A research study is mandating that Americans need to cut their energy by 90%, can you get by a basket of laundry, 7.5k kWh, and 40 gals of gas/Year?

[Qdbrown]

The study was published by the University of Leeds in June 2021 by sustainability researcher Jefim Vogel.
And there are many other requirements that this report says must be mandated, not optional, to avoid a climate catastrophe. It suggests even limits on public transportation that would be less than what an average 80 year old woman currently uses in public trans. A family of four in no more than a 640 sq ft house, with no more than 7,500 kWh's per year, juggling AC and heat, lighting, refrigeration with computer use. To make this happen, have all food and clothes provisioned by the governmet with a one basket of clothes per person per year, allowed to wash every other week (So underwear has to go around 3-4 days per pair) and calorie intake set at 2,100 firm per day. And then no more than 40 gallons of gas per year pwr person. The goal is the completely wipe out oil and gas production while virtually eliminating any form of affluency that is seen as wasteful. Sounds laughable, but they are dead serious about trying to figure out how to implement, if they can figure out how to keep people in their homes. They all ready know it will not be popular... https://reason.com/2021/07/02/to-stop-climate-change-americans-must-cut-energy-use-by-90-percent-live-in-640-square-feet-and-fly-only-once-every-3-years-says-study/

Yes, I practically live off-grid!

No! Not even close!

Hell No! This is just a reason for Communism!

[NamerOfStars]

And... yep. There it is. A whole damn study that equates "energy consumption" with "electricity consumption". That only makes up about a fifth of it. Interestingly, it also places "economic growth" as a negative; interesting how an individual typing on a possibly nuclear-powered computer keyboard over an information network spanning the whole damn planet can still fall for Malthusian nonsense. Don't forget the emphasis on incorrectly-spelled decarbonization, ignoring every other greenhouse gas! And every non-greenhouse part of global warming, but if I get into that, we'll be here all day.

I wouldn't call what this is rooted in Communism, though; the use of that as a catchall term for any form of excessive government control is really starting to grate on me. The smart thing to do is start seriously ramping up energy production research- make solar cells a net POSITIVE in terms of greenhouse gas emissions, and for pity's sake find a way to recycle them, and in the meantime get those nuke plants up and going. Ideally, quit blowing GNPs of small countries on blowing up third-world nations every week and invest in fixing the damn infrastructure. Iraq

[NamerOfStars]

's been invaded quite enough already, thank you. You're not going to get subsistence farmers in the Amazon to stop clearcutter the rainforest for wood by denying them more efficient power generation, or get the third world to stop burning coal by preventing them from industrializing their economies.

[Qdbrown]

This is communism straight up. First and foremost is puts government in control of all production. This is the political and economic side of the equation. The collective will be set to make the rules, and they will form a group to ensure that all rules for the people are maintained for their betterment of the collective. There is no shopping. All your supplies, clothes and items are directly supplied and delivered by the government, and they even maintain your daily caloric intake. They will maintain your consumption, where you would have limited travel ability, and given limited food supplies, limited walking range as well. A long walk is going to be north of 3000 calories a day at 25 miles per. Very limited public transportation and one flight per three years.

There is new joke. All the talk about how communism has never actually been executed correctly is a reason we must try again, although more than 100 million have been executed all ready trying.

This whole romance idea of Marx's ideas look really good on paper. I was in college many years ago. But the issue always comes down to misjudging human nature that can't be really regulate less you keep a rifle pointing at it, and this is not an uncommon conclusion when the powers of the communist party gets desparate at somepoint.

[Qdbrown]

This whole notion to have equality above all else, even if it means eating the zoo animals so everyone has equality makes communism a fool's errand unless your within the leadership group. And quite ironically the folks who get rich and successful, tend to be the same ones that manage to become successful in any economic model. The failed theory only shows that between a market economy and a planned economy, people make bad enough decisions in a dynamic market economy. The planned economy is always destined to fail. Without exception, so the Cubans say...

Grate all you want. This climate research is a total justification to convert the world's economies all to a planned communist world so the few can force the rest of us to save us from ourselves, and starve us in the process and live below the standard that most poor nations are all ready above, to put this absurb plan into some context.

[Frank_Woods]

I am all for being less consumeristic, but this can't happen. This doesn't lead to communism. It leads to corporate communism, where the rich get be as comsumeristic as they want while the regular folk get fucked for using less so the rich can use more. Best thing we can all do is use what you need, and don't starve yourself so others can thrive.

[Varanus]

We have way too many people in the world to sustain a high standard of living.

Three choices:
1. Have a lot fewer kids
2. Nobody gets nice things
3. Destroy the planet

I want option 1, but I fear we're headed full speed for option 3.

[Anonymous]

I just read the link you provided, but was unable to find the part where they spoke about mandating anything in this study.

[rcljr]

Research studies do NOT mandate, are NOT law, cannot be enforced, more liberal bullshit play on words.

[Qdbrown]

This is true. The study is a mandate to countries and their governments on next steps.

[rcljr]

Again, a study is NOT a mandate, mandate like executive orders are not law.

[Qdbrown]

Dang, yes, to start the process. Not to write the law. Inspire the legislation, or hopefully Marshall plan.

[Anonymous]

I hope John Kerry can still fly in his private jet to tell people to stop wasting energy.