After two decades of energy analysis & punditry, I conclude that most readers & listeners are attracted to technology stories, because they feel like they understand them. So we have hype cycles around fracking, hydrogen, nukes, etc.

But the things that actually matter--where the real #energytransition happens--are not technology stories at all! They're process and regulation and legislative stories... that bore our tech-obsessed audiences.

It's a real conundrum.

@chrisnelder
I feel it's because shiny new tech can be sold as a magic wand that solves everything while regulation, legislation, etc sounds too much like hard work.

I see the same within the energy tech industry where you can get better funding for new fancy tech than for old boring tech foundation that the fancy stuff depends on (then the fancy stuff fails because the foundation is not sound).

@brunogirin I'm sure that's part of it too. But I can tell you for certain that the stories I have published that are about tech always get more attention than the far more important stories about process and regulation.
@chrisnelder ah yes, I see what you mean! Thought experiment: if you word a post about regulation as if it was a cool tech hack, do you get more engagement?
@brunogirin Probably, but after all this time in the field anything like “how to fix our energy dilemma with this one weird trick!” gives me a nervous tick.
@chrisnelder @brunogirin "How to add more fighting lemmas with one weird regulation!"
@DamonHD @chrisnelder With the key paragraph in that weird regulation amounting to "and here, some tech magic happens"?
@chrisnelder @brunogirin I think Silver-bullet thinking is a big part of the problem too. The idea that a new technology will allow everything to keep going as it has been is dangerously misguided, IMO