• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    310 months 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

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      2
      edit-2
      10 months 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.

      Lowtechmagazine is a meditation on this concept and you are pretending that means anyone thinking this way wants to break into grandma’s home and switch off the ventilator in the middle of the night.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        0
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        I’m not sure you are straw manning yourself or you have me confused with another comment. I was agreeing with the commenter. Moral consumption of power is a concept I completely accept. But @stabby_cicada did start the argument with this:

        The point isn’t that some electricity production is reliable 24/7. The point is, if we want an ethos of reduced consumption, we need to give up the idea that we have the right to power on demand 24-7.

        I was answering to that complemented with another comments and agreeing with the whole should use power with a moral attitude. What an aggressive response…