3 ms·
Non that much related, but inspired by: in the past southern States was the richest also thanks to the climate, and places where circadian delta was little was
by kkfx 2y ago
Non that much related, but inspired by: in the past southern States was the richest also thanks to the climate, and places where circadian delta was little was the most preferred. Than when heating became more automated (meaning you do not have to manually chop wood/dig for coal for most of the year) northern countries get richer, since there was still no A/C. I think we start to reverse again where some sufficiently mild climate zones, where p.v. is meaningful and with BIG circadian delta, to not need cooling in summer nights, will be again the richest a small step at a time as fossils get phased out.
At our current technological progress we still need nature to produce food and climate have an immense impact, so well... Try to really think about the not-so-near future, where in most northern/southern areas even if the climate will be less cold heating will be simply too expensive for most.
Introduce in the mix issues with melting permafrost and Canadian geological peculiarities... Canada seems to be probably a work zone for poor more than a wealthy country...
- HPsquared 2y agoHuman factors are the most important thing these days to wealth, not geography.
- kkfx 2y agoEnergy is needed to be wealthy, and a country with too limited energy production can't be rich except small fiscal paradises...
- hollerith 2y agoJapan has basically no internal energy production. Ditto Switzerland, Sweden and Finland I think. (Being reliant on energy imports definitely makes it harder for these countries to guarantee their national security in time of war, tho.) Also the Southern US states were never richer than the North.