zlacker

> You didn't mention why this transition isn't possible. There is also not enough green energy currently to stop using fossil fuels. It is either transition or death.

Nope: I mean that green energy is just not capable of replacing fossil fuels, just by looking at orders of magnitude. Thinking that it is possible by extrapolating some graphs is just naive. It is not, that's all.

Of course we need to build alternatives (both nuclear plants and renewables), but they will only cover a fraction of fossil fuels. Don't under-estimate fossil fuels, they are extremely efficient energy.

> To use much less energy, we would need to give up cars, trains, AC, and heat. [...] We might have to give up food

That's the whole point of degrowth: prioritize what you can keep. Planes will mostly disappear, that's pretty much a fact. Food has to stay under some form, quite obviously (but meat will mostly disappear).

We are at a point where it is about survival: we need to organize our society and cities such that people don't starve in the next few decades. Let's be optimistic, I believe we can still keep a modern society. But probably we won't change smartphone every year, and people living in cities won't own a car.

>>palata+(OP)
Food accounts for 26% of emissions. 31% of that is meat. Nearly all of the usage is fossil fuels so decarbonizing electricity won't help unless electrify agriculture. Turn off the fossil fuels, the combine harvesters stop running and half of people die (the peasant farmers of Asia are fine). People mention permaculture as alternative, but that requires lots of labor. Is the plan that everybody becomes a peasant?

The problem with talking about smartphones and planes is that they aren't enough. For example, a big portion of energy usage is heating and cooling homes. Are you saying people need to give up AC and die in the summer? Or give up heating and die in the winter? Obviously, we should insulate houses, but like solar panels, that takes fossil fuels.

>>ianbur+r8
Agricultural machinery can be electrified. There are alternatives to fossil fuel fertilizers. Land use can be prioritized in such a way to significantly lower the need of chemical fertilizers while maintaining current yield. Lowering the production of meat and other animal products will yield much more consumed calories per grown calorie.

The transformation of agriculture is inevitable or we will all die.

Similarly homes can be insulated, roofs can be made of heat reflecting materials, trees can be grown to provide shade. We can build cooling centers in cities.

>>ianbur+r8
> Are you saying people need to give up AC and die in the summer?

I am precisely saying that we need to prioritize. I would rather survive the summer and not fly far away on holiday than die in the summer.

> Is the plan that everybody becomes a peasant?

Well big cities are a problem, and people working in services definitely rely on a society built on abundant energy.

I don't know exactly what the solution is. What I know is that our society is built on fossil fuel, and not only those are limited, but they are killing us. So we need to remove fossil fuels. Then looking at the numbers, it appears that we can't reasonably hope to replace fossil fuels entirely. Hence we have to use less energy, hence we have to degrow.

I hardly advise reading https://www.amazon.com/World-Without-End-Blain-Christophe-eb..., that's from a well-known french engineer.