7 ms·

As much as I'm in favor of moving towards renewables, we are still destroying our biosphere, and the resources needed for renewables are not renewable ... > En

As much as I'm in favor of moving towards renewables, we are still destroying our biosphere, and the resources needed for renewables are not renewable ... > Energy transition aspirations are similar. The goal is powering modernity, not addressing the sixth mass extinction. Sure, it could mitigate the CO2 threat (to modernity), but why does the fox care when its decline ultimately traces primarily to things like deforestation, habitat fragmentation, agricultural runoff, pollution, pesticides, mining, manufacturing, or in short: modernity. Pursuit of a giant energy infrastructure replacement requires tremendous material extraction—directly driving many of these ills—only to then provide the energetic means to keep doing all these same things that abundant evidence warns is a prescription for termination of the community of life. https://dothemath.ucsd.edu/2022/09/death-by-hockey-sticks/ https://dothemath.ucsd.edu/2022/09/death-by-hockey-sticks/ Humanity needs to let go of the fantasy of endless growth, which permeates through our cultures, economies and politics. Life on this earth is a co-op, you can't win by being the last species alive, or at least your wining will look very sad and be short lived. If you think endless growth is a viable strategy, go and ask your neighborhood slime mold in a petri dish what it thinks.

nazgul17 2y ago
Before growth became a thing, it was a zero sum game. Nasty setup for harmonious living.
- bwestergard 2y ago
  Do you mean that "Before [economic] growth became a thing, [life] was a zero sum game?". I'm genuinely unsure what you mean by that. By any measure, the history of life on earth has seen many ups and downs in biodiversity. So the flourishing of one species often coincided with the flourishing of many other related species. A well-known example would be various pollinating insects and birds and the flowers they pollinated in the early cretaceous.
- gsf_emergency_2 2y ago
  Yes! Nonrenewables+greenhouse gases. Are a zero-sum game with Earth. Problem is, locally, a zero-sum game can look quite non-zero-sum (as opposed to globally). And perhaps vice versa too (in time scales, eg universally) I'm all in on renewables+albedo driven globally pos-sum games :) (Until heat death of solar system)
- fch42 2y ago
  If you mean "eat or get eaten", then there's a few early red flags that the pursuit of growth and decarbonisation concurrently may well lead us back to that idea. There's a strong correlation in politics worldwide of extreme xenophobia with climate change denial, and growth-focus with "others pollute more than us". If you think "carbon budget" then it's compelling to grow yours at the expense of others.
ETH_start 2y ago
We are not confined to Earth. Currently something like 99.9999999% of the energy radiated by the sun is emitted into empty space, where it is completely wasted. That can all be harvested. To put that into perspective, our civilization could use 20 trillion times more energy than it does now if it harvested the sun's entire output.
- lostlogin 2y ago
  > We are not confined to Earth. A couple of humans can go to space in that they can go up for short stints. The rest of us are confined to earth for the foreseeable future. Even if we weren’t, I’d like the place kept nice.
  - ETH_start 2y ago
    The energy harvesting infrastructure can extend beyond Earth while we live here. With advanced launch capabilities we can also build much more livable habitats beyond Earth than the ISS. And yes, we should keep Earth nice, but we don't need to limit economic development to do that.
    - henearkr 2y ago
      There is a right order in which to do these things: 1) enable space harvesting of energy and minerals, 2) unleash growth. Doing 2) first as we are is just planetary-scale suicide. We should even first concentrate on 0) figure out how to preserve the biosphere liveability, and stick to these rules.
      - ETH_start 2y ago
        I respectfully disagree. There are vast opportunities, even on Earth, to expand energy generation without overloading the environment — such as utilizing arid lands for large-scale solar farms and expanding nuclear power, among other solutions. That said, I believe a robust space economy is imminent, not some distant uncertainty. Starship has already had partially successful test launches, and if it follows the same trajectory as the reusable Falcon 9, we will soon have a fully reusable vehicle capable of delivering 150 tons to low-Earth orbit per launch. If Musk follows through on his ambition to develop a fleet large enough to transport the materials needed for a self-sustaining Martian civilization, we could see an explosion in lift capacity within the next decade or two, radically transforming the scale of human expansion into space.

nazgul17 2y ago

Before growth became a thing, it was a zero sum game. Nasty setup for harmonious living.

bwestergard 2y ago
Do you mean that "Before [economic] growth became a thing, [life] was a zero sum game?". I'm genuinely unsure what you mean by that. By any measure, the history of life on earth has seen many ups and downs in biodiversity. So the flourishing of one species often coincided with the flourishing of many other related species. A well-known example would be various pollinating insects and birds and the flowers they pollinated in the early cretaceous.
gsf_emergency_2 2y ago
Yes! Nonrenewables+greenhouse gases. Are a zero-sum game with Earth. Problem is, locally, a zero-sum game can look quite non-zero-sum (as opposed to globally). And perhaps vice versa too (in time scales, eg universally) I'm all in on renewables+albedo driven globally pos-sum games :) (Until heat death of solar system)
fch42 2y ago
If you mean "eat or get eaten", then there's a few early red flags that the pursuit of growth and decarbonisation concurrently may well lead us back to that idea. There's a strong correlation in politics worldwide of extreme xenophobia with climate change denial, and growth-focus with "others pollute more than us". If you think "carbon budget" then it's compelling to grow yours at the expense of others.

ETH_start 2y ago

We are not confined to Earth. Currently something like 99.9999999% of the energy radiated by the sun is emitted into empty space, where it is completely wasted. That can all be harvested. To put that into perspective, our civilization could use 20 trillion times more energy than it does now if it harvested the sun's entire output.

lostlogin 2y ago
> We are not confined to Earth. A couple of humans can go to space in that they can go up for short stints. The rest of us are confined to earth for the foreseeable future. Even if we weren’t, I’d like the place kept nice.
- ETH_start 2y ago
  The energy harvesting infrastructure can extend beyond Earth while we live here. With advanced launch capabilities we can also build much more livable habitats beyond Earth than the ISS. And yes, we should keep Earth nice, but we don't need to limit economic development to do that.
  - henearkr 2y ago
    There is a right order in which to do these things: 1) enable space harvesting of energy and minerals, 2) unleash growth. Doing 2) first as we are is just planetary-scale suicide. We should even first concentrate on 0) figure out how to preserve the biosphere liveability, and stick to these rules.
    - ETH_start 2y ago
      I respectfully disagree. There are vast opportunities, even on Earth, to expand energy generation without overloading the environment — such as utilizing arid lands for large-scale solar farms and expanding nuclear power, among other solutions. That said, I believe a robust space economy is imminent, not some distant uncertainty. Starship has already had partially successful test launches, and if it follows the same trajectory as the reusable Falcon 9, we will soon have a fully reusable vehicle capable of delivering 150 tons to low-Earth orbit per launch. If Musk follows through on his ambition to develop a fleet large enough to transport the materials needed for a self-sustaining Martian civilization, we could see an explosion in lift capacity within the next decade or two, radically transforming the scale of human expansion into space.