Describe the relationship of energy consumption and the living standards of sociteties.?

Answer 1

Curiously enough, the MOST efficient means of agriculture on a calories used versus calories produced basis is slash-and-burn farming. And if this is practiced across a wide area where plants have decades of time between being used for crops (as almost all natives did), it actually has no negative long-term ecological effects, either. The down-side is that it produces very little in the way of crops.

And actually there's a very well-correlated trend between overall output and overall energy inefficiency. If you want LOTS of crops, you're going to have to dump tons of energy in. It quickly passes the point where humans can provide that kind of energy input and gas-consuming machines are required to do the work instead. Until you get to the apex in highly developed countries which consume ridiculous amount of energy but get large amounts of product - and not without a variety of other environmental consequences.

Now, you may say, "So what? That's just agriculture." But it is agriculture upon which the rest of industry rests. All those workers which are displaced by machines can now go on to do other work. Probably with energy-consumptive machines as well. And you can see how this massive production causes the energy usage to spiral to exorbitant heights.

And it is all this massive production that allows the people to have a high standard of living. Companies and countries and produce less are quickly eclipsed by those that produce more. But maybe not indefinitely... we'll have to hope and see...

Answer 2

Logarimically proprotional.

The higher the living standards (take, for example, the rich people in Kuwait who have a car for each family member, a VCR for each family member a TV set in every room, a DVD player for each family member and an X box for each kid -- don't be fooled by propaganda, Americans aren't NEARLY that rich as the Kuwaits are, I was shocked when Saddam invaded and American liberators and new media detailed how the average Affluent Kuwatie lived!). Their consumption of engery is FAR above that of the average person in Africa or Palestine or lower India.

Look at what has happened in China since the days of Mao when everyone rode a bicycle and today where almost everyone drives a Hundia!

In our little cavern in Los Angeles we started getting OUTRAGIOUYS electric bills. By just changing from 100 watt to 40 watt light bulbs we cut our bill down 40%!

By swtiching to flourescent bulbs that screw into normal light bulb socets you get more illumination and less energy consumption!

I pay $45 a month in electricity to run

1 Refrigerator (frost type, medium size)
1 40 watt light bulb
1 Computer box, small size 300 watt
1 CRT screen, small size 14"

Everything else is minimal. I use the stove 30 minutes per day (electric)

I turn on 100 watt blub in the kitche 1 hour a day

When I use my 750 watt electric heaters in the wintertime (it's 27 outside and 80 inside) my bill goes up to $80 a month.

I use this heater 12 hours a day, 30 days a month.

It doubles my electric bill.

Now, look at a family with 3 kids, who have 4 TV sets, 3 computers, a large double door refrigerator, oil or forced air heating.

Their winter engery bill is over $400 a month. That's 10 times my singler person summer consumption or 5 times my single person winter consumption.

So, the average "poor" American consumes $40-50 in summer and $80 in winter, per person. MINIMAL usage.

Add some extravagances you and get $70 - $100 each month per person.

This does not include CARS or RVs!

The expense to run a car to and from work is now $100 - $200 per month if you are close to work and $200 to $400 per month is you live more than 40 miles away.

Answer 3

Yes, directly proportional. The more energy you consume, the higher your standard of living.

Answer 4

Directly proportional.