A new report finds 24 states have yet to establish an “energy efficiency resource standard," which has been shown to curb demand, lower costs and reduce emissions.

  • Skyrmir@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    Energy is a base commodity, no different than aluminum, plywood, orange juice, oil or eggs. All of which increase as the population, thus demand and production, increase. And aluminum is used in a lot of structural applications where other materials would be far superior, but aluminum is a hell of a lot more affordable. It’s not that it’s the best material, it’s the best material at that price, due to cheap efficient production.

    • HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 day ago

      Exactly. Its a fungible item that can replace or be replaced by other things which energy is not. And your right that increased population will increase demand but we don’t want to be increasing demand of anything as all the fungible commodities while being fungible are not inexhaustable.

      • Skyrmir@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        Lowering demand while increasing population means a lowering standard of living. That’s how wars start, and we end up with extremist idiots in charge. If you want lower demand, lower, or stop growing the population. And also realize that most attempts to lower population growth will be massively unpopular. But again, the alternative is war and extremism.

        • HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          Well the problem there is the increasing population which should not be happening as long as we are using more than a years worth of planetary resources each year.

          • Skyrmir@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            23 hours ago

            Agreed, but try telling people not to breed or worse do something to stop them. That’s going to end almost as badly as over breeding in the first place. The difference being it would happen right then, rather than some inevitable future date.

            • HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              23 hours ago

              I don’t believe underbreeding will end very badly. It means we have to handle things differently and getting back to growth is not incredibly tough. When it comes down to it we need to lower the wealth gap which will largely take care of the rest.

              • Skyrmir@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                20 hours ago

                It’s not that population decline has to end badly, it’s that causing it will end badly. It’s eugenics and religious and class wars all rolled into a ball of angry fun.

                Knowing the solution to the problem isn’t the problem, it’s that billions of people don’t like the solution.

    • Shardikprime@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      What’s this, a voice with common sense I hear? Incredible. Upvoting before the mass downvotes arrive

      • Skyrmir@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        People be down voting like I’m calling for rolling coal in their front yards.