Chuck Darwin on Nostr: If you plot the U.S. energy consumption in all forms from 1650 until now, you see a ...
If you plot the U.S. energy consumption in all forms from 1650 until now,
you see a phenomenally faithful exponential at about 3% per year over that whole span.
The situation for the whole world is similar.
So how long do you think we might be able to continue this trend?
Economist: Well, let’s see. A 3% growth rate means a doubling time of something like 23 years.
So each century might see something like a 15–20× increase.
I see where you’re going.
A few more centuries like that would perhaps be absurd.
But don’t forget that population was increasing during centuries past
—the period on which you base your growth rate.
Population will stop growing before more centuries roll by.
Physicist: True enough. So we would likely agree that energy growth will not continue indefinitely. But two points before we continue: First, I’ll just mention that energy growth has far outstripped population growth, so that per-capita energy use has surged dramatically over time—our energy lives today are far richer than those of our great-great-grandparents a century ago [economist nods]. So even if population stabilizes, we are accustomed to per-capita energy growth: total energy would have to continue growing to maintain such a trend [another nod].
Second, thermodynamic limits impose a cap to energy growth lest we cook ourselves. I’m not talking about global warming, CO2 build-up, etc. I’m talking about radiating the spent energy into space. I assume you’re happy to confine our conversation to Earth, foregoing the spectre of an exodus to space, colonizing planets, living the Star Trek life, etc
https://dothemath.ucsd.edu/2012/04/economist-meets-physicist/
you see a phenomenally faithful exponential at about 3% per year over that whole span.
The situation for the whole world is similar.
So how long do you think we might be able to continue this trend?
Economist: Well, let’s see. A 3% growth rate means a doubling time of something like 23 years.
So each century might see something like a 15–20× increase.
I see where you’re going.
A few more centuries like that would perhaps be absurd.
But don’t forget that population was increasing during centuries past
—the period on which you base your growth rate.
Population will stop growing before more centuries roll by.
Physicist: True enough. So we would likely agree that energy growth will not continue indefinitely. But two points before we continue: First, I’ll just mention that energy growth has far outstripped population growth, so that per-capita energy use has surged dramatically over time—our energy lives today are far richer than those of our great-great-grandparents a century ago [economist nods]. So even if population stabilizes, we are accustomed to per-capita energy growth: total energy would have to continue growing to maintain such a trend [another nod].
Second, thermodynamic limits impose a cap to energy growth lest we cook ourselves. I’m not talking about global warming, CO2 build-up, etc. I’m talking about radiating the spent energy into space. I assume you’re happy to confine our conversation to Earth, foregoing the spectre of an exodus to space, colonizing planets, living the Star Trek life, etc
https://dothemath.ucsd.edu/2012/04/economist-meets-physicist/