Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).


Comment: Re:Not banning plasmas. (Score 1) 278

by ashfields (#26584047) Attached to: Efficiency Gains Could Prove Proposed Plasma Ban Shortsighted

Joe Next Door loses when electricity rates go up in reponse to the increased electricity demand.

So your increase in demand is being subsidized by your Joe Next Door paying more for the same amount of electricity, or by his reduction in electricity use to maintain the same agregate demand.

With this ban, I would be subsidizing Joe's cheap electricity.

[the electricity rates] likely won't come down until years after a new generation plant is built

In this case, the pressure to improve power efficiency would have been delayed while waiting for the invisible hand to stop scratching its ass.

The increased pressure would likely speed that process up, not delay it.

On the broader issue of global warming, waiting for the invisible hand to correct the market is a non-starter. By the time market pressures build enough for people to notice, the damage has been done.

The market exists in people's heads. Are you aware of global warming? Are you ready to spend resources (sacrifice consumption) to curb global warming? By spending your resources this way, you are buying Less-Global-Warming.

The damage needs to be done (ie population reduction due to decreased food production) for there to be a market pressure.

But you are buying Less-Global-Warming in anticipation of that event, so the market does work.

IBM Advanced Systems Group -- a bunch of mindless jerks, who'll be first against the wall when the revolution comes... -- with regrets to D. Adams