Oddbean

I see your point and you’re not wrong…but the electricity value is the easiest proxy for domestic energy production (OR proximity to energy production). If as a country you don’t have access to or produce electricity, you won’t develop industry, which elevates standard of living. Access to affordable, useable energy at scale relative to your population is critical…the countries in the bottom left don’t have that…the countries in the top right do.

Yes, we agree that energy production is key. All I'm saying is that there is no causal relationship that is apparent from this graph, not the correlation (which is very obvious!). The graph measures energy *consumption* and there are many examples you can construct to show that the causality doesn't hold.

This is what I'm here for. And I get your point as well. I believe it is a good one. And very true, just having energy doesn't create wealth. It has to be correctly applied. This is true with any resource. Your stove example, me running a bunch of stoves for the sake of running a bunch of stoves doesn't create wealth. But me running a bunch of stoves to create great meals for you and your friends can. So though energy may not create wealth, to your point, it is absolutely required. So I believe the fundamental idea of the meme holds true. There is not and will not be a low-energy rich nation.

two nations with the same energy consumption. one is more efficient than the other, and this it's wealthier than the other. two nations, one four times more efficient but uses half of the energy consumption of the other country. that one is wealthier although it uses less energy. qed

I don't disagree. Wealth depends on the how the energy is applied. Several variables can impact this. The running a bunch of stoves for no purpose versus running the same stoves to sell cooked meals. But less energy is not necessarily the same as low energy.