5 ms·

Fair point -- making a clothes dryer more energy efficient will only result in less energy consumption if the utilization of clothes dryers stays about the same

Fair point -- making a clothes dryer more energy efficient will only result in less energy consumption if the utilization of clothes dryers stays about the same, just as adding lanes to highways to reduce congestion reduces congestion briefly, but also invites more traffic. I do think that a low carbon future demands more imagination from us, a re-envisioning of prosperity, which is already underway. Working from home is one example, as is gaming and electronic social networking.

steveBK123 3y ago
I think induced demand exists, but also ignores areas of the country (the northeast) where the built infrastructure capacity predates the current inhabitants by generations. For example, the major highways through SW CT were completed by 1940 & 1960 respectively. The population is about 2x what it was then, and most families now have 2 cars instead of 1, as both spouses work whereas that wasn't as much the norm 90 years ago. So you have 2-3x the demand on essentially the same lane capacity built when my grandmother was my age. Along with this there's also been practically zero expansion of mass transit in the area. So damned if you do, damned if you don't in a way. We all just put up with it taking longer to get to/from work, visiting family out of state, etc. One area where our lives truly have gotten worse, and I'm not nostalgia pilled generally speaking.
- Tade0 3y ago
  I share this sentiment. Induced demand with regard to cars was studied when both population and urbanization were growing. It's easy to imagine that this growth will continue to fill any capacity thrown at it, but that can't hold true ad infinitum, especially that peak car happened in 2017: https://transportgeography.org/contents/chapter1/the-setting-of-global-transportation-systems/automobile-production-world/ https://transportgeography.org/contents/chapter1/the-setting... The Braess paradox is also mostly dead in the age of real-time traffic information. Anyone taking an Uber can see for themselves the sometimes weird paths they take - all because it's truly faster this way with real-time data.
  - steveBK123 3y ago
    Production numbers are also imperfect as a measure of use. Cars are more durable and last longer than cars as recently as 2000. Product cycles have also widened such that a 5yr old car looks closer to the latest models than old&dated.
- adrianN 3y ago
  The travel time people tolerate is approximately constant. If you make travel faster, after a while things just move farther away from each other.
  - steveBK123 3y ago
    Right, and even this is desirable because on the coasts you have impossible to build within, extremely expensive cities, surrounded by lots of under built land. The suburbs act as a relief valve for city housing costs. Otherwise we see a continue out-migration from urban coast blue states, to less urban, cheaper red states. For example, I have friends/family who have/do teach at HCOL city K-12 schools. Starting pay is horrendous like $40k in some areas, and tops out in the $70K range. They aren't buying a $1M-2M apartment with transit options for their commute. It's fun when they are 24 and living with a roommate splitting a dumpy rental. By their 30s they are left with basically 3 choices - quit teaching, marry someone with a higher paying job, or moving further & further out.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    - adrianN 3y ago
      The reasonable thing to do is build dense housing at the edge of the city and not endless oceans of single-family housing in suburbs.
snthd 3y ago
It's the Jenvons Paradox[0] which weirdly isn't mentioned in the article. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox
- badtension 3y ago
  It's linked directly in chapter "Rebound effects?" under footnote 7 although the link seems to be crooked. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0921800905001084 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S09218...
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
konschubert 3y ago
Degrowth ain’t gonna happen, at least not deliberately.

steveBK123 3y ago

I think induced demand exists, but also ignores areas of the country (the northeast) where the built infrastructure capacity predates the current inhabitants by generations. For example, the major highways through SW CT were completed by 1940 & 1960 respectively. The population is about 2x what it was then, and most families now have 2 cars instead of 1, as both spouses work whereas that wasn't as much the norm 90 years ago. So you have 2-3x the demand on essentially the same lane capacity built when my grandmother was my age. Along with this there's also been practically zero expansion of mass transit in the area. So damned if you do, damned if you don't in a way. We all just put up with it taking longer to get to/from work, visiting family out of state, etc. One area where our lives truly have gotten worse, and I'm not nostalgia pilled generally speaking.

Tade0 3y ago
I share this sentiment. Induced demand with regard to cars was studied when both population and urbanization were growing. It's easy to imagine that this growth will continue to fill any capacity thrown at it, but that can't hold true ad infinitum, especially that peak car happened in 2017: https://transportgeography.org/contents/chapter1/the-setting-of-global-transportation-systems/automobile-production-world/ https://transportgeography.org/contents/chapter1/the-setting... The Braess paradox is also mostly dead in the age of real-time traffic information. Anyone taking an Uber can see for themselves the sometimes weird paths they take - all because it's truly faster this way with real-time data.
- steveBK123 3y ago
  Production numbers are also imperfect as a measure of use. Cars are more durable and last longer than cars as recently as 2000. Product cycles have also widened such that a 5yr old car looks closer to the latest models than old&dated.
adrianN 3y ago
The travel time people tolerate is approximately constant. If you make travel faster, after a while things just move farther away from each other.
- steveBK123 3y ago
  Right, and even this is desirable because on the coasts you have impossible to build within, extremely expensive cities, surrounded by lots of under built land. The suburbs act as a relief valve for city housing costs. Otherwise we see a continue out-migration from urban coast blue states, to less urban, cheaper red states. For example, I have friends/family who have/do teach at HCOL city K-12 schools. Starting pay is horrendous like $40k in some areas, and tops out in the $70K range. They aren't buying a $1M-2M apartment with transit options for their commute. It's fun when they are 24 and living with a roommate splitting a dumpy rental. By their 30s they are left with basically 3 choices - quit teaching, marry someone with a higher paying job, or moving further & further out.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - adrianN 3y ago
    The reasonable thing to do is build dense housing at the edge of the city and not endless oceans of single-family housing in suburbs.

snthd 3y ago

It's the Jenvons Paradox[0] which weirdly isn't mentioned in the article. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox

badtension 3y ago
It's linked directly in chapter "Rebound effects?" under footnote 7 although the link seems to be crooked. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0921800905001084 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S09218...

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

konschubert 3y ago

Degrowth ain’t gonna happen, at least not deliberately.