Carlton green wrote: ↑9 Jan 2023, 4:23pm
Biospace wrote: ↑9 Jan 2023, 2:42pm
The bigger question is how to reduce our overall energy consumption. Should we all have the same amount of energy made available to us, millionaires and billionaires included?
An interesting concept but how it might be reasonably implemented I wouldn’t like to say, but in times of commodity shortage - which in some respects we have - then rationing is arguably fair and was used in World War Two.
The rich will find some ways around rationing, but without allowing them some ‘loopholes’ the rich will be very effective at blocking change. I’d like to see fuel supply being fairer and remove the who can have fuel being overly based on wealth; one can be reasonably certain that if the rich were limited in what fuel they could buy then Chelsea Tractors would loose their shine and the 100 mpg car would shortly be a reality. As they say necessity is the Mother of invention - means and wit is usually needed too.
I'd be most interested to hear how the rich would try to justify a higher allocation of energy for personal use. We're told that there is an impending climate disaster by the elites who fly around the world to meetings, often in personal jets, so if they believe themselves why are they not leading by example?
pwa wrote: ↑9 Jan 2023, 4:39pm
On the other hand, those with more disposable income can adapt more easily than those on a low income and stuck with an inefficient boiler they can't afford to replace. It is the same with electric cars. The people who need them most are unable to afford them. The wealthier you are, the more options you have.
This argument is one used to justify higher levels of consumption, for the most part the more you spend, the greater the negative impact on the environment.
Constantly high levels of consumption (a significant proportion of which could be judged as unnecessary) leads to lower second hand values which in turn invariably leads to shorter lifespans, in turn goods are made to a lower standard - there's little more wasteful than a product with years of life left sitting in a skip. It's a viscious circle, fed by carefully exploited human 'need' for shopping. We haven't even a good recycling process for most plastic waste.
"
It is the same with electric cars". Not quite, it makes more sense to keep older small cars which cover a lowish annual mileage than replace them with EVs, in most countries which burn a lot of fossil fuels to make their electricity. Typically the sort of car a lower income household uses. Volvo cites 70% more emissions in manufacturing EVs.
The proper servicing of mechanical devices is neglected while new sales are encouraged and heavily promoted. Products are less serviceable today, perhaps as a result of this behaviour. Yet that's the very opposite of what's needed if we're to turn around the mess the planet's in. Higher quality, simpler products are needed, ones with servicing and future upgrades engineered in.