This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
I think your formalities look fine. I appreciate the clear thesis and the provision of sources. Thought I would have liked direct links to articles on sites like phys.org or energiewende. At least when using a phone, it is not easy to navigate their whole site.
Now, for the argument.
Dr. Hall suggests an EROI of 10-15 is needed for modern quality of life, but this hinges on assumptions about efficiency. Does adding healthcare really take us from 10:1 to 12:1? Does it have to, or can we reduce bloat without reducing quality of life?
I am not convinced that renewable EROI is so low. Estimating the EROI for any source is contentious, and I would like to see newer attempts. A casual search is dominated by articles following the Scientific American feature in 2013, and if the issue is significant, I’d expect it to have gotten more attention over time. The “renewables KO’d?” article specifically argues against a paper, claiming that it was biased by the nuclear lobby, and that European renewable EROI is higher than suggested.
Nuclear presents an interesting problem. While the current known deposits are limited, it is a problem of demand more than supply. As the usage of uranium increased, the amount of uranium which is worth exploiting would also increase. According to this site there is significant opportunity to expand production and find new deposits. New technology will also improve efficiency and longevity. Compare the incentives which drive our oil and gas production curves—they should all apply to uranium too.
In summary, I believe there is significant growth potential in a nuclear+renewable combination. Current EROI measures have large error bars and depend on assumptions about technology and society which may or may not hold. Each of these factors helps to mitigate the effect on civilization.
More options
Context Copy link