Skip to content

Waste

Definition

Physics has no concept of waste: all exergy ends dissipated. Waste exists only relative to a reference system.

Waste = exergy destroyed without contributing to the maintenance, extension or steering of the reference system.

First question, always: waste for whom, at which level?

Apparent waste vs waste

Type Mechanism Verdict
Physical floor Friction, engine limits, metabolism Not waste; unavoidable
Search cost Failed R&D, prototypes, rejected candidates Not waste; price of finding gradients
Buffers / redundancy Spare capacity, slack Not waste; insurance
Coordination overhead Meetings, reporting Partly necessary; grows faster than headcount
Vestigial constraints Outlived processes, roles, rules Waste
Self-serving subsystems Units routing flow into own persistence Waste at higher level
Arms races / signaling Competing for position, not flow Collective waste, individually rational
Metric gaming Optimizing the gauge Waste (category error)

Mechanism

D10. "Work for work's sake" is a predictable result of nested selection. [Framing] D2 applies at every level: whatever routes exergy into its own persistence persists, whether or not it serves the whole.

D11. Waste grows with surplus and weak selection. [Framing] Abundant energy, capital or monopoly profit plus absent or poor feedback lets waste accumulate. Nature shows the same (peacock tails, arms races).

Deletion test

  1. Which flow does it change (access, convert, maintain, steer, allocate, explore)?
  2. If it stopped tomorrow, what would decay, and how fast?
  3. Who notices first: the larger system, or only the subsystem?

  4. Only the subsystem notices → likely self-serving.

  5. Nothing decays for a long time → buffer (needed under stress) or vestigial (not needed under stress).

Evidence caution

Graeber's Bullshit Jobs claims are contested; later survey work (Soffia, Wood & Burchell, 2021) found much smaller shares (~5%) rating their jobs useless. Perceived waste ≠ actual waste.