Well, good luck with that intelligent discussion.
I thought this may be about archeology, or paleo-anthropology, i was somewhat nonplussed to find it was just a graph and numbers.
I would put forward, that in terms of actual needs visa vie actual energy consumption, ancient rome came mighty close to these stats.
I cant back that up of course, but if you factor in leisure hours, the number of slaves/workers necessary to provide a continuem to this society, you may find that in terms of actual live or die needs, modern civilisation, with all its microwaves, air cons, cars and the rest, isnt that far off at all.
Factor in a massively larger population compared to any earlier supposed "civilisation" and you WILL have humungous pollution, robot (slave) factories, significant concentration of wealth, and basically anything else you can point to.
Oh, but technology you say...........
what about technology? Well they had SHITLOADS of technology back then, they could easily have had more, just it wasnt a priority for business-sound familiar?? Most of the best stuff was left on the inventors drawing boards, never developed properly due to market interests (ie not interested) or otherwise discarded.
What happened to the roman empire by the way?
Oh thats right, they DUMPED THE GOLD STANDARD, people lost faith in the system due to shocking CORRUPTION ,
and despite their aqueducts still serving modern alexandria, despite their roads still serving much of europe (no offense to any poms, but you are kinda near europe) , well, pax romana didnt quite work as planned.
Is their any particular reason to think, anyone living now, should expect thir descendants to have a similiar quality of life, in a couple hundred years time?