4 ms·

> The upshot is that at a 2.3% growth rate, we would reach boiling temperature in about 400 years. Growth rate of what? It is important to be clear. Growth in

> The upshot is that at a 2.3% growth rate, we would reach boiling temperature in about 400 years. Growth rate of what? It is important to be clear. Growth in energy consumption is not the same as economic growth. Total energy consumption per unit of GDP is not constant but is in fact on a downward trend[1]. [1] https://yearbook.enerdata.net/total-energy/world-energy-intensity-gdp-data.html https://yearbook.enerdata.net/total-energy/world-energy-inte...

Eddy_Viscosity2 5y ago
It was energy consumption, the link has the full conversation. They then talk about the relationship between energy consumption and economic growth.
- bhelkey 5y ago
  I, and looking around this thread many others, find his argument to be unconvincing to say the least. E.g. his argument against energy becoming almost free, "But if energy became arbitrarily cheap, someone could buy all of it, and suddenly the activities that comprise the economy would grind to a halt." One of the many problems with this is that we already live with a finite resource that is completely free but also a hard requirement for all economic activity: air.
  - ben_w 5y ago
    Air isn’t made by human industry nor is it for sale, except for special cases like medical care and submarines etc., where it does in fact run short, but not because it’s cheap enough for one person to buy all of it.
    - bhelkey 5y ago
      > Air isn’t made by human industry nor is it for sale None of this matters. The core of my point is that the price of storing THING is not always tied to the cost of using THING. Air is free but bottling the whole atmosphere would be frighteningly expensive. There are many places in the world with the ability to produce more energy than they consume but still have blackouts. In 2020, the price of crude oil was negative. Air, electricity, crude oil, and many others are not free to store. Air is currently essential yet free because one asshole cannot store it all.

Eddy_Viscosity2 5y ago

It was energy consumption, the link has the full conversation. They then talk about the relationship between energy consumption and economic growth.

bhelkey 5y ago
I, and looking around this thread many others, find his argument to be unconvincing to say the least. E.g. his argument against energy becoming almost free, "But if energy became arbitrarily cheap, someone could buy all of it, and suddenly the activities that comprise the economy would grind to a halt." One of the many problems with this is that we already live with a finite resource that is completely free but also a hard requirement for all economic activity: air.
- ben_w 5y ago
  Air isn’t made by human industry nor is it for sale, except for special cases like medical care and submarines etc., where it does in fact run short, but not because it’s cheap enough for one person to buy all of it.
  - bhelkey 5y ago
    > Air isn’t made by human industry nor is it for sale None of this matters. The core of my point is that the price of storing THING is not always tied to the cost of using THING. Air is free but bottling the whole atmosphere would be frighteningly expensive. There are many places in the world with the ability to produce more energy than they consume but still have blackouts. In 2020, the price of crude oil was negative. Air, electricity, crude oil, and many others are not free to store. Air is currently essential yet free because one asshole cannot store it all.