Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

radicalceleryjuice t1_j0a00ln wrote

Reply to comment by KronaSamu in Fusion energy breakthrough and national security implications explained by TheScienceAdvocate

That sounds provably ridiculous and probably pertaining to a cult of economics

−5

Ender16 t1_j0a64fm wrote

If we use less energy or quality of life decreases. That's true for us, and it's true for every known living thing to have ever existed.

I don't want to use less energy. In fact most don't want to and most are not going to. So instead of wishing for something people don't want to be forced on them we do what people do want in a way that is better and less detrimental.

3

radicalceleryjuice t1_j0abq3t wrote

It's not a one to one relationship between energy and quality of life. We can have awesome lives while using energy wisely.

If we can make more energy while taking better care of the planet, I'm all for that. I see no evidence that free markets will take care of the planet. We'll need a combination of free markets and environmental protection laws.

2

m0estash t1_j0a2w13 wrote

Will you do your part?? I’m not being a smart ass, it’s a real question. Years back a read a paper that had some excellent figures in it. It took the worlds energy output, analysed the energy requirements for various nations and then normalised the data to non dimensional units. The way it broke down was that in most of Africa people used about 0.25 of a unit of energy per day to exist, in places like the USA, Australia etc it was more like 4-5 units per day. To sustain current population growth around the world we would need to average it out to about about 1 unit per person on average. This would allow for about 10 billion people to survive at the standard 1 units provides. We hit this population number around 2050. Imagine the adjustment you need to make to go from 5 units a day to 1. Can you do it? I know I couldn’t. Which country should continue to under use so that we can keep 5 units a day? Simple fact is the world needs more energy not less. We have to find a away through that need without killing the planet. At this point I think fission is the best short / mid-term solution.

Edit: stuff.

2

radicalceleryjuice t1_j0a6hbf wrote

I’m totally pro sustainable energy. We use way more energy than we need to in countries like Canada. I try hard to use less. I ride a bike. I grow food. I’m also not living in a cave.

My original point was that efficiency and more energy alone won’t solve our ecological problems. Fusion will help but only if we start enacting good political policies.

But for sure, the people in Africa need energy too.

0

KronaSamu t1_j0aj6x0 wrote

It's not an economic thing, although it totally sounds like one. It's based on the idea that the more power we have access to, the more advanced we are as a civilization therefore we will have a higher quality of life among other things. This is also about us as a whole species, and not about any individuals. All that being said, we still shouldn't waste power and we absolutely have to transition to better forms of power.

2

radicalceleryjuice t1_j0ak63a wrote

Aha. Hey, I really appreciate the friendly answer. I had wondered whether my reply above had come across as too adversarial.

I'm open to the fact that energy is allowing us to advance and evolve in ways I can't entirely understand.

I'll be more thoughtful about saying things like "use less energy." Better to think in terms of using energy wisely.

Take care!

2

TheLegendaryFoxFire t1_j0al2kb wrote

>I had wondered whether my reply above had come across as too adversarial.

You could say that yeah.

1