Q&a Wiht Jean-Baptiste Fressoz on "the Myth of Energy Transition"
Posted3 months agoActive3 months ago
news.cnrs.frSciencestory
calmneutral
Debate
0/100
Energy TransitionSustainabilityEnvironmental History
Key topics
Energy Transition
Sustainability
Environmental History
The article discusses historian Jean-Baptiste Fressoz's work on the 'myth of energy transition', challenging the idea of a smooth shift to new energy sources, with the HN discussion reflecting a calm interest in the topic.
Snapshot generated from the HN discussion
Discussion Activity
Light discussionFirst comment
2m
Peak period
1
0-1h
Avg / period
1
Key moments
- 01Story posted
Oct 8, 2025 at 11:48 AM EDT
3 months ago
Step 01 - 02First comment
Oct 8, 2025 at 11:49 AM EDT
2m after posting
Step 02 - 03Peak activity
1 comments in 0-1h
Hottest window of the conversation
Step 03 - 04Latest activity
Oct 8, 2025 at 11:49 AM EDT
3 months ago
Step 04
Generating AI Summary...
Analyzing up to 500 comments to identify key contributors and discussion patterns
ID: 45517465Type: storyLast synced: 11/17/2025, 11:10:25 AM
Want the full context?
Jump to the original sources
Read the primary article or dive into the live Hacker News thread when you're ready.
"Regardless of technological innovations, the raw materials in question [wood, coal, oil] have never yet been obsolete. Exceptions to this rule are exceedingly rare. Whale oil offers a unique example of the disappearance of an energy source. Or I could mention sheep’s wool, whose use has declined by one-third since the 1950s, replaced by synthetic fibres. Or that of asbestos, now that it’s banned."
Q: Why has the history of energy been misrepresented like this?
J.-B. F.: The reason is simple: historians tend to look at energy from an economic viewpoint, seeking to understand the roots of industrialisation and growth. To that end, they convert those tonnes of wood, coal and petroleum into energy units, and examine the evolution of the mix in relative terms. So in the industrialised countries in 1900, the energy contribution of wood, for example, did indeed become negligible compared with that of coal.
Yet in terms of trees, biodiversity and climate, it’s absolute values that count, and the number of trees felled has never stopped increasing. Moreover, historians have not studied the interrelationships between energy sources – for example, all the wood needed to mine coal or all the coal necessary to extract and use petroleum.
Q: What solutions do you propose?
J.-B. F.: This is the key question that my book does not answer at all. What climate policy should we pursue once we realise that carbon neutrality is largely an illusion, and that we can slow down but probably not stop climate change?