• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    2510 months ago

    This is dumb but only because we don’t worry about energy use any other time. Tons of places in my city keep all their lights on 24/7 unnecessarily, we all are sitting on a “useless” social media, video games and movies and music are all energy uses. I don’t want the government to start limiting energy use on things it deems unimportant. Who gets to decide what counts? Just implement a carbon tax and energy use will go down if people don’t want to pay. We don’t need to police everyone’s usage, we just need the cost to actually reflect the externalities.

    • Ricky Rigatoni
      link
      fedilink
      English
      710 months ago

      We could just solve the problem the capitalist way and just charge businesses extra for their power usage. That’ll get them to care.

      • @Leeker
        link
        English
        1
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        Currently at least in the US we charge them less. This is usually due to something called Economy of Scale. As well as the fact there is more competition for Business energy. As well as the fact they are usually locked into a contract for energy. 1

    • @chakan2
      link
      English
      6
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      I want to agree with you, but crypto mining is orders of magnitude more energy than the worst lazy energy leaks.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      510 months ago

      So true. These fu**ing schools keeping their lights on the whole night and vacations, with their old lamps, while people like me measure their lamps and turn everything off…

      Also the amount of 4K or more useless data transfer, ads, unnecessary youtube videos where there could be only audio (if they made that free, you can use any FOSS client and do the same)

    • @Cosmicomical
      link
      English
      210 months ago

      With Carbon tax only the rich win, we need carbon credits

        • Jojo
          link
          fedilink
          English
          510 months ago

          A progressive tax that means the biggest users pay the most would probably be ideal (but then that’s mostly true in every situation)

            • Jojo
              link
              fedilink
              English
              510 months ago

              Because it would affect rich folks more, so they spend some money now to convince lawmakers not to charge them more later.

              • @Cosmicomical
                link
                English
                110 months ago

                So it’s not so easy to implement after all

                • Jojo
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  210 months ago

                  Did I say easy? I think I said ideal.

        • @Cosmicomical
          link
          English
          1
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          How comes I never saw that implemented, then? Progressive taxation stops “progressing” at around the 100k threshold and that’s basically just a decent salary. The Rich are never really affected by it.

          Carbon credits would be a way to level the ground in some situations and could give you a right to say NO to people consuming more than their share, or at least account for externalities and get paid if you allow them to use your “quota”.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      010 months ago

      Even so, consumer electricity habits make up a fraction of the carbon emissions on Earth. People driving cars, people buying plastic bullshit, or factory farming creates more emissions singularly.