• ladicius@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      17 hours ago

      You mean 40 years of delay for the destruction of our biosphere?

      I’d call that a win.

      • ozymandias117@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        27
        ·
        1 day ago

        40 years of burning far more coal than necessary due to inefficient engines

        Whether the overall effect was positive or negative with respect to the biome, no clue

        • jdr@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 day ago

          Yes, but also induced demand. More efficient engines means less coal per task, but more tasks, maybe so many more that total coal use increases.

          • ozymandias117@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            1 day ago

            That’s why I said we don’t know the overall effect on the biome due to less efficient engines

            With how quickly we industrialized, my intuition is we were mining and burning it as fast as possible, but maybe more efficient engines could have let us mine and burn even more