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 -
ISTR that hydro is pretty tapped out, in the First World. It's such a great energy source in so many ways that we quickly put up dams everywhere that made sense, and so least in North America and Europe we started running out of places that made sense 50 years ago. It's still growing strong in the developing world, though, which takes a little pressure off the growing demand for power there.
Tidal isn't tapped out, but it has a relatively low cap.
Solar could cover a huge chunk of energy needs if only it could be paired with cheap energy storage and transmission. Fission and coal are practically meant for base load, but solar gets at least twice as expensive if you have to rely on it in less sunny places and less sunny times. I wouldn't be surprised to see some kind of battery chemistry breakthrough handle the "less sunny times" part of that, though. We've been optimizing high power and low density for years, but "big heavy cheap batteries" are now becoming a design target for just this reason.
Boring old uranium nuclear won't be hitting fuel limitations for centuries. Thorium might have other advantages, but the big disadvantages of nuclear right now are "would-be plant operators don't trust the government and public to not quintuple the price with regulatory costs" and "the government and public don't trust would-be plant operators to maintain safety and handle waste with any lower regulatory costs". Thorium doesn't really help there, and fusion will only be a little help.
Yes, nuclear power really is the silver bullet solution to energy insufficiency. So far we're largely keeping that bullet chambered, but start enormous electricity price increases or widespread shortages, and you'll see how quickly opinion turns.
Right now new nuclear plants take several years to complete. Opinion might turn quickly but that doesn't turn the lights back on quickly.
Hopefully mass production of microreactors will change this situation before the change becomes necessary.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
There are also the issues with inertial response that might mean that we want to keep some traditional non-neglible baseload around even if batteries got cheap and possible to scale.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link