View Single Post
Old 11-14-2018, 12:06 PM   #3693 (permalink)
aerohead
Master EcoModder
 
aerohead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Sanger,Texas,U.S.A.
Posts: 16,314
Thanks: 24,440
Thanked 7,386 Times in 4,783 Posts
2 ways

Quote:
Originally Posted by redpoint5 View Post
That's the point sendler is always making; that wealth and consumption are the same thing. Any person who is wealthy is also a large consumer.

The logical conclusion then is that if you want to reduce consumption, there are only 2 ways to go about doing it:

1. Reduce population
2. Reduce wealth

So the environmental "problem" isn't that we aren't all driving EVs and using LED bulbs, it's that we're rich and prolific.

People living in the US are the 1%, including those we consider "low income".

The rate of population growth is in decline, so I tend to believe technology will allow us to live in relatively high standards of living until population naturally peaks; perhaps somewhere around 10 billion. From there we will face the opposite population crisis; aging populations with declining numbers.

In the future, reproduction will be more about making a decision, and less about impulsiveness.
I would add energy efficiency as #3.
Some pervert the Jevon's Paradox to argue against this,but even Stanley Jevons was incorrect in his logic concerning efficiency and consumption.
Efficiency can be used as an excuse to just use more,leading to zero overall conservation,but it's conditional.
In 1974,I went from 18-mpg,to 41-mpg overnight,with off-the-shelf technology.
If I could get into a TESLA Model-3,I could be at 170 mpg-e within 6-months.
__________________
Photobucket album: http://s1271.photobucket.com/albums/jj622/aerohead2/