3 ms·

Umm, energy use per capita [0] is going up, while the at-birth life expectancy is going down [1] (largely thanks to the opioid epidemic, which is largely a prod

Umm, energy use per capita [0] is going up, while the at-birth life expectancy is going down [1] (largely thanks to the opioid epidemic, which is largely a product of a large unemployment trend caused by offshoring and automation of low-education jobs). Is that the point you were making (namely that software has a net negative impact on the world)? I don't know about that. [0] https://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/browser/index.php?tbl=T01.07#/?f=M&start=200001 https://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/browser/index.php?tbl=T... [1] https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db328-h.pdf https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db328-h.pdf

adventured 7y ago
> Umm, energy use per capita [0] is going up Your own linked data from the EIA says that you're wrong. Peak energy consumption per capita 1979: 359m btu Energy consumption per capita 2000: 350m btu Energy consumption per capita 2007: 335m btu Energy consumption per capita 2018: 309b btu That's an extremely clear downtrend over time.
- modriano 7y ago
  The past decade has been flat, and it has increased noticeably since last year. There was a substantial recession about a decade ago that caused a contraction of the US economy which explains the decrease in energy consumption, and we've been recovering steadily. Unless we're going into another recession, the "downtrend" observed over the last recession isn't a predictor of future energy consumption.
- NeedMoreTea 7y ago
  The problem with that downtrend is it considers one nation alone, and completely ignores that the vast majority of manufacturing went elsewhere. The energy intensive activities became someone else's. If that is all the energy saved by moving all the heavy industry and manufacturing to the developing world, the overall up trend must be enormous.

3 ms·

Umm, energy use per capita [0] is going up, while the at-birth life expectancy is going down [1] (largely thanks to the opioid epidemic, which is largely a prod

by modriano 7y ago

adventured 7y ago
> Umm, energy use per capita [0] is going up Your own linked data from the EIA says that you're wrong. Peak energy consumption per capita 1979: 359m btu Energy consumption per capita 2000: 350m btu Energy consumption per capita 2007: 335m btu Energy consumption per capita 2018: 309b btu That's an extremely clear downtrend over time.
- modriano 7y ago
  The past decade has been flat, and it has increased noticeably since last year. There was a substantial recession about a decade ago that caused a contraction of the US economy which explains the decrease in energy consumption, and we've been recovering steadily. Unless we're going into another recession, the "downtrend" observed over the last recession isn't a predictor of future energy consumption.
- NeedMoreTea 7y ago
  The problem with that downtrend is it considers one nation alone, and completely ignores that the vast majority of manufacturing went elsewhere. The energy intensive activities became someone else's. If that is all the energy saved by moving all the heavy industry and manufacturing to the developing world, the overall up trend must be enormous.