See, this is it right here, you're doing it! You're resorting to extremist hyperbole, when what matters are actual details.
Resources are not infinite, but that is not relevant. What is relevant is the (finite) amount and the rate at which they are used.
To go hyperbolic in the other direction, if there are a trillion accessible grams of something and humanity uses a kilogram a year, then we won't run out for a billion years.
But both your hyperbole and mine are pointless. The question can't be answered without the actual details. Your argument is just "resources aren't infinite so we shouldn't use any of them!" That's not a good argument.
Another thing people often seem to miss when comparing lithium for batteries to oil for combustion, is that lithium is not a fuel in a battery, it's a vessel. It doesn't get burned up. Whether we can recycle it efficiently enough is a big open question, but it's not gone the way fossil fuels are.
Straw man fallacy. Your parent comment didn’t make that argument, only that resources are relatively more plentiful than the assumptions that many people make. I would argue the GP is correct.
Technological advances in the 1970s in agriculture (incl. genetic engineering of more nutritious yellow rice, artificial fertilizer from petrol products, improved planting density) allowed us to increase food staple yields. These improvements have expanded world food yields to double the amount of population that can be sustained by the current number of farm operations.
Fracking and horizontal drilling have made US oil/gas drilling (not just pumping of existing wells) profitable again. The explosion of cheap oil in the 2010s (and the cratering of oil prices in Trump’s term) was created by this technology. Fracking isn’t as cheap as the cheapest pumping in the world (probably Saudi light oil), so assumptions must be made about prices and when this technology can add to the world supply. But re-pressurizing existing wells (which is what fracking is) had been tried for 50+ years and only around 2005+/- did the technology work to make it become profitable.
Both of these are examples of modern technology that has bent the supply curve by breaking the simple, fixed assumptions of some economists. And no, no one thinks the supply curve bends infinitely.
sanderjd|2 years ago
Resources are not infinite, but that is not relevant. What is relevant is the (finite) amount and the rate at which they are used.
To go hyperbolic in the other direction, if there are a trillion accessible grams of something and humanity uses a kilogram a year, then we won't run out for a billion years.
But both your hyperbole and mine are pointless. The question can't be answered without the actual details. Your argument is just "resources aren't infinite so we shouldn't use any of them!" That's not a good argument.
Another thing people often seem to miss when comparing lithium for batteries to oil for combustion, is that lithium is not a fuel in a battery, it's a vessel. It doesn't get burned up. Whether we can recycle it efficiently enough is a big open question, but it's not gone the way fossil fuels are.
thephyber|2 years ago
Technological advances in the 1970s in agriculture (incl. genetic engineering of more nutritious yellow rice, artificial fertilizer from petrol products, improved planting density) allowed us to increase food staple yields. These improvements have expanded world food yields to double the amount of population that can be sustained by the current number of farm operations.
Fracking and horizontal drilling have made US oil/gas drilling (not just pumping of existing wells) profitable again. The explosion of cheap oil in the 2010s (and the cratering of oil prices in Trump’s term) was created by this technology. Fracking isn’t as cheap as the cheapest pumping in the world (probably Saudi light oil), so assumptions must be made about prices and when this technology can add to the world supply. But re-pressurizing existing wells (which is what fracking is) had been tried for 50+ years and only around 2005+/- did the technology work to make it become profitable.
Both of these are examples of modern technology that has bent the supply curve by breaking the simple, fixed assumptions of some economists. And no, no one thinks the supply curve bends infinitely.
osigurdson|2 years ago