Study reveals that decent living standards for 8.5 billion people possible with only 30% of current global resource and energy use. : science

[-] hperrin@lemmy.ca 31 points 2 months ago

Yeah but then the billionaires wouldn’t get to buy countries.

[-] ShinkanTrain@lemmy.ml 22 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Have you considered I need my jets to take off from my yatch though?

[-] Suoko@feddit.it 6 points 2 months ago

Gosh, we forgot you even exist, sorry man

[+] Archangel1313@lemm.ee 18 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

[deleted]

[-] sexy_peach@feddit.org 14 points 2 months ago

I'm not surprised. It would probably take some collaboration, so it's not necessarily going to happen.

[-] iii@mander.xyz 8 points 2 months ago

I think the authors forgot that people aren't sims.

[-] Toes@ani.social 5 points 2 months ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

[removed by mod]

[-] lvxferre@mander.xyz 8 points 2 months ago

Probably not because that 30% is an average of different resources.

For example. Let's say you have two resources:

A - 10% of the current production of A is enough for the current pops
B - 50% of the current production of B is enough for the current pops

Both average to 30%. If you multiply the population by 3, you still have a surplus of A, but now there isn't enough B.

Another concern is that increasing the population so much would force unsustainable approaches to resource extraction. In other words: 30 billion people living fine and dandy for a generation or two, and then their descendants living in a hellhole.

[-] classic@fedia.io 5 points 2 months ago

Yeah but we're not living for people

[-] jagged_circle@feddit.nl 5 points 2 months ago

Prerequisite: first you gotta eat the rich

[-] Commiunism@beehaw.org 4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Almost as if commodity production-based economies aren't there to provide for the people but to make profits and waste resources. It's a shocker

[-] MacroCyclo@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 months ago

The headline is a bit misleading. The authors give a range from 30-44%.

Very interesting conclusions on economic growth and extreme poverty. When an economy grows, the basic necessities might become too expensive for the poorest in the country.

[-] Kissaki@beehaw.org 1 points 2 months ago

The headline is a bit misleading. The authors give a range from 30-44%.

Their abstract mentions only 30%. That would mean the authors themselves are misleading in the abstract.

Provisioning decent living standards (DLS) for 8.5 billion people would require only 30% of current global resource and energy use

[-] Thorry84@feddit.nl 4 points 2 months ago

Well it would be if that were the goal. But the real goal is to make rich people even more rich. And as always: Number must go up!

[-] jagged_circle@feddit.nl 1 points 2 months ago

Site doesn't load.

[-] csolisr@hub.azkware.net 1 points 2 months ago

You all trying to tell me that, all along, we didn't really need to reduce the birth rates and let the natural selection cull all those innocent people?

Science