[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: The Limits To Growth



jmc@Steam.stanford.edu (John McCarthy) writes:

> In article <jcbud0r6tq.fsf@kbhr.ilo.dec.com> Alastair McKinstry 
 <alastair@kbhr.ilo.dec.com> writes:
>  > jmc@Steam.stanford.edu (John McCarthy) writes:
>  > > 
>  > > Making energy efficiency a general goal is foolish.  What counts is
>  > > the labor efficiency that permits two percent of the American
>  > > population to grow food for all of us and then some for export.

>  > Does this labor efficiency include those working in energy creation
>  > (oil extraction, fertilizer manufacture) or just those directly
>  > involved in agriculture ?

> It includes only the people working in agriculture.  Americans spend
> (if I recall correctly) 16 percent of our income on food, but this
> includes restaurant meals.  In general, we spend much more on making
> our eating convenient and pleasant than on the food itself.

True, but missing my point. My point is we should measure efficiency of a
process in terms of energy usage, this being a fixed size resource that 
we cannot avoid using. Measuring in terms of labor efficiency (which can be
varied depending on the technology used) or money hides the true costs of 
the food production. 

> John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stanford, CA 94305

-- 
Alastair McKinstry <alastair@ilo.dec.com>
Technical Computing Group, Digital Software, Ballybrit, Galway, Ireland
Anyone who believes exponential growth can go on forever in a finite world
is either a madman or an economist - Kenneth Boulding, economist.



Follow-Ups: References: