如何讲述能源、生态和社会系统的变迁与转型

IF 1.3 Q4 MATERIALS SCIENCE, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
J. Birat
{"title":"如何讲述能源、生态和社会系统的变迁与转型","authors":"J. Birat","doi":"10.1051/MATTECH/2021005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"After overusing the expression Sustainable Development, some action plan was needed to switch from rhetorical to transformational change. One of the answers was to propose the word Transition as a roadmap leading to the necessary level of change. A Transition is a passage from one stable regime to another, with a step that is neither instantaneous nor dangerous, like a Revolution, but is fast enough, anyway. The first Transition in the 2010s was the Energy Transition, i.e. a move towards less fossil fuels and more renewables. It started everywhere more or less at the same time, but Germany and its Energiewende was among the first contenders. The implicit objective was as much to control excessive anthropogenic GHG emissions as it was to possibly start a new period of growth based on green technologies. Very soon, however, the Fukushima disaster convinced Mrs. Merkel to change tack and veer towards “zero nuclear power”, thus aligning with the program of the Green movements. At that point, the Energiewende had become a complex, multi-objectives program for change, not a simple Transition as described at the onset of the paper. The rest of the world turned to Globish and spoke of the Energy Transition (EnT). Each country added a layer of complexity to its own version of the EnT and told a series of narratives, quite different from each other. This is analyzed in the present article on the basis of the documents prepared by the “energy-community”, which assembles hard scientists and economists, a group that the soft scientists of SSH call STEM. EnT, in its most recent and mature version, hardly speaks of energy any more but of GHG emissions. Therefore, EnT drifted towards the expression Ecological Transition (EcT). Both expressions are almost synonymous today. From then on, myriads similar expressions sprang up: Environmental Transition, Demographic, Epidemiological and Environmental Risk Transition, Societal Transitions, Global Transitions, Economic Transition, Sustainability Transition, Socio-Ecological Transitions, Technology Transitions, Nutrition Transition, Agro-Ecological Transition, Digital Transition, Sanitary Transition as well as various practices like Energy Democracy or Theory of Transition. Focusing only on EnT and EcT, a first step consists in comparing energy technologies from the standpoint of their impact on public health: thus, coal is 2 or 3 orders of magnitude worse than renewable energy, not to speak of nuclear. A second step looks at the materials requirement of Renewables, what has been called the materials paradox. They are more materials-intensive and also call on much larger TMRs (Total Materials Requirement). On the other hand, the matter of critical materials has been blown out of proportion and is probably less out of control than initially depicted. A third step is accomplished by Historians, who show that History is full of energy transitions, which did not always go in one direction and did not always match the storytelling of progress that the present EnT is heavily relying on. Moreover, they flatly reject the long-term storytelling of History depicted as a continuous string of energy transitions, from biomass, to coal, oil, gas, nuclear and nowadays renewables. Just as interesting is the opinion of the Energy-SSH community. They complain that the organizations that control research funds and decision makers listen mainly to the STEM-energy community rather than to them. And they go on to explain, sometimes demonstrate, that this restricts the perspective, over-focuses on certain technologies and confines SSH to an ancillary role in support of projects, the strategy of which is decided without their input: the keyword is asymmetry of information, which therefore leads to distortion of decision-making. They also stress the need for a plurality of views and interpretations, a possible solution to the societal deadlocks often encountered in Europe. As important and strategic as energy issues are in our present world, the hubris of both STEM and SSH communities may be excessive. Some level of success in making them work together may be a way to resolve this situation!","PeriodicalId":43816,"journal":{"name":"Materiaux & Techniques","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How to tell the story of change and transition of the energy, ecological and societal systems\",\"authors\":\"J. Birat\",\"doi\":\"10.1051/MATTECH/2021005\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"After overusing the expression Sustainable Development, some action plan was needed to switch from rhetorical to transformational change. One of the answers was to propose the word Transition as a roadmap leading to the necessary level of change. A Transition is a passage from one stable regime to another, with a step that is neither instantaneous nor dangerous, like a Revolution, but is fast enough, anyway. The first Transition in the 2010s was the Energy Transition, i.e. a move towards less fossil fuels and more renewables. It started everywhere more or less at the same time, but Germany and its Energiewende was among the first contenders. The implicit objective was as much to control excessive anthropogenic GHG emissions as it was to possibly start a new period of growth based on green technologies. Very soon, however, the Fukushima disaster convinced Mrs. Merkel to change tack and veer towards “zero nuclear power”, thus aligning with the program of the Green movements. At that point, the Energiewende had become a complex, multi-objectives program for change, not a simple Transition as described at the onset of the paper. The rest of the world turned to Globish and spoke of the Energy Transition (EnT). Each country added a layer of complexity to its own version of the EnT and told a series of narratives, quite different from each other. This is analyzed in the present article on the basis of the documents prepared by the “energy-community”, which assembles hard scientists and economists, a group that the soft scientists of SSH call STEM. EnT, in its most recent and mature version, hardly speaks of energy any more but of GHG emissions. Therefore, EnT drifted towards the expression Ecological Transition (EcT). Both expressions are almost synonymous today. From then on, myriads similar expressions sprang up: Environmental Transition, Demographic, Epidemiological and Environmental Risk Transition, Societal Transitions, Global Transitions, Economic Transition, Sustainability Transition, Socio-Ecological Transitions, Technology Transitions, Nutrition Transition, Agro-Ecological Transition, Digital Transition, Sanitary Transition as well as various practices like Energy Democracy or Theory of Transition. Focusing only on EnT and EcT, a first step consists in comparing energy technologies from the standpoint of their impact on public health: thus, coal is 2 or 3 orders of magnitude worse than renewable energy, not to speak of nuclear. A second step looks at the materials requirement of Renewables, what has been called the materials paradox. They are more materials-intensive and also call on much larger TMRs (Total Materials Requirement). On the other hand, the matter of critical materials has been blown out of proportion and is probably less out of control than initially depicted. A third step is accomplished by Historians, who show that History is full of energy transitions, which did not always go in one direction and did not always match the storytelling of progress that the present EnT is heavily relying on. Moreover, they flatly reject the long-term storytelling of History depicted as a continuous string of energy transitions, from biomass, to coal, oil, gas, nuclear and nowadays renewables. Just as interesting is the opinion of the Energy-SSH community. They complain that the organizations that control research funds and decision makers listen mainly to the STEM-energy community rather than to them. And they go on to explain, sometimes demonstrate, that this restricts the perspective, over-focuses on certain technologies and confines SSH to an ancillary role in support of projects, the strategy of which is decided without their input: the keyword is asymmetry of information, which therefore leads to distortion of decision-making. They also stress the need for a plurality of views and interpretations, a possible solution to the societal deadlocks often encountered in Europe. As important and strategic as energy issues are in our present world, the hubris of both STEM and SSH communities may be excessive. Some level of success in making them work together may be a way to resolve this situation!\",\"PeriodicalId\":43816,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Materiaux & Techniques\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Materiaux & Techniques\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1051/MATTECH/2021005\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"MATERIALS SCIENCE, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Materiaux & Techniques","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1051/MATTECH/2021005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

在过度使用“可持续发展”一词之后,需要制定一些行动计划,从修辞转向变革。其中一个答案是提出产品化这个词作为一个路线图,引导到必要的变更级别。过渡是指从一个稳定的政权过渡到另一个稳定的政权,其步骤既不像革命那样瞬间发生,也不危险,但无论如何都足够快。2010年代的第一个转型是能源转型,即减少化石燃料,增加可再生能源。几乎在同一时间,世界各地都开始了这一变革,但德国和它的能源转型是最早的竞争者之一。隐含的目标是控制过度的人为温室气体排放,同时可能开启一个基于绿色技术的新增长时期。然而,很快,福岛灾难说服默克尔改变策略,转向“零核电”,从而与绿色运动的计划保持一致。在这一点上,能源转型已经成为一个复杂的、多目标的变革计划,而不是论文开头所描述的简单过渡。世界上的其他国家转向了全球语,谈论能源转型(EnT)。每个国家都给自己版本的《耳鼻喉》增添了一层复杂性,讲述了一系列彼此截然不同的故事。本文根据“能源共同体”准备的文件进行分析,该共同体由硬科学家和经济学家组成,SSH的软科学家称之为STEM。在其最新且成熟的版本中,EnT几乎不再谈论能源,而是谈论温室气体排放。因此,EnT逐渐趋向于表达Ecological Transition (EcT)。这两个表达在今天几乎是同义词。从那时起,无数类似的表达涌现出来:环境转型、人口、流行病学和环境风险转型、社会转型、全球转型、经济转型、可持续性转型、社会生态转型、技术转型、营养转型、农业生态转型、数字转型、卫生转型,以及能源民主或转型理论等各种实践。只关注EnT等,第一步在于比较能源技术从他们的角度对公共卫生的影响:因此,煤是2到3个数量级比可再生能源,更不要说核。第二步着眼于可再生能源的材料需求,这被称为材料悖论。它们需要更多的材料,也需要更大的tmr(总材料需求)。另一方面,关键材料的问题被夸大了,可能没有最初描绘的那么失控。第三步是由历史学家完成的,他们表明历史充满了能量转换,这些转换并不总是朝着一个方向发展,也不总是与当今世界严重依赖的进步故事相匹配。此外,他们断然拒绝将历史描述为连续不断的能源转型,从生物质能到煤炭、石油、天然气、核能,再到现在的可再生能源。同样有趣的是能源- ssh社区的意见。他们抱怨说,控制研究基金和决策者的组织主要听取stem能源社区的意见,而不是他们的意见。他们继续解释,有时证明,这限制了视角,过度关注某些技术,并将SSH限制为支持项目的辅助角色,这些项目的战略是在没有他们参与的情况下决定的:关键词是信息不对称,因此导致决策扭曲。他们还强调需要多种观点和解释,这是解决欧洲经常遇到的社会僵局的可能办法。尽管能源问题在当今世界具有重要的战略意义,但STEM和SSH社区的傲慢可能有些过头了。在某种程度上成功地让他们一起工作可能是解决这种情况的一种方法!
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
How to tell the story of change and transition of the energy, ecological and societal systems
After overusing the expression Sustainable Development, some action plan was needed to switch from rhetorical to transformational change. One of the answers was to propose the word Transition as a roadmap leading to the necessary level of change. A Transition is a passage from one stable regime to another, with a step that is neither instantaneous nor dangerous, like a Revolution, but is fast enough, anyway. The first Transition in the 2010s was the Energy Transition, i.e. a move towards less fossil fuels and more renewables. It started everywhere more or less at the same time, but Germany and its Energiewende was among the first contenders. The implicit objective was as much to control excessive anthropogenic GHG emissions as it was to possibly start a new period of growth based on green technologies. Very soon, however, the Fukushima disaster convinced Mrs. Merkel to change tack and veer towards “zero nuclear power”, thus aligning with the program of the Green movements. At that point, the Energiewende had become a complex, multi-objectives program for change, not a simple Transition as described at the onset of the paper. The rest of the world turned to Globish and spoke of the Energy Transition (EnT). Each country added a layer of complexity to its own version of the EnT and told a series of narratives, quite different from each other. This is analyzed in the present article on the basis of the documents prepared by the “energy-community”, which assembles hard scientists and economists, a group that the soft scientists of SSH call STEM. EnT, in its most recent and mature version, hardly speaks of energy any more but of GHG emissions. Therefore, EnT drifted towards the expression Ecological Transition (EcT). Both expressions are almost synonymous today. From then on, myriads similar expressions sprang up: Environmental Transition, Demographic, Epidemiological and Environmental Risk Transition, Societal Transitions, Global Transitions, Economic Transition, Sustainability Transition, Socio-Ecological Transitions, Technology Transitions, Nutrition Transition, Agro-Ecological Transition, Digital Transition, Sanitary Transition as well as various practices like Energy Democracy or Theory of Transition. Focusing only on EnT and EcT, a first step consists in comparing energy technologies from the standpoint of their impact on public health: thus, coal is 2 or 3 orders of magnitude worse than renewable energy, not to speak of nuclear. A second step looks at the materials requirement of Renewables, what has been called the materials paradox. They are more materials-intensive and also call on much larger TMRs (Total Materials Requirement). On the other hand, the matter of critical materials has been blown out of proportion and is probably less out of control than initially depicted. A third step is accomplished by Historians, who show that History is full of energy transitions, which did not always go in one direction and did not always match the storytelling of progress that the present EnT is heavily relying on. Moreover, they flatly reject the long-term storytelling of History depicted as a continuous string of energy transitions, from biomass, to coal, oil, gas, nuclear and nowadays renewables. Just as interesting is the opinion of the Energy-SSH community. They complain that the organizations that control research funds and decision makers listen mainly to the STEM-energy community rather than to them. And they go on to explain, sometimes demonstrate, that this restricts the perspective, over-focuses on certain technologies and confines SSH to an ancillary role in support of projects, the strategy of which is decided without their input: the keyword is asymmetry of information, which therefore leads to distortion of decision-making. They also stress the need for a plurality of views and interpretations, a possible solution to the societal deadlocks often encountered in Europe. As important and strategic as energy issues are in our present world, the hubris of both STEM and SSH communities may be excessive. Some level of success in making them work together may be a way to resolve this situation!
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Materiaux & Techniques
Materiaux & Techniques MATERIALS SCIENCE, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
11.10%
发文量
20
期刊介绍: Matériaux & Techniques informs you, through high-quality and peer-reviewed research papers on research and progress in the domain of materials: physical-chemical characterization, implementation, resistance of materials in their environment (properties of use, modelling)... The journal concerns all materials, metals and alloys, nanotechnology, plastics, elastomers, composite materials, glass or ceramics. This journal for materials scientists, chemists, physicists, ceramicists, engineers, metallurgists and students provides 6 issues per year plus a special issue. Each issue, in addition to scientific articles on specialized topics, also contains selected technical news (conference announcements, new products etc.).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信