Because they specify Primary Energy, coal does get penalised more than solar or nuclear, so that part is kind of implied, plus it's from the 80s.

Generally negawatts (watts you don't use due to efficiency or insulation) have always been the cheapest watts, that's only recently become less true because of solar price declines.

It did mention getting 500W from carbon based means.

I'm in the lets use as much green energy as we want camp. The hair-shirt stuff from many in the green movement is the main reason I don't take them seriously.

Agreed that GW and sea level rise are existential issues for coastal communities (and possibly the human race as a whole) but why cap energy usage from Nuclear, Wind and Solar.

I'd sign up for a 100W cap on carbon faster than a 10kW cap on energy.

We do still need to avoid a civilization where every square inch is plastered with solar panels used for bitcoin mining.

Fortunately this is unlikely since:

- Nuclear doesn't take up that much space.

- BitCoin/crypto mining is so wasteful someone will think up a better idea. I'm sure if it.

They are independent variables. In practice the "10kw society" solar/nuclear society that economic-growth-above-all people push means "2kw coal + 4kw solar + 4kw nuclear". Growth is just cover for not replacing the dirty sources.