Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

×
Science

Journal: The Energy debate

Journal by gadget junkie
I have been involved in some of the discussions about renewable sources and nuclear reactors , and I have been impressed by one difference from the average IT debate on slashdot: the "average" comment is much more similar to the man-on-the-street average than it happens in more tech oriented areas.

One possible reason is that this is further from the expertise area, and so some reversion to the mean should be at work; on the other hand, I suspect that even an open-minded audience like Slashdot is entrapped in the pitfalls described by prospect theory: the way choices are "framed" changes the preferences.

So, while sending a man on Mars gets all us junkies standing on tiptoe, getting cheap energy through nuclear technology advances is not as sexy, and the first generation IV nuclear reactor will be built in a developing country (south Africa), giving "developing" a whole new meaning.

My personal impression is that Joe sixpack will eventually get it right, i.e. if and when the oil price will hurt him too much, he will go for the cheapest alternative. But what does it makes of the so called "experts" and "scientists", if we have to wait for the great unwashed to convince us that New technology is good for us?

The clearest way into the Universe is through a forest wilderness. -- John Muir

Working...