[ad_1]
When we talk about anthropogenic carbon dioxide and the global warming attributed to it, we see the solution not only in reducing fossil fuels, but also in increasingly efficient technologies.
They thought similarly of Great Britain at the time of the outbreak of the Industrial Revolution in the mid-19th century. At that time, more and more people were concerned about the rapid decline in carbon stocks. After James Watt’s innovation multiplied the desperately poor efficiency of steam engines and extracted more power from less coal, experts reassured everyone: Increasingly advanced technology will reduce coal consumption. Logical.
William Stanley Jevons, the renowned English economist, was not entirely calm. He noted that England’s consumption of coal, despite increasingly efficient machinery, had increased significantly. He thought for a long time about a seemingly illogical phenomenon and then came to the conclusion that increasing efficiency also increases consumption, and that requires even more coal.
At the time, he still did not know that his prayers would be cited in 150 years, and his observation was called the Jevons paradox.
We forgot to drive
Much of the world’s oil reserves are burned by motor vehicles. As engines evolved, they became more sophisticated and efficient, and bodies more aerodynamic. Many have already seen for themselves how oil use will decline.
However, it does not happened.
Over the decades, the efficiency (consumption) of the engine has improved, but at the same time, the total fuel consumption has continued to increase. More and more people are using cars (not just one in many families) and we drive further and further than before. In addition, the size and weight of cars has increased. What we gain in consumption with more advanced engines is partly lost.
We print on our own
The same is true of the information technology revolution. The consumption of paper places a huge burden on forests. With the development and spread of information technology, everyone expected that electronic document management and storage would reduce paper consumption.
However, the opposite has happened, in many places 40 percent more paper is consumed. This is because word processors have tempted me to write more and more documents, and with the proliferation of ultra-fast printers, we have started printing with self-oblivion. For example, at least two copies of the hundreds of millions of digitally stored field accounts. Everyday.
We fly forgetful
With the arrival of passenger planes in constant decline, the cost of travel has decreased. At the same time, services were cut and the era of low-cost travel arrived. Crowds began to fly, which in turn increased the demand for fuel. This increase in demand is called the rebound effect.
We wait in vain
The Jevons paradox is often used to support that it is a vain hope to believe in greater efficiency as demand increases. However, more efficient technology can also increase the quality of life.
In Jevons’ time, more efficient steam engines made it possible to transport products and people at a cheaper price, helping to complete the Industrial Revolution and ultimately the technological advancements that have continued ever since. Which, in turn … yes, yes, to a steady and sustained increase in consumption.
Increasingly advanced technology alone does not appear to be enough to dramatically reduce carbon dioxide globally, for example.
We create new paradoxes
It is not enough to improve, you also have to change the way you think. Now, if we want technological developments to serve the conservation of natural resources.
There is another way to emit less carbon dioxide:
saving energy.
Efficiency and energy saving are qualitatively different. Energy efficiency is a technical concept, while saving requires a change in core values and beliefs. A change in attitude, precisely: self-control, moderation of consumption.
And this leads to new questions: can one be expected to voluntarily limit oneself? If so, from whom? And to what extent does this have a significant impact? If so, how much? And how is it possible that hundreds of millions of people do not have access to basic resources, food, clean water, housing, while it is amazing to waste in better places?
Probably the strongest paradox waiting to be resolved now may be this.
I also learned something 1-2-3 today: Now just together For 9990 florins!
Buy it now!
-
It was not enough, I want to learn!
-
I’m posting a topic!
[ad_2]