Peter wrote:
More info on that burnt out cable. The genuine item is not available, two 3rd party versions are reportedly poorly made and give a lot of trouble, and when another cable was located and obtained, the public charging point across the road went offline. So they are pretty well stuffed.Weird that a “cable” should be such a problem, but you get the same with Gamin dashcams and the “cables” for those, which contain a voltage regulator, but the dashcam is extremely sensitive to the supply voltage, and even a small voltage drop in the cable stops it working.
I guess it’s just like USB cables. Some are good and some not so good. But again, just like with USB cables, you certainly don’t need the “genuine item.”
Population size is clearly important, but in Europe or the USA we use large multiples of the raw materials and energy of many people in the developing world so I disagree with your focus exclusively on population control as a solution to over-exploitation of natural resources.
I’m not sure how you define resource utilisation per capita per unit of natural resources: we live in too interconnected a world for that. Some countries export oil and import food. Some countries export food and import oil. Some countries have few natural resources of their own but produce value in other ways.
The USA might not score as well as you might imagine on any such index: the land area per capita is larger than Europe, but so is the amount of resources consumed by each person.
Here is one cable. I would make these all day for 150 quid 
To get a dud one, there have to be some serious cowboys in the game.
I guess a lot of people drive off with the cable still connected.
It is far too late for population control in Europe – on any viable time scale. The energy policy has been totally screwed up by just about everybody. Putin should get the Nobel prize for energy security awareness.
Energy security is not a major issue in the Americas.
I think energy used per person is a fairly direct indicator of their standard of living, and given slowly rising living standards in the developing world that there is no question at all (zero) that the number will continue its rise on a worldwide basis, indefinitely.
With that in mind, and possible long term (circa 200 year) limits on energy production, population reduction is again a good idea to avoid human progress reversing.
I agree that broadly, as people’s lives in the developing world improve, they will use more resources including more energy, but I disagree that energy use is closely correlated (‘a direct indicator’) to standard of living.
If I insulate my house, my standard of living goes up and my energy use goes down. If I go to work in a more efficient vehicle, my standard of living changes only a little (and perhaps for the better, due to an improved environment) but my energy use drops considerably. I doubt it’s possible to have a decent standard of living without using a certain amount of resources, but I would wager that it is considerably lower than that used by the most resource hungry nations.
Personally I’m optimistic about population, in the longer term. People are having fewer kids all over the world, as they become better educated and as individual kids have a better chance of making it to adulthood.
Peter wrote:
It is far too late for population control in Europe – on any viable time scale.
Is there is any need for population control in Europe? The only country in Europe where the fertility rate is high enough to maintain a constant population is Turkey – and only barely so. In all other countries population would decrease if it were not for immigration from outside Europe. In many European countries it decreases anyway.
According to this calculator the difference between a 37.000€ Diesel and Electric car, at 10.000km/year, Diesel @2€/L and electricity @ 0,3€/kwh is ~7000€ in favor of the latter.
There is a 5000€ subsidy on purchase, no engine/emissions tax (roughly half, 400€ vs. 1100€ / year), 1/3 of the maintenance cost…
Either my superficial calculation is totally off or something like one of these https://www.mgmotor.eu/ might be something to think about. 🤔
Personally I’m optimistic about population, in the longer term. People are having fewer kids all over the world, as they become better educated and as individual kids have a better chance of making it to adulthood.
Me too. And I totally agree with Silvaire that the most effective way to keep our planet reasonably livable is to make sure that the population is kept in check. And yes education and birth control programs are key, particularly in Africa. It also provides more opportunity for women to become part of the economy, which would be a great impulse. Micro-financing is mainly directed towards them, and it works. Europe’s population is in decline and only grows through immigration, that much is clear
So what we need is a 3rd world war. Soon kill off a few million. Oh look we’ve nearly got one.
When governments give contracts, should energy cost as well as money cost be considered? And audited.
The Seagreen Windfarm bases are mnufactured in China, and taken by sea to the Cromarty Firth by Chinese vessels, 4 to a vessel. They are taken 2 to a barge to the windfarm, which is offshore of the Firth of Forth. Cheapest in cash. Lowest energy use???
