I’m theory, yes. But for every person that believes this, there are 10 more who will not budge. “I need to set my air conditioning to 60 degrees to sleep.”
I’m theory, yes. But for every person that believes this, there are 10 more who will not budge. “I need to set my air conditioning to 60 degrees to sleep.”
stabby_cicada@slrpnk.net 1 year ago
Sure, and that’s why I say over and over again, reducing your personal consumption is a moral issue, and we need a moral/ethical/spiritual movement to reduce consumption. Because lots of people, reasonably, prioritize their comfort over their electric bill or the objectively tiny marginal benefit to the environment that turning off their air conditioner would provide. But if we teach people that unnecessary consumption is morally wrong, and your neighbors start shaming you for keeping your air conditioning at 60, you’re going to start setting it higher.
GuilhermePelayo@slrpnk.net 1 year ago
I wasnt agreeing at first with you but I can agree with you on the moral take of energy consumption. Nevertheless I don’t think it makes any sense to remove constant electricity from the equation. Human development and prosperity is greatly increased by that availability aswell as communication. Let’s say the goal is a post capitalism, non hierarchical decentralized society that outgrows capitalism’s growth needs and achieves post scarcity. In order to for this to be real you need constant access to electricity and communications, otherwise you are isolating people and dampening your efforts towards it. I do think you are right and there needs to be some morality in spending but it should be a moral choice not a matter of not being available
schroedingershat@lemmy.world 1 year ago
None of this justifies running the aluminium smelter 24/7 rather than redesigning it slightly and running it 20/6. You’re straw manning.