MugaSofer comments on Why safety is not safe - Less Wrong

48 Post author: rwallace 14 June 2009 05:20AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (97)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Clippy 26 March 2010 03:12:17AM 0 points [-]

No, once a technological civilization has used the minerals, they're too scattered and worn to be efficiently gathered. When the minerals are still in the planet, you can use geological knowledge to predict where they are and find them in concentrated form. Once Sentients start using them for various purposes, they lose the order and usefulness they once had.

In short, the entropy of the minerals massively increases, because the information about its distribution is destroyed. Therefore, it requires greater energy to convert back into useful form, almost certainly needing a higher energy expenditure per unit useful mineral obtained (otherwise, humans would be currently mining modern middens (aka landfills) for metals).

Comment author: MugaSofer 25 April 2013 01:30:32PM -2 points [-]

We do. It's called "recycling".

Comment author: Clippy 29 April 2013 09:22:54PM -1 points [-]

You should recycle.

Comment author: MugaSofer 01 May 2013 06:40:19PM *  -2 points [-]

I do. So do a lot of other people. Because it is, in fact, a good idea. IIRC, it's more efficient than mining, what with all the easily-accessible minerals already mined out.