The Relationship Between Energy Costs, Global Temperatures, CO2, and Energy Consumption (Part II)

Below is the result of running a linear regression analysis on the model posted in Part I of this series of blogs solving for energy consumption.

n	26
R2	1.00
Adjusted R2	0.99
SE	666,086.3
Term	Coefficient	95% CI	SE	t statistic	DF	p
Intercept	378255947	-226719665	to 983231560	267433091	1.41	9	0.1909
Temp	1003424	-4214167	to 6221015	2306467	0.44	9	0.6738
Temp5	14160839	972170	to 27349508	5830130	2.43	9	0.0381
CO2	100280	-707089	to 907649	356902	0.28	9	0.7851
Energy Cost	846385	-2231455	to 3924225	1360578	0.62	9	0.5493
USP	35774485	-96506874	to 168055844	58475767	0.61	9	0.5558
CO2 GDP	-9505	-96114	to 77105	38286.4	-0.25	9	0.8095
CO2 GDP1	25085	-47297	to 97466	31997	0.78	9	0.4532
Coal KWH1	-66478559	-165573816	to 32616698	43805652	-1.52	9	0.1634
NG KWH1	-21325244	-54839198	to 12188711	14815044	-1.44	9	0.1839
Oil KWH1	-42947504	-87151923	to 1256915	19540828	-2.20	9	0.0555
NP KWH1	-176333962	-469778220	to 117110296	129718791	-1.36	9	0.2071
BIO KWH1	-8995579	-103871161	to 85880002	41940319	-0.21	9	0.8349
Hydro KWH1	-32454908	-87709284	to 22799468	24425528	-1.33	9	0.2166
Geo KWH1	-10174301	-105691745	to 85343143	42224058	-0.24	9	0.8150
Solar KWH1	-79532965	-267937269	to 108871338	83285250	-0.95	9	0.3645
Wind KWH1	-109678477	-186980783	to -32376172	34171947	-3.21	9	0.0107

Source of variation	Sum squares	DF	Mean square	F statistic	p
Model	###########	16	###########	238.14	<0.0001
Residual	###########	9	###########
Total	###########	25

Coefficients	Coefficient Value	Value	Energy Consumption	Ave	Energy Consumption
Intercept	378255947	1.00E+00	3.78E+08		1.00E+00	378255947
Coal KWH1	-66478559	1.48E+00	-9.84E+07		9.00E-01	-59830703.1
NG KWH1	-21325244	4.71E+00	-1.00E+08		3.10E+00	-66108256.4
Oil KWH1	-42947504	1.85E+00	-7.95E+07		1.15E+00	-49389629.6
NP KWH1	-176333962	2.30E-01	-4.06E+07		2.30E-01	-40556811.26
Hydro KWH1	-32454908	3.67E-01	-1.19E+07		3.67E-01	-11910951.24
Geo KWH1	-10174301	9.20E-02	-9.36E+05		9.20E-02	-936035.692
Solar KWh1	-79532965	4.17E-02	-3.32E+06		5.00E-01	-39766482.5
Wind KWH1	-109678477	1.43E-01	-1.57E+07		1.40E+00	-153549867.8
CO2 GDP	-9505	5.10E+02	-4.85E+06		4.80E+02	-4562400
CO2 GDP1	25085	4.16E+02	1.04E+07		3.90E+02	9783150
USP	35774485	1.80E-01	6.44E+06		1.60E-01	5723917.6
Temp	1003424	7.00E-01	7.02E+05		7.00E-01	702396.8
Biomass KWH1	-8995579	3.21E-01	-2.89E+06		3.21E-01	-2887580.859
Energy Cost	8.46E+05	1.00E+01	8.46E+06		1.30E+01	11003005
CO2	100280	3.90E+02	3.91E+07		4.30E+02	43120400
Temp5	14160839	6.50E-01	9.20E+06		6.50E-01	9204545.35
Result			9.42E+07			28294643.3

The model has excellent correlation as shown by the R² variable equal to 1. The results indicate that the 2009 value for energy consumption of 9.42E7 billion BTUs can go down to 2.83E7 BTUs by decreasing the United States reliance on coal, natural gas, and oil by 25% and increasing the United States reliance on Solar and Wind energy by 25% (highlighted in red). Nuclear power, hydro power, biomass, and geothermal variables were held constant. Other 2009 variables were adjusted to keep up with the trends of using renewable energies such as increased energy costs, higher global temperatures (Temp and Temp5 – even with reduced CO2 emissions the temp trend is upward), lower energy consumption (including the USP variable), and lower CO2 to GDP numbers.

Global warming alarmist may point out that reduced energy consumption is due to renewable energies, but this is not true. The trend for energy consumption has been downward in the United States for several years because of its expense and the introduction of more efficient and lower power appliances.

My Book: Is America Dying? (Amazon.com, Barnes and Noble)