4 ms·

http://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_and_the_magic_washing_machine http://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_and_the_magic_washing_... Hans Rosling has a very goo

by pdkl95 10y ago

http://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_and_the_magic_washing_machine http://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_and_the_magic_washing_... Hans Rosling has a very good argument that we need a certain minimum amount of energy usage if we want both social and population stability. Wasted energy in the developed world is an interesting discussion, but if we want to address climate change the focus has to be on the much larger population of the world that is trying to rapidly increase their energy needs. > without confusing it with lowering the standard of living That's precisely the problem. Any proposal that significantly reduces energy usage almost certainly involves telling a large portion of the world "no, you don't get a washing machine" or similar restrictions on the basic benefits of industrialization.

fulafel 10y ago
It's easy to imagine many proposals that don't restrict access to washing machines. For example a per capita progressive CO2 tax would be one. We generally have the mechanisms to implement binding international agreements about these things, it's just a question of political will.
- CountSessine 10y ago
  We generally have the mechanisms to implement binding international agreements about these things Binding? Name one that doesn't involve nuclear weapon proliferation.
- dispose13432 10y ago
  >For example a per capita progressive CO2 tax would be one You can't Carbon tax people by income (because people don't pollute directly). You'll target polluters. So you go to Apple and tell them that they emitted so many kg of CO2, pay ... tax, Which will undoubtedly find its way to rising phone prices, which means (poor) people don't get nice things.
  - fulafel 10y ago
    There are several alternative ways to address this, for example products bought by consumers might account toward their CO2 emissions. Or just apply the CO2 tax to companies directly. Anyway, let's not get lost in the details, I was just offering a trivial counterexample against the claim that > Any proposal that significantly reduces energy usage almost certainly involves telling a large portion of the world "no, you don't get a washing machine"
thatfrenchguy 10y ago
> Any proposal that significantly reduces energy usage almost certainly involves telling a large portion of the world "no, you don't get a washing machine" or similar restrictions on the basic benefits of industrialization. Probably more like "No you don't get a dryer" though, as a washing machine can use less water ?

by pdkl95 10y ago

fulafel 10y ago

It's easy to imagine many proposals that don't restrict access to washing machines. For example a per capita progressive CO2 tax would be one. We generally have the mechanisms to implement binding international agreements about these things, it's just a question of political will.

CountSessine 10y ago
We generally have the mechanisms to implement binding international agreements about these things Binding? Name one that doesn't involve nuclear weapon proliferation.
dispose13432 10y ago
>For example a per capita progressive CO2 tax would be one You can't Carbon tax people by income (because people don't pollute directly). You'll target polluters. So you go to Apple and tell them that they emitted so many kg of CO2, pay ... tax, Which will undoubtedly find its way to rising phone prices, which means (poor) people don't get nice things.
- fulafel 10y ago
  There are several alternative ways to address this, for example products bought by consumers might account toward their CO2 emissions. Or just apply the CO2 tax to companies directly. Anyway, let's not get lost in the details, I was just offering a trivial counterexample against the claim that > Any proposal that significantly reduces energy usage almost certainly involves telling a large portion of the world "no, you don't get a washing machine"

thatfrenchguy 10y ago

> Any proposal that significantly reduces energy usage almost certainly involves telling a large portion of the world "no, you don't get a washing machine" or similar restrictions on the basic benefits of industrialization. Probably more like "No you don't get a dryer" though, as a washing machine can use less water ?