3 ms·
Not "warm", because with fusion filling this cache, energy usage wouldn't lead to CO2 pollution. They're suggesting it would lead to increases in consumption wh
by slothtrop 4y ago
Not "warm", because with fusion filling this cache, energy usage wouldn't lead to CO2 pollution. They're suggesting it would lead to increases in consumption which means waste. Notwithstanding that a) life won't necessarily get more affordable for people, and stuff costs money, b) there are innovations now, and expected in the future, which would drastically curtail waste, though some regulatory measures might be necessary to do better with this.
So I'm also skeptical.
- lambdaba 4y agoI don't see why it goes without saying the extra energy would necessarily go towards consumerism. There is still a long way to go towards getting every human a decent life and opportunity to reach their full potential. There's no way we're getting there without the extra energy. For providing healthcare, nutricious food, education, etc.
- felixmeziere 4y agoSo far, extra energy has been entirely targeted at increasing consumerism: it's the famous "such and such country is finally getting a sizeable middle class". Translation of "middle class": class of mass consumers.
- lambdaba 4y agoI guess my idea is most cultures have moved on or are in the process of moving on having realized that "things" is not what they need most, but that's a phase that a culture must pass through. Again, there are plenty of other things to do with that extra energy, it's not like we don't have a choice.
- felixmeziere 4y agoExactly we agree: the problem is doing the right choice!
- felixmeziere 4y agoThe graphs of energy availability/consumption and emissions of garbage are correlated. This is a historical fact. Life is literally as affordable for people as the amount of energy that is available to them, that's the main factor (a bit of optimization of processes also plays but at a more minor order). Food used to be 25% of households' spending early XXth century, when someone would go buy eggs from the local market or farmer. Today it is 10% if you count the margins of industrials, distributors etc. But if you just look at the price of the eggs, then it's probably less than 1%. What allowed this? Energy! Energy allowed for abundant food, a long life, studying and the general tertiarisation of the economy (giving birth to tech) and of course consumerism. The more energy the cheaper everything is the more people consume, at least as long as we persuade people that buying things is the greatest pleasure in life.
- slothtrop 4y agoSee my response to your other post.