>Basically the bulk of it demonstrates that, as far as energy contraints go, we could supply a ten billion population with a U.S. per capita GDP in a sustainable fashion, at less cost than the market price of fossil fuels - not taking social costs into account. And then the question comes, if efficiency measures and renewable source are available now at a lower market price than fossil fuels, why aren't we doing it? And it turns out that old whiskers pretty much tells us why.
Don't get me wrong. I'm not against theory--only its un-self-critical fantasies of omniscience, as they appear in litcritter grad school syllabi. People in other parts of academe and outside it do much more interesting stuff with what goes as theory--as this project you describe shows. Is there a <10,000 synopsis of the argument available?
Christian