3 ms·

It's a cost thing. Prices for energy have been so cheap that investing in recapture capex didn't make sense. With energy prices going up, it does make sense. A

It's a cost thing. Prices for energy have been so cheap that investing in recapture capex didn't make sense. With energy prices going up, it does make sense. A funny anecdote (or sad?), after gas prices spiked in much of Europe due to the war many manufacturing facilities were looking to cut energy use, they found a lot of waste. Many places were able to reduce their gas usage by as much as ~33% if I recall correctly. I can't find the original source, but here's [1] one that claims 23% lower consumption across Germany in 2022 adjusted for temperature. 1 - https://www.nature.com/articles/s41560-023-01260-5 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41560-023-01260-5

philwelch 3y ago
Reducing consumption as a response to increased prices doesn’t mean the difference in consumption was originally “wasted”; it only means it was not worth the higher cost.
- fragmede 3y ago
  From the POV of capitalism, yes. From the POV of the environment, noooo.
  - ZeroGravitas 3y ago
    Or even from a non-fossil capitalism point of view, a carbon tax that equaled the externalities would lead to higher efficiency and give people a permanant financial incentive to find these efficiencies.
  - philwelch 3y ago
    If people can’t afford to heat their homes and freeze to death in the winter, is their continued survival wasteful from the POV of “the environment”?
    - fragmede 3y ago
      I think you're misreading me. The fact that there was that much waste that could have been found and eliminated earlier is an affront to the health of our planet. At no point did I suggest freezing people in their homes in the middle of winter to die.
      - philwelch 3y ago
        Cutting consumption because the price went up doesn’t necessarily mean the difference in consumption is waste. If you keep increasing the cost of energy, eventually people are going to freeze to death in their homes because they won’t be able to afford the heat. That doesn’t mean the energy required to keep them alive was wasted; it just means they couldn’t afford it anymore. Germany is heading into a recession because the high cost of energy is destroying their manufacturing sector. They aren’t just making the same amount of stuff with less energy; they’re making less stuff and becoming a poorer country.
- Firadeoclus 3y ago
  Which could be a coordination problem, though. Where initial high costs are due to a lack of scale whereas if everyone participated, costs would come down fast.

philwelch 3y ago

Reducing consumption as a response to increased prices doesn’t mean the difference in consumption was originally “wasted”; it only means it was not worth the higher cost.

fragmede 3y ago
From the POV of capitalism, yes. From the POV of the environment, noooo.
- ZeroGravitas 3y ago
  Or even from a non-fossil capitalism point of view, a carbon tax that equaled the externalities would lead to higher efficiency and give people a permanant financial incentive to find these efficiencies.
- philwelch 3y ago
  If people can’t afford to heat their homes and freeze to death in the winter, is their continued survival wasteful from the POV of “the environment”?
  - fragmede 3y ago
    I think you're misreading me. The fact that there was that much waste that could have been found and eliminated earlier is an affront to the health of our planet. At no point did I suggest freezing people in their homes in the middle of winter to die.
    - philwelch 3y ago
      Cutting consumption because the price went up doesn’t necessarily mean the difference in consumption is waste. If you keep increasing the cost of energy, eventually people are going to freeze to death in their homes because they won’t be able to afford the heat. That doesn’t mean the energy required to keep them alive was wasted; it just means they couldn’t afford it anymore. Germany is heading into a recession because the high cost of energy is destroying their manufacturing sector. They aren’t just making the same amount of stuff with less energy; they’re making less stuff and becoming a poorer country.
Firadeoclus 3y ago
Which could be a coordination problem, though. Where initial high costs are due to a lack of scale whereas if everyone participated, costs would come down fast.