https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959378020307512

I would love to hear perspectives on the relative strengths and shortcomings of this study.

While the solarpunk in me loves the conclusion because it supports my deepest values, it is also a very strong claim, thus requiring strong scrutiny.

I believe this fits in politics, because, if true, this conclusion must still become politically accepted to be realized.

Article highlights:

As ecological breakdown looms, the basic material needs of billions remain unmet. We estimate the minimal energy for providing decent living globally & universally. Despite population growth, 2050 global energy use could be reduced to 1960 levels. This requires advanced technologies & reductions in demand to sufficiency levels. But ‘sufficiency’ is far more materially generous than many opponents often assume.