The Jevons Paradox

The Paradox

We might like to think that as technology develops we will be able to address all sorts of environmental issues by making our things (machines of all types) more efficient. Cars will run on less or renewable fuel, electricity costs will come down as sustainable solutions are developed, batteries will run our transport systems etc.

There is however a paradox involved, known as the Jevons Paradox, developed in 1865 and since greatly debated and to some extent tested and seen (to some extent I stress).

In 1865, the energy of choice was coal. James Watt had devised a steam engine that was much more efficient that the previous Newcomen design. This new design led to production costs falling as less coal was used in the process, but what had not been foreseen was that coal use would dramatically increase rather than decrease.

The reasons are simple to see. As the materials (energy) become more efficient they become relatively cheaper. An article that required ten kilos of coal to produce now only required six, becoming cheaper to produce and so easier to sell.

The machines producing these goods became cheaper to run, so were used more (and more of them were built). The result was an acceleration in the use of coal, not a decrease.

Further Research into the Paradox

There are also lots of pieces of research that have looked into this paradox in more recent times. In 2005 a report came out (here, quite technical though) that included summaries of lots of this research.

A look at cars is quite instructive. It appears that as fuel efficiency improves, drivers chose to use their cars more. So there is a relationship between improved efficiency and extra miles. If (as some of this research suggests) US citizens travel 20 – 25% more in their cars because the costs are lower, but the car is only 15% more efficient, fuel use will actually go up.

This also effects a broader set of consumption measurements. The more miles we drive the more wear and tear we cause on our cars. The vehicles will have to be replaced quicker. This will also cause more wear to the roads, and on our tyres  and brakes (some studies suggest that 60% of new (efficient) vehicle pollution comes from tyres, brakes and other non-emission sources).

We have written a lot about energy use on the blog, and I have to agree with Christopher in his last post:

We have to use less power, but that might require looking at the problem from a few different view points, and looking into a few dusty corners that we might have overlooked.

Energy efficient production is not the answer without broader political and more widespread change.

Experiments in Culture: Opening up after COVID-19

A view from the COVID-19 Test Concert in Amsterdam, March 2021

A couple of weeks ago Christopher and myself traded comments on one of his posts about the UK’s COVID-19 vaccine rollout, and he touched upon the question of what the post pandemic world might look like.

Going Dutch

This led me to thinking about the Dutch government’s approach to preparing the country for opening up and new forms of lifestyle for the near future, that they say is based on decisions that are founded in scientific research. And they are conducting a series of experiments that I thought our readers might be interested in.  

In order to discover how COVID might spread if life went back to the good old days of conferences, concerts, football matches and festivals, the government is running a series of experimental events:

  • 20 February: Business conference with cabaret show (500 guests)
  • 21 February: Football match NEC-De Graafschap (1500 guests)
  • 28 February: Football match Almere City FC-Cambuur Leeuwarden (1500 guests)
  • 6   March: dance event in Ziggo Dome (1300 guests)
  • 7   March: concert in Ziggo Dome (1300 guests)
  • 13 March: dancefestival (outside) at Walibi Holland (1500 guests)
  • 14 March: popfestival (buiten) at Walibi Holland (1500 guests)

Tickets for the first football matches didn’t sell out, but the rest went like the proverbial hot-cakes. Guests have to have a COVID test before they are allowed in, submit to tests during the event (temperature etc) and have tests after the event. Positive tests result in no admittance.

Bubbles

Inside the venues the visitors are put into bubbles. The dance event (see the photo above) involved dividing the guests into 5 groups of 250 and one group of 50. Each had its own entrance and exit, and all the necessary facilities. Each bubble had its own rules, for example one group of 250 placed in the seated area had to remain seated, while another replica group was allowed to dance in their places. Other bubbles were on the dance floor. In one, guests were asked to keep 1.5 mtrs apart, in another each had their own dance space marked on the floor. Fluorescent Water was distributed (presumably so that guests could see if they had been sneezed on).

Guests were also asked to wear sensors so that their interactions with other guests could be monitored.

What did they investigate?

  • Behaviour (following the rules)
  • Triage, track and trace systems
  • Quick-test (15-minute result tests) as a strategy
  • Air quality
  • Movement dynamics
  • Personal rule effectiveness (1.5 mtr distance)
  • Surface hygiene
  • High risk groups

Those lucky enough to get a ticket heard Sunnery James & Ryan Marciano, Sam Feldt, Lucas & Steve and Lady Bee! 

The dance festival had to be cancelled due to high winds, but preparations are in full swing for the pop festival. There have only been a few words said about any results, but it appears that nobody became infected as a result of the first event, so maybe a model of this sort might be possible, everyone has a test before entering, then follows a protocol as yet to be defined.

As someone who had his honeymoon at Glastonbury Festival in the UK (and went to PinkPop last year), I very much hope and look forward to trying out the new approach, whatever that might be.

SIENNA final conference: 10 – 12 March

The SIENNA Project is holding its final (online) conference on Ethics, Human Rights & Emerging Technologies.

Various project members and a host of professors from various fields will present and discuss results and proposals for the ethical management of new and emerging technologies. The conference has four parts that can be attended separately. The programme is now available for all sessions, and they are all individually free to attend!

Here is just a little taster, all times are CET:

10 March
14:00-17:00 Human Genetics and Genomics: Ethical, legal and human rights challenges

11 March
09:30-12:30 Human Enhancement: Ethical, legal and human rights challenges
13:30-17:30 Artificial Intelligence and Robotics: Ethical, legal and human rights challenges

12 March
13:00-17:00 Governance of emerging technologies: incorporating ethics and human rights

Two panel discussions might be of particular interest to Technology Bloggers readers:

On Thursday 11 March at 11:40, future strategies for human enhancement, ethics and human rights features the following interesting array of speakers.

Lesley-Ann Daly, CyborgNest
Christopher Coenen, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology
Marc Roux, President of  the Association Française Transhumaniste – Technoprog
Yana Toom, Member of European Parliament, STOA member.

While later in the afternoon (at 16:40) a panel will discuss strategies for future ethical and human rights challenges of AI and robotics, and it also includes some really interesting names:

Cornelia Kutterer, Senior Director on Microsoft’s European Government Affairs team in Brussels
Patrick Breyer, Member of European Parliament, Group of the Greens/European Free Alliance
Clara Neppel, Senior Director of the IEEE European office
Vidushi Marda, Article 19 and Carnegie India

Have a look at the full programme, or go to the conference website landing page to register. It’s free!