Gates directed this year’s letter toward high school students, complete with personal details including his early affinity for Superman comic books, his bad grades in middle school and his love of Cocoa Puffs cereal. (Melinda Gates, who focused the second half of the letter on gender equality, prefers Wheat Chex). He punctuates his letter with a simple mathematical equation he concocted that underscores the need for what he calls an “energy miracle”.
P x S x E x C = CO2 (carbon dioxide output).
It’s a neat little formula because it drives home the point: that for all the Paris climate talks and more affordable Teslas, environmental incrementalism is somewhat pointless. In the equation, P = population; S = services used by people; E= the energy needed to power those services; and C equals the carbon dioxide created by that energy. Population is of course trending ever-higher, as are the services people demand, especially in the developing world which has barely scratched the surface in terms of cars and air conditioning and other modern basics. Those two factors swamp progress in energy efficiency. Gates points out that scientists are calling for an 80 percent drop in carbon emissions by 2050 (and a total end by 2100) to stave off the most dramatic effects of climate change, yet even with more efficiency, the growth in population and services means that emissions will instead jump by 50%.
Math 101: the only way to get to zero carbon dioxide output is to drop one of those inputs to zero. Since eliminating any carbon byproduct of energy is preferable to a complete human die-off or a stone age suite of services, that’s the only path. Shaving at the margins simply won’t get the job done; only a moonshot solution that provides unlimited clean energy will stave off environmental (and thus, economic) catastrophe.
https://archive.md/yI8Zu
ok, not to be a nitpicking nerd but Gates did the math wrong:
- first of all, C and C0 are the same thing (carbon output), so if we simplify we get: P x E x S = C0 x
2/C - he didn't factor in nitrous oxide emissions, nor the amount of infrared energy absorbed (feed back loop): P x E x S x N x I= C0
- lastly, and I can't believe I even have to explain this: there's correlation between the number of Crusader Kings expansions released and how fucked the climate is. Paradox must be stopped.
So in the end we have: P x E x N x I x S = CO x CK
Fucking amateur shit by Gates here. I eagerly await for him to transfer all his Microsoft shares directly to me.
One of my old chemistry professors would find this absolutely hilarious.
- first of all, C and C0 are the same thing (carbon output), so if we simplify we get: P x E x S = C0 x
It's so weird how Gates is so overpopulation brained while the rest of the capitalists want more workers to drive labor costs down and more consumers to buy their crap
I'm pretty sure he genuinely believes overpopulation is a real issue and is trying to save the world because he's a fucking dumb techbro
no need for racist rhetoric, the racism is inside the results.
There's a weird split between breeding fetish eugenicists and ecofascist Mathusians... or is there?
Maybe the synthesis is everyone (and most life forms on earth) gone but a few failsons of theirs. :cap-think:
Lmao so the equation masterfully averages all human energy use as the same. No differences between Malawians and Miamians here boss.
Yes, that is a big problem. It makes the thing look linear, however correct would be the to sum up each person and their respective Co2 production, this would mean looking at the economic inequalities, too.
It would also be important to be aware that the output of Co2 is not solely dependent on people, but on stuff the state, companies and nature do on their own as well.
All in all this is better than malthusianism, but worse than plenty alternatives. It is pure propaganda.
Look at it (:reddit-logo: warning): https://www.reddit.com/r/lostgeneration/comments/10n4uqa/maybe_thanos_was_right_all_along/
Bill Gates
Why are you asking a businessman to solve a problem well outside his field and not, say, ecologists, anthropologists, biochemists, and environmental scientists? You know, people that study this shit for a living? That's like asking your dentist for plumbing advice. Maybe it's because you don't like the solution given by people in the relevant fields.
He punctuates his letter with a simple mathematical equation he concocted that underscores the need for what he calls an “energy miracle”.
Just say you have no idea if you're going to suggest magical cures.
Gates points out that scientists are calling for an 80 percent drop in carbon emissions by 2050 (and a total end by 2100) to stave off the most dramatic effects of climate change.
Actually, we need to start pulling carbon out of the air ASAP. We need to fully reverse it if we want to not cause a domino effect and kill ourselves and 90% of life with us.
the only way to get to zero carbon dioxide output is to drop one of those inputs to zero.
You have yet to demonstrate that this equation can accurately predict anything. Nor do we need it, because the prediction models environmental scientists already use have proven to already be pretty damn accurate at predicting things.
Since eliminating any carbon byproduct of energy is preferable to a complete human die-off or a stone age suite of services, that’s the only path.
Please elaborate on how you concluded that those are the only paths. Or how we can take a path that isn't currently available to us (a magic non-polluting energy source that allows you to continue expanding energy consumption)?
This also assumes that any reduction in energy consumption would send us back to the stone age. Explain this reasoning. Show your work. Citations needed. You also fail to acknowledge other factors of anthropogenic ecological collapse outside of carbon, such as rapid expansion, real estate development, land clearing, farming, pollution, and pesticides.
The solution to climate change has been made loud and clear, by those who study it, for decades; A society where the economy and production are carefully planned and kept in balance with our environment. In other words, we need to transition away from a capitalist system to a socialist system of government. This is probably why someone that lives in obscene luxury because of the said capitalist system, such as yourself, can't provide a real solution.
The solution needs to happen on multiple fronts; reduce energy consumption to what is necessary for a safe and happy life. No more overproducing just so the super-rich can live cartoonishly lavish lives. If we restrict production to only what we need to live comfortable lives (no, we don't even have to go stone age), then we reduce carbon considerably. As the repair of the ozone after the banning of CFCs has shown us, restrictions and regulations work. Instead of wasting money and effort on a fickle market that controls us, we instead take control of the market and force it to focus on something that matters. No more asking businesses nicely to reduce emissions, they've already had more than enough chances to shape up. No more allowing ridiculous polluters like NFTs to waste resources on things of little benefit. No more allowing big oil to avoid legal repercussions for sabotaging decades of environmental messaging.
We also need to dedicate more to researching and developing ways to pull carbon from the atmosphere. There has been promise shown in certain carbon-trapping plants. Without capitalist waste, we produce enough to reach our goals while reducing the harm overproduction causes. Mobilizing special forces to repair environmentally impacted sites would also need to happen. History has shown that scientific progress happens much faster under well-funded public programs than under a capitalist system that put the practical benefits of a project second to profit.
Transitioning the world to a planned economy that is not controlled by the whims of businessmen is the real 'only path'. It will lead to a less wasteful, less polluting society with the added benefit of raising the standard of living for most people.
Most economists are afraid of differential equations so they pretend variables have no interaction with each other
Also yeah gates isn't saying it, but reducing 'services' or energy isn't an option because it would mean Microsoft would lose value. So his two theoretical options are fascism or magical zero-carbon technologies that don't exist yet
You have actually explained so much of economics to me with yoyr off hand comment. Economists are just physists that are somehow worse at math huh.
Well said
It annoys me to no end how these guys all :morshupls: about how we have to get carbon to zero WHEN THEY HAVEN’T EVEN DONE ANYTHING
How about we ban private jets bill?
Bitcoin?
SUVs?
The oligarchs are going to cut "services" for the rest of us and call it "green", aren't they?
https://www.indiatoday.in/technology/news/story/bill-gates-believes-covid-19-vaccine-tech-should-not-be-given-to-india-what-he-said-and-why-he-said-it-1798357-2021-05-03
Why cant these overpopulation is the problem mfers just follow their leader (adolf hitler)
the equation should be a shortest path mapping between every billionaires roblox house
Best response to these clowns is ok, if we have to reduce population to combat climate change, why not start with white Americans to get the most bang for our buck?
Shuts them up real quick
Perfect example of why you need to be a narcissist in order to get rich. They constantly need to think the world is about them and their ideas are more important than everything else.
Not surprising how Gates is so similar to Musk here. Absolutely no experience or education in any of these things, and yet they constantly feel the need to teach us. Heck not even just teach the normal dumbass average joe which you could again be cynical and claim it is not like the average public is that smart either.
Instead they feel the need to teach actual professionals, researchers and academics on their own fields. Why would anyone that spent any amount of time researching climate change pay any attention to this nonsense?
Did he figure people needed to learn that human activity is correlated with CO2 emissions?
His equation is also so absurdly stupid, I guess he figured services is a catch all term for "economy" even though mainstream economics already makes a distinction between production and services. If this is the case... I don't know... honestly this feels like someone teaching a toddler about trees making oxygen and why they are good all over again and then pretending they are smart for doing it.
Come on please papa Gates, draw us a tree and a sun for us so we can understand it better too! Here you can have these fucking crayons, I beg you!
I know forbes will publish anyone but a bill gates post is a new low
Gates directed this year’s letter toward high school students, complete with personal details including his early affinity for Superman comic books, his bad grades in middle school and his love of Cocoa Puffs cereal.
SO RELATABLE LOVE HIM LOVE HIM LOVE HIM :so-true:
as are the services people demand, especially in the developing world
:porky-happy: stop blaming people with a tiny fraction of :porky-happy: 's carbon footprint challenge. Difficulty level: :porky-scared:
Went to Livestreamfail for the first time in a while and it's nothing but people getting angry over "cracker." I have never seen a white guy getting called a cracker and being hurt the same way any other minority was after being called a slur. These people love to make themselves oppressed over nothing.
