Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

smurficus103 t1_j2b2ky8 wrote

Single most important issue is energy production. We need more powa and we need to not kill what's left of the natural world.

With boundless energy, you could do silly shit, like farm underground with temperature and humidity control

14

ShalmaneserIII t1_j2bi3qm wrote

Iirc, you can track a civilization pretty well just by measuring the amount of power available to it. We have the modern world because we've been able to heavily use fossil fuels since the 1830s or so.

Without those, or a replacement, everybody goes back to raising horses and plowing a lot.

10

AllanfromWales1 t1_j2b327x wrote

I presume you're aware that not everyone will agree with you on this.

3

Erlian t1_j2crib3 wrote

Yeah I already think we're using too much power senselessly. I think power should be more expensive in a tiered fashion, and especially when it gets expensive in realtime. Wanna blast your AC in your entire 10,000sqft mansion in LA when it's 108F out and people are dying? The cost of that should accelerate, and go towards heat shelters, climate remediation, carbon taxes, projects to eliminate/ reduce effects of urban heat islands. That way maybe people will start to feel more of a hole in their wallet and only cool the 2-3 rooms they're using and shut off the rest of the house on days like those..

I think gas should cost more, the more of it you use. Wanna own a big truck you don't even need for actual work / hauling, a van, an ATV, etc? OK, gas costs more the more of it you use beyond what the typical person needs.

Wanna guzzle 80% of the limited supply of fresh water your community uses, so you can farm cash crops, then blame the public and tell them to let their lawns die / have to ask for water at a restaurant, which maybe contributes 2% at best? OK sure, just make sure that whatever you're doing is actually worth all the resources you're using, and give it back to the community.. wait, it's not worth it and the costs are untenable at competitive market rates for fresh water? Ok then, maybe stop growing so much alfalfa in a goddamn desert.

Wanna eat steak and beef burger for dinner every single night, even though that meat has drastic environmental impact in terms of water, land, and energy use? Sure thing, it will just cost you twice as much, compounding, per night of the week you eat it, and the tax money will go towards water remediation, carbon offsets, etc.

I think the expectation that everyone gets a single family home and yard etc within commuting distance to work, parking space etc is untenable. We need public housing that is affordable, yet efficient and comfortable (not much for low income folks), with mass transit nearby. We need to redline the NIMBY homeowners and pave the way for a future where more people can have a better life instead of a handful of elites who happened to get some nice hand-me-downs dating back to when FDR carved out SFH zoning across all of America's cities.

We vastly overconsume as it is. More power will just beget more consumption and more inequality + inefficiency in the allocation of that power.

Does all that sound socialist / utilitarian? If yes, then good, bc that aligns with my personal philosophies.

3

smurficus103 t1_j2ctz30 wrote

Excellent points.

As far as making water and electricity cost moar, removing subsidies might go a long way.

I'm really hopeful we can produce more locally with 3d printing and solar panels and such. Re-use old panels and old EV batteries to drop off the grid as much as possible.

My orig point tho... we need more power. Power is light in the dark, heat in the winter, food, clean water, whatever people need.

But, you're absolutely right to be concerned with the distribution of that power... right now subsidies take from the average, while large corporations feast on that infrastructure

2

Mafinde t1_j2ctgtl wrote

I agree. We are way too accustomed to convenience at huge energy expense. Do not see that changing tho lol

1

AllanfromWales1 t1_j2cxp1y wrote

Perhaps worth mentioning how US-centric this response is to a world issue.

0