Showing posts with label technological progress. Show all posts
Showing posts with label technological progress. Show all posts

Wednesday, 10 July 2019

2000 watts society - Zurich’s path to sustainable energy use

On Nov 30, 2008, the people of Zurich voted, with a large majority (over 75%), in favor of (i) sustainable development, (ii) reduction of energy consumption to 2000 watts per  person, (iii) reducing its annual CO2 emissions to one tonne per person by 2050, (iv) promoting renewable energies and energy efficiency, and (v) not renewing its investments in nuclear power plantsAs a 2000-watt society, Zurich will be better equipped for times of scarce and expensive energy  resources. The idea behind the 2000-watt society is that a lighter life requires less energy is an ecological necessity and can also be a better life. Zurich cannot solve the climate crisis, nor the expected scarcity of oil, nor the uneven distribution of resources worldwide, but it can make its contribution – and in doing so, it will also benefit in its own right.
  • If the human race continues to consume natural resources, and particularly energy, at the same rate as it does today, we are headed towards drastic climate change. 
  • In the past, it was taken for granted that higher energy consumption brings more prosperity.  From 1970 onward, there was growing realization that energy consumption causes ecological and political problems.
  • We live in a culture of energy wastefulness. We only use a tiny fraction of the energy we consume and the rest disappears as waste heat. By using energy more efficiently, the energy required for each energy service could be reduced by over 80 to 85%.
  • Below the threshold of 1000 watts per person, people are better off if they can increase their energy consumption. However, once this threshold is reached, more energy does not improve the quality of life. 
  • Consuming more energy would be undesirable, even if the energy could be provided in a completely clean way. It is just that consuming an ever-increasing amount of energy does not make people happier.
  • Numerous authorities in Switzerland have committed to the goal of the 2000-watt society. Zurich is the first body to lay this down in its municipal code as a binding goal.
  • Global justice demands sufficiency that offers fair opportunities for all and everyone must also have access to a similar amount of energy. It is not possible for the poor countries to raise their energy consumption to the level of rich countries. If all people consumed as much energy as the rich countries, the worldwide energy consumption would be more than three times as high as it is today.
  • At present, the average European uses around 6,000 watts, compared to 12,000 watts in the United States, 1,500 watts in China, 900 watts in India and 300 watts in Bangladesh. Today, Zurich consumes around 5,000 watts of primary energy per resident. If the total grey energy is also taken into account, the consumption is considerably higher. The work performed by twenty workers, or three horses, working around the clock, amounts to 2000 watts. Anyone who burns one litre of petrol every six hours consumes 2000 watts.
  • One tonne of CO2 is produced upon combustion of 300 litres of petrol. This is enough to drive a car 4000 kms. Zurich residents cause 5.5 tonnes of CO2 emissions per person each year. This would be considerably more if the grey emissions are also taken into account.
  • Today’s material living standard in Switzerland could be maintained with 2000 watts per person if the energy were used more effectively. With consumption of 2000 watts per person, annual CO2 emissions reduction, caused by energy use, to less than one tonne per person is realistic. Also 2000 watts corresponds to the average energy consumption worldwide. According to the IPCC report, worldwide annual greenhouse gas emissions must drop to one tonne per person by 2050, so that climate warming can be limited to two degrees.
  • Although nuclear power does not directly contribute to climate change, it is not sustainable. It consumes the finite raw material uranium, the extraction of which severely harms the local environment. It leaves behind highly dangerous waste, for the disposal of which, no satisfactory solution has been found. Any accident is a tragedy for the people affected and renders large areas uninhabitable for long periods of time.
  • Buildings and infrastructures which essentially determine a society’s energy consumption cannot be changed overnight. In view of climate change and dwindling energy reserves, ambitious goals are necessary. The required reduction of CO2 emissions is only realistic in parallel with a significant reduction of energy consumption.
  • Cost efficiency and energy efficiency are central themes in renovation, conversion and new construction projects. 
  • Switzerland will not result in political, cultural and social factors that determine how it is used. Technological progress is not enough and must not cause us to oversleep and neglect the need for social change.
  • Mobility is responsible for 18 percent of energy consumption and 37 percent of CO2 emissions in the City of Zurich. However, without mobility, there is no urban life.
The 2000-watt society costs nothing, because all the measures pay for themselves. The 2000-watt society - the idea is that a lighter life has less impact on the environment and is also a better life. It means that we all consume considerably less energy and only cause CO2 emissions at a fraction of today’s level. It also means that with efficient energy use and renewable energies, we can abandon nuclear power, making Zurich environmentally friendly, climate-friendly and very well prepared for a future in which the scarcity of resources will play an increasingly major role. The 2000-watt society requires alongside the political will and also requires more renewable energies, energy-efficient buildings and a city in which people get around very well on foot, by bicycle or with public transport.

We should leave oil before it leaves us - Fatih Birol


Friday, 16 February 2018

Why do we need economic growth?

Most things don’t grow forever. If a person grew at the same rate for his whole life, he’d become gigantic. Yet most economists are united around the idea that the economy needs to grow, always. And at a high rate, for the good of the country and its people.
  • Economic growth is the increase in the goods and services produced by an economy, typically a nation, over a long period of time. It is measured as percentage increase in real gross domestic product (GDP) which is gross domestic product (GDP) adjusted for inflation. The economic growth every year is essential to a country’s stability and prosperity. But some economists argue that it makes more sense to focus on measures of well-being than growth.
  • Maximizing growth doesn’t necessarily help people, but also that rapid growth can itself come at a cost, such as when the pursuit of growth is used to push through policies that are expected increase the GDP but may have negative consequences for millions.The pursuit of growth can be quite dangerous. The welfare of a nation can scarcely be inferred from a measurement of national income.
  • For a developing economy where the basic need isn’t met and growth is necessary for more food. Economic growth in a developing economy can go a long way to improving living standards. When people are living in poverty, they experience a deprivation of basic human needs, such as food, shelter, education, basic health care. Economic growth can enable many of these basic needs to be met and this economic growth can radically increase living standards among those countries.
  • It's an election winner. Politicians see growth as very important. Elections are won or lost on the state of the economy. Look what happens if growth disappears and recession looms. People get very concerned about falling incomes and rising unemployment. 
  • If poverty is to be relieved and the rich are not to be made poorer, then growth is necessary. Making the poor richer is not easy and there are many political obstacles in the way. But at least growth makes it easier.
  • When real incomes are already quite high, economic growth can have a marginal impact on living standards. There is a strong diminishing marginal utility to extra income. 
  • Economic growth is driven by technological improvements, which reduce the costs of production and enable more to be produced. This technological progress in many ways feels an inevitability. How could you stop this technological progress? Technological improvements have particularly improved the productivity of agriculture and manufacturing. This means we can support ourselves with a smaller % of the workforce on agriculture and manufacturing. Many of new jobs are in service sector.
  • In theory, economic growth should enable people to work less, enjoy more leisure time and would enable to retire earlier, if they are able and willing.
  • Increased GDP offers the potential for higher living standards but certainly doesn’t guarantee it because of uneven distribution and how it is used. GDP measures activity in the economy, but there’s no way to know whether that activity is actually good for society. The BP oil-rig explosion, which killed 11, and the subsequent spill, which leaked 3 million barrels of oil into the Gulf, actually lifted GDP because of the amount of money spent cleaning it up.
  • Economists often say that without growth it will be impossible to address income inequality. But even with growth, there’s no guarantee that inequality will decrease. The economy’s current trajectory is of increasing inequality. Economic growth leads to the depletion of resources - a problem that's likely to get worse as world population and world consumption grows.
  • One of the biggest sources of rising expenditure in western economies is health care. There are simply more things that can be treated. Also, there is the irony of having to treat diseases of affluence (such as obesity, heart attacks, cancer etc).
  • Economic growth will not solve the fundamental problems of human psychology / behaviour. It can increase sense of inequality. Growth will not reduce the incentives to cheat and steal. It does not make people more charitable and good-natured.
  • Environmental problems facing humanity, economic growth could exacerbate these issues and reduce living standards.
  • Some of the most content people in the history of the world got by on a lot less. Some saints have argued they were much happier when they forsook their wealth.
  • Rather than worrying about increasing real GDP, we could spend time promoting greater social harmony.
  • The point is that life is a struggle for most people in developed economies, and technology and increased efficiency has not done much to fix that over the last 40 years. No doubt there are a few that have enjoyed increased leisure time, but at the expense of the masses.
Do we need economic growth? Not really. But, if managed well, it doesn’t have to do any harm and gives the potential to make improvements in our material well-being. Needless to say, economic growth is far from the panacea to make society better. It is a neutral component of human well-being. There’s nothing wrong with targeting economic growth as long as you are aware of its imitations. Governments and society need to be judged on so much more than simply whether their economies are growing.


We have to find a way to make the aspects of capitalism that serve 
wealthier people serve poorer people as well.

If money is your hope for independence you will never have it. 
The only real security that a man can have in this world is a reserve of 
knowledge, experience, and ability ... Henry Ford

Money has no utility to me beyond a certain point ... Bill Gates

For India with large number of unemployed youth, economic growth is the only way to create enough jobs and security. The present phenomenon of jobless growth is unsustainable. The current trends of economic growth are also associated with increased pollution, over exploitation of non-replenishable natural resources, destruction of ecology etc is a destructive growth. Additional wealth created is grabbed by top 10% wealthiest people. The disparity between rich and poor is widening. This kind of growth is absurd. In an ideally developed world all people should be equal, even though perfection is unachievable. We need to grow to accommodate ever rising population.