Generation & Transmission Losses.

The reason for more population is not only fuel, but it is also improved agriculture, fewer animals, artificial fertilizer, and more CO2. When farms worked with a few draught horses and many men, the crop yield was very low, and the amount that could be sold was even smaller due to internal use by men and horses. In London, there were half as many horses as there were people. The road and stable sweepings provided rich fertilizer for the surrounding area, although the whole place was basically filthy. They managed (just), the population controlled by poverty.

Today London is much larger, has a huge population, and very few starve because of the available food supply from all over the World. The welfare state prevents grinding poverty, and heating prevents most disease and death in winter. Those suggesting that fuel should not be used for agriculture and transport would take Britain back to Victorian time very quickly, with huge loss of population through poverty and starvation.

Most energy in the UK is used for heating, space, and industrial process, the next biggest use is probably motive power for transport and industry, and IT is not that far behind! Air fuel is relatively small, air travel is hated for other reasons, going by air is less fuel-intensive per passenger than going by car, and miles better than cruise ships!  A car to America might be a bit interesting. The much-loved trains are not too good either, and they have the advantage of nearly level tracks, but building a new railway uses immense quantities of fuel (look at HS2, that cost is not labour). A 747 jet uses about 20 litres of fuel per passenger hour when filled with 450 passengers, and travels about 500 miles. It also carries 30 tons of cargo. A car could just about manage something similar in proportion but would take much longer by a factor of 10.

I don't fancy the idea that I can only go a few miles from my home, have virtually no heating, cannot buy any manufactured goods etc. Civilisation is actually made of energy!

The reason for more population is not only fuel, but it is also improved agriculture, fewer animals, artificial fertilizer, and more CO2. When farms worked with a few draught horses and many men, the crop yield was very low, and the amount that could be sold was even smaller due to internal use by men and horses. In London, there were half as many horses as there were people. The road and stable sweepings provided rich fertilizer for the surrounding area, although the whole place was basically filthy. They managed (just), the population controlled by poverty.

Today London is much larger, has a huge population, and very few starve because of the available food supply from all over the World. The welfare state prevents grinding poverty, and heating prevents most disease and death in winter. Those suggesting that fuel should not be used for agriculture and transport would take Britain back to Victorian time very quickly, with huge loss of population through poverty and starvation.

Most energy in the UK is used for heating, space, and industrial process, the next biggest use is probably motive power for transport and industry, and IT is not that far behind! Air fuel is relatively small, air travel is hated for other reasons, going by air is less fuel-intensive per passenger than going by car, and miles better than cruise ships!  A car to America might be a bit interesting. The much-loved trains are not too good either, and they have the advantage of nearly level tracks, but building a new railway uses immense quantities of fuel (look at HS2, that cost is not labour). A 747 jet uses about 20 litres of fuel per passenger hour when filled with 450 passengers, and travels about 500 miles. It also carries 30 tons of cargo. A car could just about manage something similar in proportion but would take much longer by a factor of 10.

I don't fancy the idea that I can only go a few miles from my home, have virtually no heating, cannot buy any manufactured goods etc. Civilisation is actually made of energy!