• ikt@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    19 hours ago

    And still globally the fraction of renewables in electricity gen, and even primary energy consumption (counting renewable elec gen as “primary”), remains pretty steadfast at the levels of the 1990s

    I think this might be out of date info, renewables (thanks mainly to china tbh) are now the cheapest form of power and surging with installations:

    World surpasses 40% clean power as renewables see record rise

    https://ember-energy.org/latest-insights/global-electricity-review-2025/#executive-summary

    Savings are not totally pointless, but reducing prices of something does tend to increase consumption

    Good old Jevons

    Adding new generation capacity has some similarity to adding a new lane to a busy highway. Induced demand.

    I don’t agree with this, yes there is an increase in energy usage, I am technically using more electricity than ever from thanks to cheap solar because I fill up my car with 40kw worth of electricity every few weeks, but at the same time I now use 0L of petrol and no gas at all so it’s not exactly adding a lane to the highway if I’ve reduced my energy use elsewhere and added it on to renewables, it’s the same number of lanes but now I’m 100% renewable

    We also have visible signs it’s eating into fossil fuels:

    Closure of Spain’s biggest coal plant makes way for massive wind power development

    https://beyondfossilfuels.org/2023/08/22/closure-of-spains-biggest-coal-plant-makes-way-for-massive-wind-power-development/

    UK to finish with coal power after 142 years

    https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c5y35qz73n8o

    The Australian Energy Market Operator is predicting that the country’s remaining coal fired generators are likely to close much quicker than expected, saying they are becoming less reliable, more difficult to maintain and less able to compete with the growing share of renewables.

    AEMO’s draft 2024 Integrated System Plan, the latest version of its 30-year planning blueprint, suggests coal fired generation will be gone from Queensland and Victoria within a decade – by 2033/34 – and that the last coal unit will close in NSW by 2038.

    https://reneweconomy.com.au/aemos-jaw-dropping-prediction-for-coal-power-all-but-gone-from-the-grid-in-a-decade/

    Same will be with transport, if you don’t ban petrol, and just subsidise electric transport, there’ll be more trips you wont reduce petrol consumption

    This doesn’t make sense to me, if you were talking about cheaper petrol then sure, but if I replace my petrol car with an EV, even if I do more trips it’s still electricity, petrol usage has dropped to 0 despite an increase in trips

    And we’re still in the very early years with EV’s, we have only just started pushing out electric trucks and buses, speaking of: Brisbane just got our first electric buses earlier in the year!

    Onboard the new Brisbane Metro (now with added Chilli)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4oWDE4zh2FA

    They are so quiet it’s crazy!

    tldr: I think your premise is that electricity usage is increasing and renewables are supplying it but not eating into fossil fuels and I don’t think this is true, the last few years solar, EV and battery innovation has been leaps and bounds

    As an example I bought this in Jan 2023 for 14k: https://sonnen.com.au/sonnenbatterie-evo/

    10kw

    Today for 5.5k I can get 40kw:

    https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/922035

    • bryndos@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      18 hours ago

      OK, I’ll wait til the 2024 and 2025 data are out and see the radical change - but the past 30 years pretty much support my “outdated” view. I don’t accept that you putting no petrol in your car means petrol consumption is lower - someone else can (and almost certainly will) still use it somewhere somehow in some vehicle or other. Unless you’re still buying it and burying in the ground somewhere no one can find it.

      https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/data-tools/energy-statistics-data-browser?country=WORLD&fuel=Energy%20supply&indicator=TESbySource

      In short - top line goes up faster than the renewables wedge grows —> global warming increases. In fact the fossil fuel wedges also grow as much or more than renewables. Maybe this will become more than a blip - maybe. But realistically I look at the graph above and 2008, 2020 are the things that stand out as a lesson.

      People need fewer datacentres not more, wherever they’re located. I think people just need to take a long hard look at themselves and see whether they can survive by jerking off to 360p or 720p porn - it is just about exactly as hollow and unfulfilling as jerking off to 4K AI generated porn.

      • ikt@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        15 hours ago

        it is just about exactly as hollow and unfulfilling as jerking off to 4K AI generated porn.

        gasp I can’t believe you said that in front of my 4k ai girlfriend!

        top line goes up faster than the renewables wedge grows —> global warming

        Yeah but there’s two parts here, one is that it’s not us or the data centres:

        In contrast, India recorded the highest absolute increase in emissions, adding 164.8 Mt CO2eq compared to 2023, a 3.9% rise. Indonesia saw the most significant relative increase at 5%, followed by Russia (+2.4%) and China (+0.8%). The US and Brazil had relatively stable emissions with minor increases.

        https://www.openaccessgovernment.org/global-greenhouse-gas-emissions-hit-a-record-high-in-2024/197979/

        India adding 164 million tons of co2 more than it did the year before, that’s a shitload of data centres

        The EU and US and Australia/NZ/UK all have emissions trending down, we’re playing our part, this place beats itself up a lot when if the rest of the world was like us we’d be well on our way down

        • bryndos@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 hours ago

          I think they’re just catching up to what countries like the UK did over the past 200 years. So a few hundred thousand more Indian people can afford cars or international holidays these days - that seems fair enough. what’s the indian GHG emisiions per capita? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_greenhouse_gas_emissions_per_capita sorry still old data, but 2023 they were not much over half the UK , so what is the fair share of ghg emissions for a person in India? Any why should it be lower than , say, UK - who has a centuries old legacy of fucking the climate. The UK has a hell of a lot more reducing ghg per person to do before it can be any sort of role model -b and thats after nerfing it’s own heavy industry and not counting GHG embodied in imports.

          Back before the twats here (UK) had let the banks offshore domestic manufacturing, you might have had a point, but greenhouse gas intensity of the economy here in UK was a lot higher when we actually did shit like transforming iron ore into useful products.

          With widespread international supply chains for so much stuff, I’m not convinced by nationalistic parochialism. At least not without doing a lot of fairly complex import/export and supply / use analysis across industries and from primary through to tertiary to figure out who is really providing for whom.

          The simplistic way i see it; It’s a world full of humans (or as i like to say, cunts), they do stuff, they trade their products. some people directly do carbon intensive processes, others buy stuff off them. At the end of the day, if everyone was ‘postindustrial’, it’d be a very interesting and different ‘economy’ and i think very different lifestyles, and a very different capacity to support the human population. I’d like to think the bubble’d last about as well as the Hindenburg blimp.

          • ikt@aussie.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 hours ago

            I disagree with measuring in per capita, I argued further here: https://aussie.zone/post/25024450/19010578

            Any why should it be lower than , say, UK - who has a centuries old legacy of fucking the climate

            Because the tech wasn’t available at the time and now with renewables being the cheapest form of electricity it’s straight up insulting that you’d pick coal, gas I can understand due to its ability to quickly fill in for solar/wind gaps but coal… :|

            If you’re going to argue that India should be free to copy the west and build coal power plants like we did 50 years ago before solar/batteries/wind etc took off then what are we even doing here? lets just give up because if India lives like the west did 60 years ago it’s over

            some people directly do carbon intensive processes, others buy stuff off them

            This part I agree with, it comes up a lot lately with AI data centres, people from the west devastated that they have to host the stuff that they use 😭 but also whenever mining is involved people get really upset, especially people in the EU

            I’ve argued the EU and US in part run a false green economy, the lithium and critical minerals in your phones and computers has to come from somewhere and mining has an awful environmental impact locally. Saying your green but ignoring that you get China do it isn’t a win at all imo, it’s a joke.