submitted 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) by to c/solarpunk@slrpnk.net
 

Found this on the lowtech magazine. What are your toughts?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 1 point 1 day ago

"net zero energy use" isn't a meaningful term. We can talk about net zero carbon as it is part of a cycle where carbon both has sources (burning fossil fuels, respiration of animals) and sinks (forests, oceans, wetlands, artificial carbon capture) so the two sides can balance to zero on net.

There is no "net" when it comes to energy usage, it is either used or it isn't. There is nothing fundamentally wrong with using energy, in harnessing energy is what allows increases of standard of living fundamentally. We need to stop the negative externalities of certain types of energy generation (primarily fossil fuels).

  • source
  • parent