4 ms·
Saying it in a situation where we don't utilize even 1% of available resources. Much closer to 0.0001% than 1%. Also saying it in a situation where we don't ev
by throwaway11460 3y ago
Saying it in a situation where we don't utilize even 1% of available resources. Much closer to 0.0001% than 1%.
Also saying it in a situation where we don't even really attempt to be efficient.
Now I'm all for efficiency - but that's not what the degrowth people are saying.
- throwaway4220 3y agohttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_Overshoot_Day https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_Overshoot_Day Despite some flaws with the above it is not crazy to believe we have finite resources. Your numbers are sadly orders of magnitude too low.
- throwaway11460 3y agoThat's a complete pseudoscientific quack, sorry to be so blunt. Even if it wasn't, it doesn't meaningfully invalidate anything I said.
- throwaway4220 3y agohttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3818166/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3818166/ Let’s see your source for such a low percentage. I can tell you know we don’t have enough lithium for 1e6x more electric cars then we have now. Now maybe you’re imagining a future where we can replicate things so we do have the raw materials ie atoms? I’d agree with that