I am pretty sure this is just not reality. I am reading Vaclav Smil and this is not the picture he paints at all.
From reading Smil though I come away with the idea that informed discussion on this matter is basically impossible because the subject is too complicated. People will just talk their prior beliefs.
It is really a bad situation no matter how you look at it.
The discussion needs to be about gigajoules per hectare but I have never read anyone mention that other than Smil. This of course could be my ignorance.
> The discussion needs to be about gigajoules per hectare
Remember that for nuclear you have to factor in the size of the potential nuclear exclusion zone, which was 4,143 square km for Chernobyl and up to 807 square km for Fukushima.
I actually read The Scapegoat and liked it. I’m not sure he could convince me of his thesis due to the unfalsifiable nature of his arguments; but he is an interesting thinker.
However, due to the high probability that blog-like content mentioning Girard shares Thiel’s ethos, I am obliged to pass on principal.
I would say more precisely it was a major variable in our ability to have huge economic growth, huge money printing all while having low inflation and a very low volatility in the amount of inflation. Of course, anything in this domain is going to have many dimensions but exporting our inflation was a major variable.
It is tough being mid 40s and realizing my entire adult life was a golden age that is gone forever.
From reading Smil though I come away with the idea that informed discussion on this matter is basically impossible because the subject is too complicated. People will just talk their prior beliefs.
It is really a bad situation no matter how you look at it.
The discussion needs to be about gigajoules per hectare but I have never read anyone mention that other than Smil. This of course could be my ignorance.