1685
The average car purchased in 2023 emits higher levels of carbon dioxide (CO₂) than its 2013 equivalent. This is due to the large proportion of SUVs in the mix, which tend to be bigger and heavier. (english.elpais.com)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
371 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 50 points 2 years ago* (6 children)

I don't remember the name of the effect, but it seems to happen a lot of times when newer technologies makes things consume less. People end up consuming more, either by increase of size, duration of use of using more of the thing.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
    •
  • [–] 19 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    This isn't an example of that though, its just a result of deliberately terrible emissions regulation brought on by lobbying.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 17 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I can confirm. In 2023 despite having LED lightbulbs - we consume 7 more watts per hour per lightbulb than the average lightbulb did in 1546.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 12 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    The lights back then probably weren't very bright were they?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    But they used very little electricity, almost none

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    They also did jack shit for illumination, so...

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    The average light bulbs in 1546 definitely did jack shit that's for sure.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Yeah considering they didn't discover electricity until the 1700s then they didn't even invent one that lasted long enough to be practical until 1879.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

    That's the joke isn't it? Just for historical context Michaelangelo completed the Last Judgement on the Sistine chapel in 1541, so like 5 years before 1546, and I don't think he had flashlights to help him with the lighting.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Vacuum cleaners are the classic example, IMO.

    When introduced, they were supposed to make cleaning rugs take less time, freeing time and effort for other activities, but instead housewives just cleaned their rugs more often.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    led comes to mind here with this explanation. extremely more efficient then most other light sources. but because it is so efficient we see led being used everywhere. and almost never turned of because people say it barely uses any power. also the operating time is so high that companies purposely put components behind the led that break so they can sell more. (similar what they did to the old light bulb)

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago

    also the operating time is so high that companies purposely put components behind the led that break so they can sell more.

    Could you elaborate with more detail, or share some links for articles that describe that?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent