• Cavemanfreak
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    21 days ago

    Yep, it’s close to 4% of the total. Not really “almost as much”.

    • HauntedCupcake@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      20 days ago

      That’s honestly pretty good, I can see world leaders coming together and just doing that. There must be other technical challenges to this other than raw power usage

      • Cavemanfreak
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        20 days ago

        I don’t know much about the technology, so I can’t comment on that. But I don’t really see politicians pushing for this, at least not succesfully. There are too many rightwing obstructionists in most Western governments right now…

        • HauntedCupcake@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          20 days ago

          Other than the currently dying Tory party (and even sort of them), every single major UK political party is for green energy and against climate change to varying degrees. And I mean on a policy level, not just words.

          I’m not too familiar with other governments, but Europe seems to be going well on that front too. And as much as China bad, they seem open to green policies, and the US democrats seem pretty okay on climate, especially as carbon capture helps out fossil fuel companies.

          I know that’s not a massive ringing endorsement, but considering the cost of 4% energy expenditure for a single year, it seems like a no brainer. If you spread it over 20 years that’s 0.2% of energy, less than AI or crypto uses by far