO can be

May 18, 2018 by Devin Jones

However, it is not clear that the AEO can be used to justify such a broad set of assumptions, at least in the US. But that doesn't mean, as some have suggested, that it can't be used to justify policy changes that might affect the US economy.

For instance, even the most optimistic of the US energy projections are not going to cut carbon emissions, they say, because most of that emissions would be done by solar PV and wind, which would provide enough energy to provide enough power and generate enough electricity to keep the US economy humming and allow for a decent standard of living for most Americans.

The AEO is also going to make climate change predictions more difficult to forecast, since it's not clear that people will be aware of them. "The AEO 2020 reference case suggests that most people still don't have a good understanding of the world's climate change risks," the EIA notes.

In other words, the AEO will not be able to make any predictions about future climate change.

This is the most conservative estimate that could go out of the way, even in a conservative environment, given the current climate change scenario, because the EIA's projections are so likely, in part, because of the nature of the US economy. It would also make it nearly impossible for the US government to get its way, since it would have to rely on fossil fuel-based energy sources and rely on its own natural resources.

The AEO also doesn't look like a final prediction, based on the evidence from the US and other countries, because the projections don't include any other countries that still want to cut emissions.

But this would be a very small percentage of a very ambitious US policy, with about 30,000 Americans already living in extreme poverty, and it's hard to imagine that the US government would go all-in on climate policy any time soon, given the US economy and the growing energy demand.

Meanwhile, the projections are quite optimistic. By 2100, the US is projected to have more than 1 million fewer people than today, and the country will lose around 13 million people in energy-related jobs (which is a lot less than the 13 million currently lost due to climate change). In other words, without the US government doing anything about climate change, there's virtually no chance that people will be working in the US, and that this would be a real problem.

So, how do the EIA manage its projections? It's not clear that it has any way of making