3 ms·

We haven't squeezed living standards? Take two examples: LED lights and heat pumps. Replacing incandescent bulbs and direct heating hasn't made us poorer. Just

We haven't squeezed living standards? Take two examples: LED lights and heat pumps. Replacing incandescent bulbs and direct heating hasn't made us poorer. Just more efficient. Many countries have decoupled economic growth from energy use.[1] My personal theory is that we were stuck based on the marginal cost of fossil fuels. Given the fossil price of energy we had already exploited nearly all avenues. Renewables are cheaper than fossil fuels and massively scalable. Thus we will once again be in the state with more energy available than what we can use, and we will reliably find new ways of utilizing this. Nuclear is the antithesis to this. It is more expensive than fossil fuels which means relying on it will entail degrowth compared to our fossil equilibrium. [1]: https://ourworldindata.org/energy-gdp-decoupling https://ourworldindata.org/energy-gdp-decoupling

roenxi 3y ago
How much of that 15% drop can you explain with light bulbs and heat pumps? There is no way it is that material. And we know that efficiencies don't cause the amount of energy used to drop, they cause an overall rise, because energy goes further so it is worth collecting more (ie, Jevons' Paradox). The only thing that causes energy use to drop is if the supply isn't there. > Many countries have decoupled economic growth from energy use. Yeah, but the obvious conclusion isn't what you expect it is - GDP is becoming obsolete. The reason it has been useful historically is that it is a good proxy for energy availability. You've got a number there that goes up, but is decoupling from any real metric. If GDP correlates with energy availability and GDP drops; that is an urgent problem because that means it is getting harder to get food, shelter and essentials. If it doesn't correlate with energy availability then there is a bit of a question about why we're supposed to care.

roenxi 3y ago

How much of that 15% drop can you explain with light bulbs and heat pumps? There is no way it is that material. And we know that efficiencies don't cause the amount of energy used to drop, they cause an overall rise, because energy goes further so it is worth collecting more (ie, Jevons' Paradox). The only thing that causes energy use to drop is if the supply isn't there. > Many countries have decoupled economic growth from energy use. Yeah, but the obvious conclusion isn't what you expect it is - GDP is becoming obsolete. The reason it has been useful historically is that it is a good proxy for energy availability. You've got a number there that goes up, but is decoupling from any real metric. If GDP correlates with energy availability and GDP drops; that is an urgent problem because that means it is getting harder to get food, shelter and essentials. If it doesn't correlate with energy availability then there is a bit of a question about why we're supposed to care.