Remix.run Logo
▲ Beijinger a day ago

"It comes from an idea that economic progress is coupled with increased energy use"

Yest it is. https://arxiv.org/pdf/0811.1855

"a fallacy that hasn't been true for decades" Nope. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox

Same with AI. It is becoming much more efficient and cheaper. This will result in a much, much higher demand. Expect Netflix to render a movie based on your wishes in real time.

That the energy demand is sinking is based on the fact that most industries got outsourced to China.

▲PaulDavisThe1st a day ago | parent | next [-]

> Expect Netflix to render a movie based on your wishes in real time.

Blech. I don't have wishes I want netflix to fulfill. I want to see the dreams of another human before me and be entranced/enchanted.

▲quacktopia 19 hours ago | parent [-]

I wonder if this will become increasingly niche if people grow up with systems that can spoon feed tailored content and monitor feedback

▲locallost a day ago | parent | prev [-]

No, it is not. For example, gasoline use per capita in the US peaked in 1978 and the economy went up around a gazillion percent since then. There are now millions of EVs in Europe and electricity use has declined in the last twenty years and this has nothing to do with the hand wavy "deindustrialization". Why would it not? The light bulbs I have today use 10x less electricity, the induction stove I have uses significantly less energy, I bought a fridge last year that uses 3x less electricity than the previous one, the TV died three years ago, the new one uses an estimated 50kwh per year of normal use, and the old one used 200. The EU has new standards where the devices on stand by are not allowed to draw more than 3kwh (I think) etc. And obviously manufacturers will not make efficient stand by devices for the EU and then make inefficient ones for the rest of the world in purpose. The same is true for other forms. My building replaced the gas boiler used for heating and warm water in general. The winter was tougher than the one before, I switched to working from home and heated a lot more. My gas use stayed flat.

When your logic collides with hard numbers I would stick to the numbers and reconsider the logic. Here is an idea: will I run my dishwasher 3x more often just because it is now 3x more efficient? Will I run my fridge more often because it is more efficient? Difficult, it already runs 24/7. Will I keep the lights on when I sleep because they are 10x more efficient?

So as you see although there is obviously some validity in the OBSERVATION that is Jevons Paradox, it is not a hard rule. There comes a point where it stops being true.

▲Beijinger 10 hours ago | parent [-]

„Economic Growth Is Closely Tied to Energy Consumption“, Slide 3: “This rather strange situation arises because the standard calculation misses energy embodied in imported goods.”

https://ourfiniteworld.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/the-ap...

https://ourfiniteworld.com/2017/10/18/the-approaching-us-ene...

"Will I keep the lights on when I sleep because they are 10x more efficient?" Nope. But now you have a computer, maybe two, a cell phone, an ebook reader, a tablet, take international flights and use Bitcoin and AI.

▲locallost 6 hours ago | parent [-]

Article title: A number of countries have decoupled economic growth from energy use, even if we take offshored production into account

Article link: https://ourworldindata.org/energy-gdp-decoupling?ref=ufuksno...

Your anegdotal evidence falls on its face as well: I have two TVs now instead of one, and my electricity consumption went down. This includes moving mid year from an office to work from home. So one laptop charging every day, and one monitor. I even bought a printer which I did not have previously. That's because the two TVs combined, made 2023 and 2025, use less electricity than the one I had before, made 2011. The addition of a laptop, monitor and printer were negligent compared to the savings I made with my new fridge.

▲Beijinger 6 hours ago | parent [-]

I think you have 1. anecdotal evidence and 2. understood neither of my arguments.