As you say, an interesting exchange of thoughts
first off, I can’t follow the idea that labour need not be consumed during the production of energy.
60ft beneath my feet is a coalseam — -if I wanted that energy I would have to expend energy to get hold of it, or buy someone else’s energy to get it for me. The coal itself represents fossilised sunshine,
In this article below the photo of the men with the bucket is of the same coalseam, taken 100 years ago about 1.5 miles away, Incidentally I live where the industrial revolution started. the Darby family built the house opposite mine in the 1700s, So my interest is very localised.
If I cut down one of my trees, I could release the energy locked within it, but only at the expense of my own energy in doing it.
it would do useful work in keeping me warm in the winter
Same applies to oil extraction. The first wells went down 60ft, now they go down 5 miles or more — -vastly increased energy input necessary.
Energy release requires heat at some stage in the proceedings, unless you slaughter an animal an eat it raw. — -and even then, energy is being exchanged through effort.
As to automation, I’ve tried to explain that here, FWIW.
Robots cannot survive automation
The general concern about our jobs being automated, and artificial intelligence (AI) taking over from human beings…
Robots create value only for so long as they are fed with raw materials (energy input again) Without energy input, value cannot be released into general circulation. (My tree remains unburned)
Robots do not consume, therefore cannot survive in a long term commercial independent existence
incidentally i am disappearing on holiday from tomorrow until 2 weeks on saturday