If US further outsources, per capita energy consumption wouldn't rise abroad - if the living conditions abroad rose, so would foreign energy consumption. Separately and in addition, if the manufacturing and factories increase abroad, energy consumption would simply transfer abroad. Let's examine China recent coal energy expansion to fuel its industrialization in the recent decade.

In fact it is whole idea, to buy energy for knowledge and paper money :-) Look back to blog posts to see world map with energy consumption. And no, energy consumption does not transfer abroad. Foreign country will harvest or buy energy and export it in the form of goods or services to you.

The US has already outsourced ala free trade agreements, unemployment is high, wealth inequality in the US is at an all time, yet the US is also at an all time high for energy consumption?

It is consuming much more than everyone else ver capita, yep.

Rather, I tend to believe the labor that both the middle and lower classes participate is responsible for this energy consumption. We drive to and from work, operate factories, machinery, and live in cubicle - energy is consumed for profits that are appropriated to the top. Why should the middle class pick up the tab for the elites?

They'll keep gradient low enough for masses to keep stablility. And average US citizen wastes energy like no one else, and your goverment work hard to keep it. But it is hard work, hence middle class who consume big amount of energy and producing very little of useful stuff is very good goal.

@Vitaliy I think we agree on a lot of assumptions. As far as people driving long distance, the explanation is high rent. Those with capital can often live closer to their workplaces, while those who commute sacrifice time in favor of lower rent, accepting high travel cost. But take into account other problems in the US, namely subsidization of the oil industry, which explains why it is easier to pay a lower rent while still spending more time and money in work travel. I wasn't disagreeing with the graph. I bring into question, given it is a mathematical average of energy consumption, how much is due to travel costs, and how much is due to the running of factories.

I don't see a net benefit in energy reduction if, for instance, the US produces less energy via outsourcing, while on the other hand, those countries that build factors (like China) harvest more energy to fund their newly built factories.

For me, the question is how the energy is produced (in the context of global warming and limited energy resources). We should get off oil, gas, and coal and move towards wind, solar, etc., as well as utilize those alternative energy sources in a better public transportation system, which the automobile and gas industries successfully, through lobbying, oppose. At fault are the owners, who don't care about the world we all live in, and not the middle class. Worse yet, lacking alternative employment opportunities (i.e. factories, manufacturing) the lower classes will always commute from afar and work in kitchens and other areas in the service industry. They will continue to burn gas. This is the present state of affairs in Los Angeles. The majority of industry has, to my knowledge, already been outsourced. It's either banking, pharmaceutical, tech, defense, or retail stores and service. There are fewer manufacturing jobs than there have ever been. The US is not a manufacturing based economy. Rather, it relies, unfortunately, on spending by those employed by corporations.

Yes, we need some positive solutions toward population control.

The US at present is unfortunately, the wild west in terms of law - high capital writes the law, and it will sabotage the stability of the system to meet unrealistic goals. Greater consciousness is needed on the part of the majority here, and it's quite hard to fix things because high capital uses media to overwrite normal consciousness, and unfortunately, it works to a significant degree. The wealth class should pay; the middle class, unbeknownst to a significant portion of the populace who are middle class, have been, and are, continually exploited to a greater and greater degree. I don't believe mean energy consumption is the right metric to determine that the middle class is at fault - rather it is other forces at work who hold accountability. They resist positive societal change.

Hmm... My apologies for lack of brevity, I don't see the world in simple terms, I see it as web of complex interacting elements (causation, etc.) which lead to certain plausible conclusions about reasonable/not reasonable, combine with certain principles of morality and lack thereof (maybe it comes from designing and understanding complex microprocessor design, network design, etc., in university, lol).

1. I don't see the relevance of US high per capita energy consumption means outsource to other country if another country will simply take the place of the consumption and net world energy consumption therefore won't decrease. So I don't understand the argument/position as a whole.

2. I don't understand the principle or morality that can be articulated as such: make the people who do the work and simultaneously don't receive the net majority benefit pay the price for the profits that the elites set themselves up to appropriate and accumulate. i.e. why make the slaves pay?

3. I understand the need to reduce populace and increase energy efficiency for the sake of sustainability. We should focus on this as a society.

BTW - New York City public transportation is awesome, having lived there in the past.

1. "Who we? How preventing good long life life and preventing birth in colonies is different from killing people? Who give you authority?" - wasn't suggesting that. I'm saying, as a society, we need to confront the issue. I think China used taxation past the first child. And I'm not saying that's a good solution, as it favors the wealthy.

2. Concerning middle class - I was responding to your initial post concerning per capital energy consumption. - "Almost forgot. It is also good idea to somehow reduce population. At least slash middle class that consume too much energy."

3. If net world energy consumption doesn't matter, I don't understand why we're interested in US per capita consumption? Perhaps I misunderstood and you're critiquing the elite's position? Not quite sure what position/side you're taking.

okay :)