4 ms·
Surely mass cryogenics is a non-starter in this day and age when we are concerned with lowering carbon emissions. All that refrigeration in perpetuity would con
by Mediterraneo10 6y ago
Surely mass cryogenics is a non-starter in this day and age when we are concerned with lowering carbon emissions. All that refrigeration in perpetuity would consume so much energy, and keeping the dead frozen would erase the gains that we expect to get from the gradual decline in birthrates.
- Cpoll 6y agoAre the carbon emissions that big of a deal? Every house in North America has at least one freezer. What scale are you envisioning when you say "mass"? I've sometimes fancied that the discovery of immortality might be good for the environment, it changes the incentives for the biggest abusers. With that said, I'm not entirely confident of that in practice.
- Mediterraneo10 6y ago> Every house in North America has at least one freezer. Cryonics requires the maintenance of a temperature far colder than any household freezer. > What scale are you envisioning when you say "mass"? I just mean that it might hardly seem acceptable to freeze more terminally ill people than just a few ultra-wealthy eccentrics.
- est31 6y agoVolume scales cubically while surface area with the square of the length. It should be possible to build large scalable cooled facilities. I do agree though that we aren't ready for such a system yet, both legally (currently a frozen person counts as dead, leading to their assets being taken away) and ecologically (carrying capacity limits of our planet). One day we might, who knows.