Americans Are Using Less Steel, Paper, Fertilizer, and Energy • Hacker News Board

Re: Americans Are Using Less Steel, Paper, Fertilizer, and Energy

#171

Post by nostrademons » Wed, Oct 09, 2019, 9:32 PM UTC

spodek wrote: post #154

Physics > Economics The Do The Math blog by Caltech-trained UCSD astrophysicist Tom Murphy is the best resource in this area. In particular the posts - Galactic Scale Energy https://dothemath.ucsd.edu/2011/07/galactic-scale-energy - Can Economic Growth Last? https://dothemath.ucsd.edu/2011/07/can-economic-growth-last - The dinner conversation with an economist on this topic https://dothemath.ucsd.edu/2012/04/economis…

I read those and conclude "Physics is not a particularly relevant constraint on economic growth."

His energy analysis concluded that at 2.3% growth rate and current technology, we would need to use the entire energy supply falling upon the earth's surface within 275 years. Improving technology might be able to stretch that to 400 years. Within 1400 years, we would need to use the entire energy of our solar system.

But we have a number of more pressing demographic constraints. As countries develop, fertility falls; fertility rates are currently below replacement in the entire developed world [1] with all regions other than Africa falling below replacement rate by 2050. Within 80 years, population is likely to start falling, with some studies predicting this within 30 years. Worse, there's a worldwide demographic bulge of 18-30 year old males that's hitting just about now; such demographics have been associated with a higher likelihood of war in the past.

There's plenty of other problems that these bring: if you don't get killed in war and manage to find a mate, you're not likely to see your social security or 401(k) worth all that much, nor will you find health care unless your rich or lucky or both. But they'll happen way before we reach physical limits on growth. Our threat model should be stupid politicians doing stupid things at the behest of frustrated populations, not the laws of physics.

[1] http://worldpopulationreview.com/countries/total-fertility-r...

Re: Americans Are Using Less Steel, Paper, Fertilizer, and Energy

#172

Post by layoutIfNeeded » Wed, Oct 09, 2019, 9:33 PM UTC

panpanna wrote: post #164

benibela wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They do that in the EU/Germany, too €/item, €/100g, €/1kg are all common

In 99% this is _not_ a EU thing. Maybe some German law?? Or just common practice in Germany? Edit: I think I confused your response with parent. I understand price/kg is a thing although I didn't knew it was mandated by law. What I don't understand is being forced to use some odd unit like price per 500g.

Same in Hungary. Everything has price / kg or litre shown next to the item’s price.

Re: Americans Are Using Less Steel, Paper, Fertilizer, and Energy

#173

Post by souprock » Wed, Oct 09, 2019, 9:34 PM UTC

tialaramex wrote: post #140

IfOnlyYouKnew wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The heat-trapping behaviour of CO_2 was first accurately measured in the 19th century, and all climate change models do actually predict convergence, not linear rise. It's just that the point of convergence is not one compatible with civilisation as we know it.

Exactly. If global warming said the typical outside temperature in Seattle doubles to almost 600K then it'd be fair to argue that's crazy people extrapolating - water isn't even liquid at that temperature, no model we have could make sense. But actually the model says it will go up say 2 or 3K. Much less like a wild extrapolation, and unfortunately still completely terrifying because that is already far too much.

2 or 3K really isn't enough for Seattle.

Re: Americans Are Using Less Steel, Paper, Fertilizer, and Energy

#174

Post by TeMPOraL » Wed, Oct 09, 2019, 9:35 PM UTC

Consultant32452 wrote: post #167

anon1m0us wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess what I am learning about myself lately is that I have the power to lie to people and convince them to do things they don't want to do or don't know better. People know this about me. They know it almost instantly. I sense it in them. I sense the same about other people. They have that power over me. However, I make an effort not to. Or, when I do, I work especially hard to steer them in the direction of their…

I'm interested in your thoughts on one public policy example of this. Back when AIDS first hit, the community of scientists and public policy makers said that while it was starting in the gay and drug community any moment it would hop into the general population. They knew this was a lie, but told us this because they didn't believe Americans would spend money helping gays and junkies. I've come to understand that to…

Thank you for saying that. Conditioning on this being accurate information, I just lost that much trust in the community of scientists.

This is how "hacking" the public policymaking fucks up society. And then people are surprised antivaxxers are a thing. They are a thing because we're all being constantly manipulated, and some people just don't have the capacity or patience to separate the truth from bullshit.

Re: Americans Are Using Less Steel, Paper, Fertilizer, and Energy

#175

Post by freeflight » Wed, Oct 09, 2019, 9:35 PM UTC

TeMPOraL wrote: post #14

This reads to me mostly as the US importing more, so the increased material use doesn't show in statistics. The article also mentions increase in use of plastics. One thing I'm curious about though - how come energy use stopped being correlated with economic growth? That's new.

Afaik energy use being correlated with economic growth depends on how much of the economy is based on energy-intensive industries, like manufacturing.

The US, as many other developed countries, has been shifting out of manufacturing economies to service economies for a while now.

Case in point: Nothing at Disney stipulates a correlation between their "economic output" and their energy consumption.

Meanwhile, a steel/aluminum plant in China will have a pretty direct correlation between economic output and energy input.

Re: Americans Are Using Less Steel, Paper, Fertilizer, and Energy

#176

Post by Nasrudith » Wed, Oct 09, 2019, 9:35 PM UTC

Consultant32452 wrote: post #167

anon1m0us wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess what I am learning about myself lately is that I have the power to lie to people and convince them to do things they don't want to do or don't know better. People know this about me. They know it almost instantly. I sense it in them. I sense the same about other people. They have that power over me. However, I make an effort not to. Or, when I do, I work especially hard to steer them in the direction of their…

I'm interested in your thoughts on one public policy example of this. Back when AIDS first hit, the community of scientists and public policy makers said that while it was starting in the gay and drug community any moment it would hop into the general population. They knew this was a lie, but told us this because they didn't believe Americans would spend money helping gays and junkies. I've come to understand that to…

I don't think that was even a lie - disease doesn't respect tidy social boundaries of guilt and innocence. Especially with unscreened blood at the time.

Re: Americans Are Using Less Steel, Paper, Fertilizer, and Energy

#177

Post by Moru » Wed, Oct 09, 2019, 9:35 PM UTC

panpanna wrote: post #164

benibela wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They do that in the EU/Germany, too €/item, €/100g, €/1kg are all common

In 99% this is _not_ a EU thing. Maybe some German law?? Or just common practice in Germany? Edit: I think I confused your response with parent. I understand price/kg is a thing although I didn't knew it was mandated by law. What I don't understand is being forced to use some odd unit like price per 500g.

It's at least law in Sweden since a while.

Re: Americans Are Using Less Steel, Paper, Fertilizer, and Energy

#178

Post by xyzzyz » Wed, Oct 09, 2019, 9:36 PM UTC

pjmorris wrote: post #96

Someone I know posted a picture of an empty rolodex today, saying that they'd moved their friends to 'the cloud.' I'm sure you can look at your phone apps and see other things that would've been physical objects ten or twenty years ago. So, that's one way material use has, at least, shifted. There are two other trends that worry me more. One is visible in the freezer section at the grocery store; a "half-gallon" of i…

A lot of it is due to sticky prices. Customers don't like seeing the number on the label go up, so the companies do what they can to keep the product quality the same at the same price point, which results in reduced quantity. The alternative is to reduce quality, which usually results in a death spiral.

Re: Americans Are Using Less Steel, Paper, Fertilizer, and Energy

#179

Post by andrewmutz » Wed, Oct 09, 2019, 9:38 PM UTC

TeMPOraL wrote: post #161

andrewmutz wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You haven't rebutted the parent poster. He said "Some people say growth can't happen forever, and all growth comes at environmental cost". Pointing out that "Every economic output requires material inputs" doesn't mean that there are limits to growth or that you can't have growth without environmental cost. As an example, if you have a resource that you consistently get more efficient at operating, you can consistent…

This is an accounting trick, though. It works because people are willing to pay for a massage and not for whatever the person was doing. But to actually grow the economy, you have to continuously retask that person to ever more profitable activities. You can also create growth by moving money in circles increasingly fast. Question is, how far we can push bullshit jobs before people get fed up with it? I'm not convinc…

It's not an accounting trick. Different ways a person spends their time genuinely provide different levels of value to society.

If a doctor spends his time saving lives or spends his time watching television, the impact on the world's material resources isn't that different, but the amount of value to society is much greater if he is saving lives.

Re: Americans Are Using Less Steel, Paper, Fertilizer, and Energy

#180

Post by Nasrudith » Wed, Oct 09, 2019, 9:40 PM UTC

mempko wrote: post #36

seibelj wrote: post #23

Some people say growth can't happen forever, and all growth comes at environmental cost, but that simply isn't true. I can create digital goods and services which people buy, and this increases GDP, and it doesn't hurt the environment and is indeed economic growth in the realest sense. I can even give massages all day, and this also doesn't destroy the environment.

If technological efficiency had any effect on lowering overall consumption, we would see that now. But we don't. Consumption in real terms is increasing at an exponential rate. This is called The Great Acceleration. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Acceleration Turns out people use the efficiency of technology to just consume more. Your internet goods and services might increase consumption somewhere else. Some of…

We already did actually. LED lightbulbs caused household power useage to drop in spite of the proliferation of networked computing devices. Thats right adding in a whole new category of power consumers wasn't enough to make up for the drop.