#jevons — Public Fediverse posts
Live and recent posts from across the Fediverse tagged #jevons, aggregated by home.social.
-
"Now let’s think about what’s going to happen with widespread AI adoption, if it pays off the way we all think it will. First of all, it’s going to drive a lot of productivity gains in services specifically. (There is precedent for this; e.g. the railroads made the mail a lot more productive; the internet made travel booking a lot more productive.) Some services are going to get pulled into the Jevons vortex, and just rapidly start getting more productive, and unlocking new use cases for those services. (The key is to look for elastic-demand services, where we plausibly could consume 10x or more of the service, along some dimension. Legal services, for example, plausibly fit this bill.)
And then there are other kinds of services that are not going to be Jevons’ed, for some reason or another, and for those services, over time, we should expect to see wildly high prices for specific services that have no real reason to AI whatsoever. Your dog walker has nothing to do with AI infrastructure; and yet, he will cost more. But you’ll pay it anyway; if you love your dog.
The last piece of this economic riddle, which we haven’t mentioned thus far, is that elected governments (who appoint and direct employment regulators) often believe they have a mandate to protect people’s employment and livelihoods. And the straightforward way that mandate gets applied, in the face of technological changes, is to protect human jobs by saying, “This safety function must be performed or signed off by a human.”
When this happens (which it certainly will, across who knows how many industries, we’ll see a Baumol’s type effect take hold within single jobs."
https://a16z.substack.com/p/why-ac-is-cheap-but-ac-repair-is
-
"Now let’s think about what’s going to happen with widespread AI adoption, if it pays off the way we all think it will. First of all, it’s going to drive a lot of productivity gains in services specifically. (There is precedent for this; e.g. the railroads made the mail a lot more productive; the internet made travel booking a lot more productive.) Some services are going to get pulled into the Jevons vortex, and just rapidly start getting more productive, and unlocking new use cases for those services. (The key is to look for elastic-demand services, where we plausibly could consume 10x or more of the service, along some dimension. Legal services, for example, plausibly fit this bill.)
And then there are other kinds of services that are not going to be Jevons’ed, for some reason or another, and for those services, over time, we should expect to see wildly high prices for specific services that have no real reason to AI whatsoever. Your dog walker has nothing to do with AI infrastructure; and yet, he will cost more. But you’ll pay it anyway; if you love your dog.
The last piece of this economic riddle, which we haven’t mentioned thus far, is that elected governments (who appoint and direct employment regulators) often believe they have a mandate to protect people’s employment and livelihoods. And the straightforward way that mandate gets applied, in the face of technological changes, is to protect human jobs by saying, “This safety function must be performed or signed off by a human.”
When this happens (which it certainly will, across who knows how many industries, we’ll see a Baumol’s type effect take hold within single jobs."
https://a16z.substack.com/p/why-ac-is-cheap-but-ac-repair-is
-
"Now let’s think about what’s going to happen with widespread AI adoption, if it pays off the way we all think it will. First of all, it’s going to drive a lot of productivity gains in services specifically. (There is precedent for this; e.g. the railroads made the mail a lot more productive; the internet made travel booking a lot more productive.) Some services are going to get pulled into the Jevons vortex, and just rapidly start getting more productive, and unlocking new use cases for those services. (The key is to look for elastic-demand services, where we plausibly could consume 10x or more of the service, along some dimension. Legal services, for example, plausibly fit this bill.)
And then there are other kinds of services that are not going to be Jevons’ed, for some reason or another, and for those services, over time, we should expect to see wildly high prices for specific services that have no real reason to AI whatsoever. Your dog walker has nothing to do with AI infrastructure; and yet, he will cost more. But you’ll pay it anyway; if you love your dog.
The last piece of this economic riddle, which we haven’t mentioned thus far, is that elected governments (who appoint and direct employment regulators) often believe they have a mandate to protect people’s employment and livelihoods. And the straightforward way that mandate gets applied, in the face of technological changes, is to protect human jobs by saying, “This safety function must be performed or signed off by a human.”
When this happens (which it certainly will, across who knows how many industries, we’ll see a Baumol’s type effect take hold within single jobs."
https://a16z.substack.com/p/why-ac-is-cheap-but-ac-repair-is
-
"Now let’s think about what’s going to happen with widespread AI adoption, if it pays off the way we all think it will. First of all, it’s going to drive a lot of productivity gains in services specifically. (There is precedent for this; e.g. the railroads made the mail a lot more productive; the internet made travel booking a lot more productive.) Some services are going to get pulled into the Jevons vortex, and just rapidly start getting more productive, and unlocking new use cases for those services. (The key is to look for elastic-demand services, where we plausibly could consume 10x or more of the service, along some dimension. Legal services, for example, plausibly fit this bill.)
And then there are other kinds of services that are not going to be Jevons’ed, for some reason or another, and for those services, over time, we should expect to see wildly high prices for specific services that have no real reason to AI whatsoever. Your dog walker has nothing to do with AI infrastructure; and yet, he will cost more. But you’ll pay it anyway; if you love your dog.
The last piece of this economic riddle, which we haven’t mentioned thus far, is that elected governments (who appoint and direct employment regulators) often believe they have a mandate to protect people’s employment and livelihoods. And the straightforward way that mandate gets applied, in the face of technological changes, is to protect human jobs by saying, “This safety function must be performed or signed off by a human.”
When this happens (which it certainly will, across who knows how many industries, we’ll see a Baumol’s type effect take hold within single jobs."
https://a16z.substack.com/p/why-ac-is-cheap-but-ac-repair-is
-
"Now let’s think about what’s going to happen with widespread AI adoption, if it pays off the way we all think it will. First of all, it’s going to drive a lot of productivity gains in services specifically. (There is precedent for this; e.g. the railroads made the mail a lot more productive; the internet made travel booking a lot more productive.) Some services are going to get pulled into the Jevons vortex, and just rapidly start getting more productive, and unlocking new use cases for those services. (The key is to look for elastic-demand services, where we plausibly could consume 10x or more of the service, along some dimension. Legal services, for example, plausibly fit this bill.)
And then there are other kinds of services that are not going to be Jevons’ed, for some reason or another, and for those services, over time, we should expect to see wildly high prices for specific services that have no real reason to AI whatsoever. Your dog walker has nothing to do with AI infrastructure; and yet, he will cost more. But you’ll pay it anyway; if you love your dog.
The last piece of this economic riddle, which we haven’t mentioned thus far, is that elected governments (who appoint and direct employment regulators) often believe they have a mandate to protect people’s employment and livelihoods. And the straightforward way that mandate gets applied, in the face of technological changes, is to protect human jobs by saying, “This safety function must be performed or signed off by a human.”
When this happens (which it certainly will, across who knows how many industries, we’ll see a Baumol’s type effect take hold within single jobs."
https://a16z.substack.com/p/why-ac-is-cheap-but-ac-repair-is
-
-
-
📌Regar con un agua que no tenemos ni tendremos
https://carabanchel.net/regar-con-un-agua-que-no-tenemos-ni-tendremos/
#Carabanchel #Madrid #agroindustria #agua #desertificación #especulacion #Jevons #regar -
📌Regar con un agua que no tenemos ni tendremos
https://carabanchel.net/regar-con-un-agua-que-no-tenemos-ni-tendremos/
#Carabanchel #Madrid #agroindustria #agua #desertificación #especulacion #Jevons #regar -
📌Regar con un agua que no tenemos ni tendremos
https://carabanchel.net/regar-con-un-agua-que-no-tenemos-ni-tendremos/
#Carabanchel #Madrid #agroindustria #agua #desertificación #especulacion #Jevons #regar -
📌Regar con un agua que no tenemos ni tendremos
https://carabanchel.net/regar-con-un-agua-que-no-tenemos-ni-tendremos/
#Carabanchel #Madrid #agroindustria #agua #desertificación #especulacion #Jevons #regar -
DeepSeek’s Disruption: Geopolitics and the Battle for AI Supremacy | RUSI https://www.byteseu.com/733447/ #Additionally #africa #AI #Allies #Beijing #China #Chinese #Commentary #DeepSeek #Expanding #export #Finally #Geopolitics #Given #Jevons #microsoft #OpenAI #Paradox #RUSI #washington #Western
-
After a brutal 2023, the vibes around #self-#driving #cars are improving.
#Cruise, the industry leader whose vehicle was involved in a #horrific San Francisco #crash last fall, has #rebooted under new management,
while rival #Waymo is #expanding to serve broader swaths of the Bay Area and Los Angeles
and #Tesla is promising a new #robotaxi service.Although Americans say they remain #wary of autonomous driving,
boosters insist there is nothing to fear.
In fact, they foresee roads full of self-driving cars that are both #safer and #cleaner than the status quo,
a tantalizing prospect in a country where transportation is the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions and residents are several times more likely to die in a crash than those living in other rich nations.Enticing though they are, such arguments conceal a #logical #flaw.
As a classic 19th-century theory known as a #Jevons #paradox explains,
even if autonomous vehicles eventually work perfectly
— an enormous “if”
— they are🆘 likely to increase total #emissions and crash #deaths,
simply because ⭐️people will use them so much.https://www.theverge.com/2024/9/2/24232386/self-driving-car-jevons-paradox-robotaxi-waymo-cruise
-
Ejemplo de la paradoja de #Jevons.
Entre 1990 y 2007 los vehículos de carretera interurbana (coches, motos y autobuses) redujeron buena parte de su consumo energético (un - 8 % de bajada, de 2,35 MJ/vkm a 2,18 MJ/vkm) pero a la vez aumentaron tantísimo su número (un +95 %) que el resultado final se comió todas las emisiones que pudiesen haberse ahorrado: el sector pasó a emitir un +80 % más, de 33 849 ktCO2 a 61 023 ktCO2.
No existe posibilidad de #descarbonización de la economía si no reducimos emisiones por vehículo al tiempo que reducimos número de vehículos.
PD. El tren lo hizo bien: +31 % de viajeros, -23% MJ/vkm, +0% CO2.
-
Para aquellos que están celebrando que supuestamente DeepSeek sea más "sostenible" y accesible que sus predecesores. ¿Teneis presente el Efecto Jevons?
-
Para aquellos que están celebrando que supuestamente DeepSeek sea más "sostenible" y accesible que sus predecesores. ¿Teneis presente el Efecto Jevons?
-
#Jevons es ese señor que nos dice a la cara que siempre queremos más.
-
After a brutal 2023, the vibes around #self-#driving #cars are improving.
#Cruise, the industry leader whose vehicle was involved in a #horrific San Francisco #crash last fall, has #rebooted under new management,
while rival #Waymo is #expanding to serve broader swaths of the Bay Area and Los Angeles
and #Tesla is promising a new #robotaxi service.Although Americans say they remain #wary of autonomous driving,
boosters insist there is nothing to fear.
In fact, they foresee roads full of self-driving cars that are both #safer and #cleaner than the status quo,
a tantalizing prospect in a country where transportation is the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions and residents are several times more likely to die in a crash than those living in other rich nations.Enticing though they are, such arguments conceal a #logical #flaw.
As a classic 19th-century theory known as a #Jevons #paradox explains,
even if autonomous vehicles eventually work perfectly
— an enormous “if”
— they are🆘 likely to increase total #emissions and crash #deaths,
simply because ⭐️people will use them so much.https://www.theverge.com/2024/9/2/24232386/self-driving-car-jevons-paradox-robotaxi-waymo-cruise
-
After a brutal 2023, the vibes around #self-#driving #cars are improving.
#Cruise, the industry leader whose vehicle was involved in a #horrific San Francisco #crash last fall, has #rebooted under new management,
while rival #Waymo is #expanding to serve broader swaths of the Bay Area and Los Angeles
and #Tesla is promising a new #robotaxi service.Although Americans say they remain #wary of autonomous driving,
boosters insist there is nothing to fear.
In fact, they foresee roads full of self-driving cars that are both #safer and #cleaner than the status quo,
a tantalizing prospect in a country where transportation is the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions and residents are several times more likely to die in a crash than those living in other rich nations.Enticing though they are, such arguments conceal a #logical #flaw.
As a classic 19th-century theory known as a #Jevons #paradox explains,
even if autonomous vehicles eventually work perfectly
— an enormous “if”
— they are🆘 likely to increase total #emissions and crash #deaths,
simply because ⭐️people will use them so much.https://www.theverge.com/2024/9/2/24232386/self-driving-car-jevons-paradox-robotaxi-waymo-cruise
-
After a brutal 2023, the vibes around #self-#driving #cars are improving.
#Cruise, the industry leader whose vehicle was involved in a #horrific San Francisco #crash last fall, has #rebooted under new management,
while rival #Waymo is #expanding to serve broader swaths of the Bay Area and Los Angeles
and #Tesla is promising a new #robotaxi service.Although Americans say they remain #wary of autonomous driving,
boosters insist there is nothing to fear.
In fact, they foresee roads full of self-driving cars that are both #safer and #cleaner than the status quo,
a tantalizing prospect in a country where transportation is the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions and residents are several times more likely to die in a crash than those living in other rich nations.Enticing though they are, such arguments conceal a #logical #flaw.
As a classic 19th-century theory known as a #Jevons #paradox explains,
even if autonomous vehicles eventually work perfectly
— an enormous “if”
— they are🆘 likely to increase total #emissions and crash #deaths,
simply because ⭐️people will use them so much.https://www.theverge.com/2024/9/2/24232386/self-driving-car-jevons-paradox-robotaxi-waymo-cruise
-
After a brutal 2023, the vibes around #self-#driving #cars are improving.
#Cruise, the industry leader whose vehicle was involved in a #horrific San Francisco #crash last fall, has #rebooted under new management,
while rival #Waymo is #expanding to serve broader swaths of the Bay Area and Los Angeles
and #Tesla is promising a new #robotaxi service.Although Americans say they remain #wary of autonomous driving,
boosters insist there is nothing to fear.
In fact, they foresee roads full of self-driving cars that are both #safer and #cleaner than the status quo,
a tantalizing prospect in a country where transportation is the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions and residents are several times more likely to die in a crash than those living in other rich nations.Enticing though they are, such arguments conceal a #logical #flaw.
As a classic 19th-century theory known as a #Jevons #paradox explains,
even if autonomous vehicles eventually work perfectly
— an enormous “if”
— they are🆘 likely to increase total #emissions and crash #deaths,
simply because ⭐️people will use them so much.https://www.theverge.com/2024/9/2/24232386/self-driving-car-jevons-paradox-robotaxi-waymo-cruise
-
"Le paradoxe de #Jevons énonce qu'une meilleure efficacité dans l'usage d'une ressource entraîne une augmentation et non une baisse de l'exploitation de celle-ci. (...) Le paradoxe est visible dans toute l'histoire des innovations technologiques. (...) Il est dès lors très naïf de croire que les progrès technologiques vont, à eux seuls, limiter l'impact de la croissance et réduire le poids qui pèse sur la biosphère."
(Kim Stanley Robinson - chap.40, p.178)
-
"Le paradoxe de #Jevons énonce qu'une meilleure efficacité dans l'usage d'une ressource entraîne une augmentation et non une baisse de l'exploitation de celle-ci. (...) Le paradoxe est visible dans toute l'histoire des innovations technologiques. (...) Il est dès lors très naïf de croire que les progrès technologiques vont, à eux seuls, limiter l'impact de la croissance et réduire le poids qui pèse sur la biosphère."
(Kim Stanley Robinson - chap.40, p.178)
-
"Le paradoxe de #Jevons énonce qu'une meilleure efficacité dans l'usage d'une ressource entraîne une augmentation et non une baisse de l'exploitation de celle-ci. (...) Le paradoxe est visible dans toute l'histoire des innovations technologiques. (...) Il est dès lors très naïf de croire que les progrès technologiques vont, à eux seuls, limiter l'impact de la croissance et réduire le poids qui pèse sur la biosphère."
(Kim Stanley Robinson - chap.40, p.178)
-
"Le paradoxe de #Jevons énonce qu'une meilleure efficacité dans l'usage d'une ressource entraîne une augmentation et non une baisse de l'exploitation de celle-ci. (...) Le paradoxe est visible dans toute l'histoire des innovations technologiques. (...) Il est dès lors très naïf de croire que les progrès technologiques vont, à eux seuls, limiter l'impact de la croissance et réduire le poids qui pèse sur la biosphère."
(Kim Stanley Robinson - chap.40, p.178)
-
"Le paradoxe de #Jevons énonce qu'une meilleure efficacité dans l'usage d'une ressource entraîne une augmentation et non une baisse de l'exploitation de celle-ci. (...) Le paradoxe est visible dans toute l'histoire des innovations technologiques. (...) Il est dès lors très naïf de croire que les progrès technologiques vont, à eux seuls, limiter l'impact de la croissance et réduire le poids qui pèse sur la biosphère."
(Kim Stanley Robinson - chap.40, p.178)
-
Another resource from Andreas Malm's _Fossil Capital_ It's good to find the original _Coal Question_ writing by Jevons. His name comes up a lot with "Jevon's paradox" about greater efficiency leading to more uses and not bringing down prices or increasing supply.. I think of #JevonsParadox everytime I see some new battery-operated gadget: like portable fans for individual consumers...
https://archive.org/details/bub_gb_ww88bypTQUEC
#WilliamStanleyJevons #Jevons #CoalQuestion from #AdreasMalm in #FossilCapitl -
En este caso, la paradoja de #Jevons ha conseguido que podamos 'pintar' a un coste casi absurdo. ¿El resultado? La emergencia masiva de imágenes cuyo coste unitario (ambiental) es muy bajo pero cuyo coste agregado (de nuevo, ambiental) es muchísimo mayor al que tenía el sector de creación de imágenes previamente.
-
En este caso, la paradoja de #Jevons ha conseguido que podamos 'pintar' a un coste casi absurdo. ¿El resultado? La emergencia masiva de imágenes cuyo coste unitario (ambiental) es muy bajo pero cuyo coste agregado (de nuevo, ambiental) es muchísimo mayor al que tenía el sector de creación de imágenes previamente.
-
En este caso, la paradoja de #Jevons ha conseguido que podamos 'pintar' a un coste casi absurdo. ¿El resultado? La emergencia masiva de imágenes cuyo coste unitario (ambiental) es muy bajo pero cuyo coste agregado (de nuevo, ambiental) es muchísimo mayor al que tenía el sector de creación de imágenes previamente.
-
En este caso, la paradoja de #Jevons ha conseguido que podamos 'pintar' a un coste casi absurdo. ¿El resultado? La emergencia masiva de imágenes cuyo coste unitario (ambiental) es muy bajo pero cuyo coste agregado (de nuevo, ambiental) es muchísimo mayor al que tenía el sector de creación de imágenes previamente.
-
En este caso, la paradoja de #Jevons ha conseguido que podamos 'pintar' a un coste casi absurdo. ¿El resultado? La emergencia masiva de imágenes cuyo coste unitario (ambiental) es muy bajo pero cuyo coste agregado (de nuevo, ambiental) es muchísimo mayor al que tenía el sector de creación de imágenes previamente.
-
Pero, al mismo tiempo, es imprescindible comparar el volumen generado en modo AI comparado con el volumen generado por humanos.
Sí, crear una imagen bonita con IA emite una cantidad irrisoria de carbono a la atmósfera, pero su bajísimo coste (económico) hace que el volumen de imágenes totales generadas se haya multiplicado de forma explosiva.
Ahora cualquiera puede crear imágenes con pocos clics. Sí, ese cualquiera emitirá menos CO2 por imagen que el artista gráfico que compra un PC para componer, pero son emisiones SUMADAS a las que ya teníamos.
Otro ejemplo de la paradoja de #Jevons
-
Pero, al mismo tiempo, es imprescindible comparar el volumen generado en modo AI comparado con el volumen generado por humanos.
Sí, crear una imagen bonita con IA emite una cantidad irrisoria de carbono a la atmósfera, pero su bajísimo coste (económico) hace que el volumen de imágenes totales generadas se haya multiplicado de forma explosiva.
Ahora cualquiera puede crear imágenes con pocos clics. Sí, ese cualquiera emitirá menos CO2 por imagen que el artista gráfico que compra un PC para componer, pero son emisiones SUMADAS a las que ya teníamos.
Otro ejemplo de la paradoja de #Jevons
-
Pero, al mismo tiempo, es imprescindible comparar el volumen generado en modo AI comparado con el volumen generado por humanos.
Sí, crear una imagen bonita con IA emite una cantidad irrisoria de carbono a la atmósfera, pero su bajísimo coste (económico) hace que el volumen de imágenes totales generadas se haya multiplicado de forma explosiva.
Ahora cualquiera puede crear imágenes con pocos clics. Sí, ese cualquiera emitirá menos CO2 por imagen que el artista gráfico que compra un PC para componer, pero son emisiones SUMADAS a las que ya teníamos.
Otro ejemplo de la paradoja de #Jevons
-
Pero, al mismo tiempo, es imprescindible comparar el volumen generado en modo AI comparado con el volumen generado por humanos.
Sí, crear una imagen bonita con IA emite una cantidad irrisoria de carbono a la atmósfera, pero su bajísimo coste (económico) hace que el volumen de imágenes totales generadas se haya multiplicado de forma explosiva.
Ahora cualquiera puede crear imágenes con pocos clics. Sí, ese cualquiera emitirá menos CO2 por imagen que el artista gráfico que compra un PC para componer, pero son emisiones SUMADAS a las que ya teníamos.
Otro ejemplo de la paradoja de #Jevons
-
Pero, al mismo tiempo, es imprescindible comparar el volumen generado en modo AI comparado con el volumen generado por humanos.
Sí, crear una imagen bonita con IA emite una cantidad irrisoria de carbono a la atmósfera, pero su bajísimo coste (económico) hace que el volumen de imágenes totales generadas se haya multiplicado de forma explosiva.
Ahora cualquiera puede crear imágenes con pocos clics. Sí, ese cualquiera emitirá menos CO2 por imagen que el artista gráfico que compra un PC para componer, pero son emisiones SUMADAS a las que ya teníamos.
Otro ejemplo de la paradoja de #Jevons
-
Ejemplo de la paradoja de #Jevons.
Entre 1990 y 2007 los vehículos de carretera interurbana (coches, motos y autobuses) redujeron buena parte de su consumo energético (un - 8 % de bajada, de 2,35 MJ/vkm a 2,18 MJ/vkm) pero a la vez aumentaron tantísimo su número (un +95 %) que el resultado final se comió todas las emisiones que pudiesen haberse ahorrado: el sector pasó a emitir un +80 % más, de 33 849 ktCO2 a 61 023 ktCO2.
No existe posibilidad de #descarbonización de la economía si no reducimos emisiones por vehículo al tiempo que reducimos número de vehículos.
PD. El tren lo hizo bien: +31 % de viajeros, -23% MJ/vkm, +0% CO2.
-
Ejemplo de la paradoja de #Jevons.
Entre 1990 y 2007 los vehículos de carretera interurbana (coches, motos y autobuses) redujeron buena parte de su consumo energético (un - 8 % de bajada, de 2,35 MJ/vkm a 2,18 MJ/vkm) pero a la vez aumentaron tantísimo su número (un +95 %) que el resultado final se comió todas las emisiones que pudiesen haberse ahorrado: el sector pasó a emitir un +80 % más, de 33 849 ktCO2 a 61 023 ktCO2.
No existe posibilidad de #descarbonización de la economía si no reducimos emisiones por vehículo al tiempo que reducimos número de vehículos.
PD. El tren lo hizo bien: +31 % de viajeros, -23% MJ/vkm, +0% CO2.
-
Ejemplo de la paradoja de #Jevons.
Entre 1990 y 2007 los vehículos de carretera interurbana (coches, motos y autobuses) redujeron buena parte de su consumo energético (un - 8 % de bajada, de 2,35 MJ/vkm a 2,18 MJ/vkm) pero a la vez aumentaron tantísimo su número (un +95 %) que el resultado final se comió todas las emisiones que pudiesen haberse ahorrado: el sector pasó a emitir un +80 % más, de 33 849 ktCO2 a 61 023 ktCO2.
No existe posibilidad de #descarbonización de la economía si no reducimos emisiones por vehículo al tiempo que reducimos número de vehículos.
PD. El tren lo hizo bien: +31 % de viajeros, -23% MJ/vkm, +0% CO2.
-
Ejemplo de la paradoja de #Jevons.
Entre 1990 y 2007 los vehículos de carretera interurbana (coches, motos y autobuses) redujeron buena parte de su consumo energético (un - 8 % de bajada, de 2,35 MJ/vkm a 2,18 MJ/vkm) pero a la vez aumentaron tantísimo su número (un +95 %) que el resultado final se comió todas las emisiones que pudiesen haberse ahorrado: el sector pasó a emitir un +80 % más, de 33 849 ktCO2 a 61 023 ktCO2.
No existe posibilidad de #descarbonización de la economía si no reducimos emisiones por vehículo al tiempo que reducimos número de vehículos.
PD. El tren lo hizo bien: +31 % de viajeros, -23% MJ/vkm, +0% CO2.
-
'Rebound effect' puts CO2 targets at risk - where @[email protected] talks about #Jevons
https://www.newsroom.co.nz/sustainable-future/rebound-effect-puts-co2-targets-at-risk
-
'Rebound effect' puts CO2 targets at risk - where @[email protected] talks about #Jevons
https://www.newsroom.co.nz/sustainable-future/rebound-effect-puts-co2-targets-at-risk
-
'Rebound effect' puts CO2 targets at risk - where @[email protected] talks about #Jevons
https://www.newsroom.co.nz/sustainable-future/rebound-effect-puts-co2-targets-at-risk
-
'Rebound effect' puts CO2 targets at risk - where @[email protected] talks about #Jevons
https://www.newsroom.co.nz/sustainable-future/rebound-effect-puts-co2-targets-at-risk
-
'Rebound effect' puts CO2 targets at risk - where @[email protected] talks about #Jevons
https://www.newsroom.co.nz/sustainable-future/rebound-effect-puts-co2-targets-at-risk
