Re: Existential risks

On 27 Apr, 14:24, Wolf Kirchmeir <wolf...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Curt Welch wrote:

[...]> At worse, what will happen is that the current flow of energy and cheap
pre-made materials will slow as all the "free" stuff is used up, and we
have to use energy to recycle materials into the forms we need. The net
result is that we will find more ways to make things last longer and throw
less stuff away since the material to make new things will cost so much
more than it does now.

[...]

Good thing you put "free" in quotes. The only cost of doing or making
anything is energy.

Yes, you need energy to do or make things, but you can't measure costs
in energy units:
1 Joule of gravitational potential energy is the same amount of energy
of 1 Joule of heat, but they aren't equally useful to produce goods
and services.
As per second law of thermodynamics, mechanical energy can be
converted completely to heat but heat can be converted to mechanical
energy only partially.

Usable energy is a resource, probably the most important one.
Monetary value is a different thing.

But the economic theories underlying our accounting
systems equate cost with price. "Externals" are priced at $0. Thus the
real costs of out goods and services are hidden from us. Actually, a
good deal of that unaccounted cost does show up, in the costs of
healthcare, accelerated rusting, "restoration" of wilderness areas, etc
etc etc.

The problem is that exploitation of some limited resources, like
environment cleanness, is unregulated.

This stems from the incorrect belief that these resources are, for all
practical purposes, unlimited.
From most of human history this belief was correct: hunter-gatherers'
camp fires didn't cause significant negative environmental changes.
Pollution has become a problem mostly from the industrial revolution,
but it wasn't recognized as such or even when recognized people
thought that its costs where outweighed by the benefits of
industrialization.

Another problem is that usage environmental resources is difficult to
quantify, and their ownership is unclear:
Mines and crop fields are located in countries and have owners, but
who does own the earth atmosphere?
Perhaps these issues can't be resolved until there is a substantial
form of world government.

Our economic theories are insane. What's worse is that the left and
right believe the same nonsense they are different sects of the same
religion.

--
wolf k.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Attn: Mr. Mook
    ... exactly is it about spare/surplus energy that you still do not ... The cost of alternative energy sources has to do with capital costs. ... The recurring cost of energy for nuclear and solar sources (solar is ... Now, since power levels of nuclear reactions can be arbitrarily large, ...
    (sci.energy.hydrogen)
  • Re: Attn: Mr. Mook
    ... exactly is it about spare/surplus energy that you still do not ... The cost of alternative energy sources has to do with capital costs. ... The recurring cost of energy for nuclear and solar sources (solar is ... Now, since power levels of nuclear reactions can be arbitrarily large, ...
    (sci.energy.hydrogen)
  • Re: We can meet all our needs through space development
    ... expectations of 13% efficiency not 40% as you appear to assume with ... against conventional energy sources without government subsidy. ... By 2050 solar power could end U.S. dependence on foreign oil and slash ... I answer the cost questions below. ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: LA-4541-MS
    ... Earth has more water than we know what to do with, ... The world spends most of its money on food. ... things like food and energy and warfare.. ... greater variety and taste, at lower cost, available to everyone at ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: LA-4541-MS
    ... Earth has more water than we know what to do with, ... The world spends most of its money on food. ... things like food and energy and warfare.. ... greater variety and taste, at lower cost, available to everyone at ...
    (sci.space.policy)