3 ms·

Buckminster Fuller made a similar observation or prediction even earlier, in the late 1930s. He called it ephemeralization, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epheme

Buckminster Fuller made a similar observation or prediction even earlier, in the late 1930s. He called it ephemeralization, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ephemeralization https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ephemeralization, the idea that increasing technological efficiency will allow us to do evermore with less. A possible counter-acting force is Jevon's paradox (a generalized economic form of Wirth's Law) but the linked empirical result suggests ephemeralization is the stronger force. Although, it is likely true we can do much more to counteract Jevon's Paradox like phenomena.

philipkglass 7y ago
The Jevons Paradox [1] is named a "paradox" as it is an unusual, apparently contradictory outcome. It can be considered a special case of the rebound effect [2] where the rebound is greater than 100%. Unlike rebound effects in general, a Jevons Paradox is not a routine outcome of any new technological efficiency gain. It is something that needs to be observed from data rather than assumed. In my experience, the Jevons Paradox seems to be more widely brandished than understood in internet debates about energy and resources [3]. If Alice claims e.g. that American electricity production is getting more efficient, Bob may "refute" her point by citing the Jevons Paradox without mustering evidence that the Jevons Paradox applies to recent trends in American electricity consumption. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rebound_effect_(conservation) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rebound_effect_(conservation) [3] Your comment did not misuse the Jevons Paradox. You noted that ephemeralization seems to be winning.
- roenxi 7y ago
  There is a vast pent up global demand for electricity around the world. Africa needs electricity, China needs electricity, India, etc. The world is changing but at the moment that electricity largely comes from burning fuel. And if it makes sense to mine fuel when the payoff is X, then if still makes sense when the payoff is X + something (as it is when efficiency improves). It is a very safe assumption that Jevons's paradox applies to electricity consumption, there is no need to show it. Take a look at US coal production [0]. There is no evidence there that energy use from coal will decrease with improved technology. That is 150 years of technological innovation and we're basically seeing a linear uptrend in use. If domestic use levels off there will be exporting. That production is not going to go down without an uneconomic political intervention or literally running out. Now I'll agree that Jevons's paradox does not apply to everything [1]. But energy in general and electricity in particular it is painfully obvious that there are more potential uses than there are efficiencies in the world. Give me cheap enough electricity and I can do anything; its use will not be suppressed by reducing need for it in specific cases. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal_mining_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal_mining_in_the_United_Stat... [1] Also my name isn't Bob.
  - philipkglass 7y ago
    The decline of US coal production is right there in the page that you linked to: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal_mining_in_the_United_States#Production https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal_mining_in_the_United_Stat... American coal production peaked in 2008 at 1.172 billion short tons. Domestic use peaked in 2006 at 1.150 billion short tons. As of 2018 those numbers are down to 0.755 and 0.678 billion tons short tons respectively. The EIA's latest Short Term Energy Outlook predicts that total US coal production for 2019 will be 0.679 billion short tons and for 2020 will be 0.603 billion short tons, 48% below the peak. If you look at the "components of annual change" graphic in the EIA report, you can see that coking coal (used for making steel) is up slightly from 2017-2020. It's coal consumption for electric power that is in persistent decline. https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/steo/report/coal.php https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/steo/report/coal.php Coal supplies about 25% of American electricity in 2019 and is expected to decline to 22% in 2020: https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/steo/report/electricity.php https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/steo/report/electricity.php Percentage-wise, coal reached its all time high in the mid-1990s, at over 50% of American electricity generation: https://www.mjbradley.com/sites/default/files/MJBAcoalretirementissuebrief.pdf https://www.mjbradley.com/sites/default/files/MJBAcoalretire... The Jevons Paradox observes the introduction of more efficient technology in an existing system but finds a "paradoxical" uptick in input consumption. The introduction of more efficient coal burning machinery in England was followed by higher coal consumption. That surprised Jevons. The broadening of energy use (e.g. India developing like England did) certainly also increases demand for energy inputs, but it's a different case than the Jevons Paradox.
    - roenxi 7y ago
      Which is meaningless unless you believe that energy efficiency has only happened in the 2008-2018 period, which is not true. I happened to be working in the coal industry for most of that time and the decline isn't because people are using 40% less energy. It has nothing to do with increased efficiency. It has to do with: 1) Political action. 2) Alternative energy sources getting more competitive. Particularly natural gas, renewables and US shale oil. You're arguing that use-of-energy efficiency can cause a decline in coal production. That is wrong; if you use energy more efficiently I'll mine more coal - I've met the people who make that sort of decision. Coal is declining for other reasons - mainly that alternative sources are getting cheaper (which is not using energy more efficiently).

philipkglass 7y ago

The Jevons Paradox [1] is named a "paradox" as it is an unusual, apparently contradictory outcome. It can be considered a special case of the rebound effect [2] where the rebound is greater than 100%. Unlike rebound effects in general, a Jevons Paradox is not a routine outcome of any new technological efficiency gain. It is something that needs to be observed from data rather than assumed. In my experience, the Jevons Paradox seems to be more widely brandished than understood in internet debates about energy and resources [3]. If Alice claims e.g. that American electricity production is getting more efficient, Bob may "refute" her point by citing the Jevons Paradox without mustering evidence that the Jevons Paradox applies to recent trends in American electricity consumption. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rebound_effect_(conservation) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rebound_effect_(conservation) [3] Your comment did not misuse the Jevons Paradox. You noted that ephemeralization seems to be winning.

roenxi 7y ago
There is a vast pent up global demand for electricity around the world. Africa needs electricity, China needs electricity, India, etc. The world is changing but at the moment that electricity largely comes from burning fuel. And if it makes sense to mine fuel when the payoff is X, then if still makes sense when the payoff is X + something (as it is when efficiency improves). It is a very safe assumption that Jevons's paradox applies to electricity consumption, there is no need to show it. Take a look at US coal production [0]. There is no evidence there that energy use from coal will decrease with improved technology. That is 150 years of technological innovation and we're basically seeing a linear uptrend in use. If domestic use levels off there will be exporting. That production is not going to go down without an uneconomic political intervention or literally running out. Now I'll agree that Jevons's paradox does not apply to everything [1]. But energy in general and electricity in particular it is painfully obvious that there are more potential uses than there are efficiencies in the world. Give me cheap enough electricity and I can do anything; its use will not be suppressed by reducing need for it in specific cases. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal_mining_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal_mining_in_the_United_Stat... [1] Also my name isn't Bob.
- philipkglass 7y ago
  The decline of US coal production is right there in the page that you linked to: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal_mining_in_the_United_States#Production https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal_mining_in_the_United_Stat... American coal production peaked in 2008 at 1.172 billion short tons. Domestic use peaked in 2006 at 1.150 billion short tons. As of 2018 those numbers are down to 0.755 and 0.678 billion tons short tons respectively. The EIA's latest Short Term Energy Outlook predicts that total US coal production for 2019 will be 0.679 billion short tons and for 2020 will be 0.603 billion short tons, 48% below the peak. If you look at the "components of annual change" graphic in the EIA report, you can see that coking coal (used for making steel) is up slightly from 2017-2020. It's coal consumption for electric power that is in persistent decline. https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/steo/report/coal.php https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/steo/report/coal.php Coal supplies about 25% of American electricity in 2019 and is expected to decline to 22% in 2020: https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/steo/report/electricity.php https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/steo/report/electricity.php Percentage-wise, coal reached its all time high in the mid-1990s, at over 50% of American electricity generation: https://www.mjbradley.com/sites/default/files/MJBAcoalretirementissuebrief.pdf https://www.mjbradley.com/sites/default/files/MJBAcoalretire... The Jevons Paradox observes the introduction of more efficient technology in an existing system but finds a "paradoxical" uptick in input consumption. The introduction of more efficient coal burning machinery in England was followed by higher coal consumption. That surprised Jevons. The broadening of energy use (e.g. India developing like England did) certainly also increases demand for energy inputs, but it's a different case than the Jevons Paradox.
  - roenxi 7y ago
    Which is meaningless unless you believe that energy efficiency has only happened in the 2008-2018 period, which is not true. I happened to be working in the coal industry for most of that time and the decline isn't because people are using 40% less energy. It has nothing to do with increased efficiency. It has to do with: 1) Political action. 2) Alternative energy sources getting more competitive. Particularly natural gas, renewables and US shale oil. You're arguing that use-of-energy efficiency can cause a decline in coal production. That is wrong; if you use energy more efficiently I'll mine more coal - I've met the people who make that sort of decision. Coal is declining for other reasons - mainly that alternative sources are getting cheaper (which is not using energy more efficiently).