Live data from Hacker News

All poverty is energy poverty

omnibudsman.substack.com

271–280 of 466 posts

Re: All poverty is energy poverty

#271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> even though it may seem efficient from the financial perspective of a single company or an individual The national highway system and 1950s’ surburbanisation are top-down policy choices, not emergent behaviour.

The national highway system was a military not economic or social policy designed to allow for easy transport of troops in the event of a way. That is why many cities have large beltways that surround them, the idea being that if a city is nuked the highway is outside the blast radius.

It can be all of those things.

The existence is a military policy. The fact that many of them cut through and decimated minority businesses and neighborhoods rather than just solely going around cities in a beltway fashion (as is done in Europe and was Eisenhower's original intention) was an intentional social policy to remove "blighted" areas.

Re: All poverty is energy poverty

#272
post #10

I’ve long suspected that currencies are really just units of measurement convertible to the joule (or calorie).

The book Windup Girl [0] is a SciFi novel set in a universe where climate change has completely altered the world. Fossil fuels are no longer available, so production is limited by genetically engineered products or human/animal labor to charge in-universe batteries. Calorie cost of items becomes front and center to many activities. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Windup_Girl

Paolo Bacigalupi is fantastic if you're into eco-disaster sci-fi. The Water Knife[1] is also excellent, and with the extreme drought in the western US, feeling more and more prescient.

1 - https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/23209924-the-water-knife

Re: All poverty is energy poverty

#273
post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Interesting to see the comment thread digging into all sorts of criticism of the article (is it 2 kWh / fridge? Or 1.1? Should the author discuss renewable?) Hear hear. The point is, for those of us living in developed countries, is that all wealth is energy wealth. The western way of life is totally dependent on an abundance of cheap energy. When energy runs out, or becomes significantly more expensive, it's game…

> The western way of life is totally dependent on an abundance of cheap energy. Western?! What about cities like Tokyo, Dubai, Beijing, Johannesburg, Singapore?

Tbfh, he's wrong. The modern (read: based on electricity and fossil fuels) way of life is dependent on cheap energy. China is currently the biggest emitter in the world. Not because they're particularly wasteful necessarily, no. Surprise, an enormous amount of energy is required for a modern society to sustain itself, especially when that country is home to 1.4 billion people. They've built more nuclear reactors than all other countries combined in the past decade, and they're still heavily reliant on gas and coal (62% coal, 5% nuclear). Nobody knows how to efficiently and cleanly generate that much energy.

For comparison, France, which produces 78% of its electricity with nuclear, only generates about 380 TWh per year with nuclear power plants (2019). China generates ~350 TWh/year with nuclear. 5% of their energy production produces as much as close to 80% of France's energy sector.

And before anybody chimes in with "but they produce everything for everybody in the West": Only around 10% of their production is exported. They have the biggest domestic market in the world and they have the largest middle class population in the world. They have money too and they consume like any other economic actor.

And all this is before considering things like how energy-intensive producing fertilizer is, and fossil fuels are a required part of getting the necessary ingredients.

This can't be solved by consuming/producing less unless a part of that solution is wiping out a significant part of the human population and getting rid of modern civilization. Solving the energy issue (and by extension poverty, resource conflicts, etc.) requires us to actually figure out how to generate enough cheap and clean energy for 8+ billion people.

Re: All poverty is energy poverty

#274

In order to build systems to extract and use energy requires an educated society - that is the root deficiency. And it’s a lot more than just dropping books from airplanes.

In the present day, yes, that's true. However, once we develop AGI, this deficiency could* go away permanently.

An "educated society" just means a "necessary amount of trained cognitive power to direct energy towards the goals/purposes we value". Currently that's exclusive domain of the human brains within our workforce. However, there is absolutely no fundamental requirement for the cognitive power to be human. Once AGI is achieved, artificial constructs could rapidly (no 20-30 year training cost per single unit!) take over the vast majority of cognitive burden from humans.

I personally believe that we will achieve AGI on a timescale far far shorter than any kind of mass attempt to improve education across the world.

*Whether AGI is used to usher in a utopic civilization, or one of many possible dystopias, will of course depend on what groups end up being in control of it.

Re: All poverty is energy poverty

#275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The interesting thing isn't even your assesment of "west", but what values you assign to russia. They are absolutely wrong. It's (for someone, paradoxically) extremely individualistic slave nation with very deep hierarchies of power.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fourth_Political_Theory

I can't tell if this would be the motivation of a Metal Gear Solid villain, or the motivation of a multi-disc JRPG final boss.

Re: All poverty is energy poverty

#276
post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The author is saying we should do all those things, that they need done, that the total amount of energy humanity uses should grow not shrink Well...yea. It's unbelievably naive how some believe humanity should somehow start using _less_ energy. If they actually got their way, we would see a recession/depression that would be the most painful of our lifetime. We should be focused on raising the standard of living f…

> It's unbelievably naive how some believe humanity should somehow start using _less_ energy. Nothing naive about it, there are costs associated with production of energy and spending less energy is simply about lowering the associated costs. Europe being big on energy savings and efficiency is now better off compared to what would have had happened if they lost the Russian energy without the achieved efficiencies.

Efficiency is not the same as negative growth.

There are actual, real-life proponents of policies that would have us shrink our economies and decrease the standard of living.

Re: All poverty is energy poverty

#278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No grid is 100% reliable, but in the present situation where renewables are cheaper than nuclear it's not hard to see why they're being preferred. You'd need a story where that price difference is artificial or temporary (both possible)

Renewables are cheaper than nuclear mostly because of large state grants and tax reductions. Ultimately, if you want to handle all of your load with only renewables, you're going to need to build about 3x what's needed, just to account for wind turbines not running, sun not shining, etc, and you're going to need to replace most of it in 15 years, with rare earth materials that will start costing a lot of money. Needl…

> Ultimately, if you want to handle all of your load with only renewables, you're going to need to build about 3x what's needed, just to account for wind turbines not running, sun not shining, etc, and you're going to need to replace most of it in 15 years, with rare earth materials that will start costing a lot of money.

You're getting downvoted for living in the real world and opposing the approved climate messaging.

It is really a shame to see all the people that have been bamboozled by the "renewable energy" propaganda and refuse to see the obvious (very negative) implications of following through on that policy.

Re: All poverty is energy poverty

#279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's the better alternative?

A better alternative would be to have localised production and localised consumption of food and most basic goods. Stuff like not having foreign-cuisine restaurants and not buying salmon from thousands of kilometers away. Cloth production should follow the same idea. People should feel more attached to their birthplace and the goal should be to develop their skills locally with one company preferably. Strong bonds wi…

> not having foreign-cuisine restaurants and not buying salmon from thousands of kilometers away. Cloth production should follow the same idea

These isolated communities exist. Their quality of life is lower. But anyone can join them. From hippie communes to Amish communities, Luddism has a long tradition in modern society. (I’m ignoring the ethno-racial undertone in implying there can be an objective arbiter of what counts as true local cuisine and culture.)

Re: All poverty is energy poverty

#280
post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's unbelievably naive how some believe humanity should somehow start using _less_ energy. Nothing naive about it, there are costs associated with production of energy and spending less energy is simply about lowering the associated costs. Europe being big on energy savings and efficiency is now better off compared to what would have had happened if they lost the Russian energy without the achieved efficiencies.

Efficiency is not the same as negative growth. There are actual, real-life proponents of policies that would have us shrink our economies and decrease the standard of living.

That's not because they hate energy but because they think it's not worth to tolerate the negatives associated with production of energy.

Energy production often impacts negatively the surroundings of the production area and that's why even those who boast for energy production at all cost are also NIMBY folks. Notice how wealthy prefer to live away from energy production sites, in prestine environment? turns out the poor and the middle class want that too.

Post reply on HN