askchapo

Basically yes, however the differences would be massive. The only relatively current estimates & modeling I've found for this come from the book Half Earth Socialism. Some highlights I recall, under both energy & land use constraints:

• Essentially zero air travel
• Nearly 100% mandatory veganism
• Nobody uses private cars to commute
• You are limited to about 48 kWh of energy usage/day, or about 2000 W average at any given time. A single AC unit would pretty much entirely consume this energy budget. Currently USians use 12,000 W average at any given time. Your monster gaming PC would be illegal, sorry.

There are some tradeoffs that could be made (you occasionally get to eat meat but have to use 1500 W instead of 2000 W, etc.) but land use is the big fundamental constraint if you want to avoid xenociding 85% of the world's species (so you need to set aside half the earth for them). I know we all like those photos of mountains covered in solar panels in China but that's an example of land use devoted to electricity.

The big wildcard here is nuclear power. I don't want to start a nuclear power argument because those go nowhere. The Half Earth book doesn't use nuclear in its scenarios because the largest base of support for eco policies is anti-nuclear. Whether you view overcoming that resistance as more or less realistic than convincing USian treatlerites to give up borger is of course up to you.

There is also the question of how in a society free from want you get people to do jobs that really fucking suck. This is in the "fun to speculate about" wheelhouse. Obviously capitalism takes the stick approach and threatens the global south with homelessness, starvation, and even direct murder if they don't do the shitty jobs. Transforming this into a pure carrot-based approach is the domain of speculative fiction like The Dispossessed.