Yes, but they are not gaming devices. They are meant to efficiently compute things. When used for that purpose they use little energy compared to other devices doing the same thing.
Then their wrong: Due to increased Nerd for batteries we need to produce new batteries while also recycling the broken ones. The are comparing apples with oranges.
I don't think I do. At least not in the way you do.
I guess you mean that they are a means of production and are considered to be kind of fungible. I don't know how that relates to the post though.
This is stupid - in either system you want scientists and engineers. They need an education.
You only are more marketable because employers expect people with degrees to have better critical thinking skills.
I am not arguing that, I am saying that populations would still be much high if more and more suitable habitat existed. The issue being that you cannot count lack of animals due to habitat via mortality.
This is misleading: Habitat destruction and lawns are a much greater threat to birds. If you do not like cats and want them gone that's fine. Don't use false/misleading information to further your point.
Superfreighters are among the most efficient form of transport. It can be more eco friendly to import even fresh water than using difficult to access water.
Same goes for exotic fruit, like tomatoes etc.
Driving really fast is electric, still. Driving fast and quite far is not.