MORE AND MORE AND MORE

by a new one. In this model, wood gives way to coal, which gives way to oil, then electricity, nuclear, and eventually renewable energy become the dominant forms. The book argues that the transition model was originally created by industrialists touting their products as the wave of the future. The idea especially took off after World War II, with the “atomic age” promoted as a new era of clean, cheap energy. Historians as well as the popular press adopted the idea without looking closely at all the ways it simplified what was really happening. Fressoz, a French historian of science and technology, rejects this model, supplying abundant evidence that instead of earlier forms being replaced as newer ones came online, they remained in use, often supplementing the new forms. For example, the rise of coal was accompanied by an increase in the use of wood, for braces in the coal mines, railroad ties, and construction of railroad cars. A similar dynamic followed each of the later “energy transitions,” with coal usage increasing as oil became the dominant energy source\u003B more coal is being used today than ever before, notably to generate electricity in Asian countries but also to make steel and other metals. Most recently, “transition” has become a mantra for those responding to the climate crisis—all the bad, polluting energy sources will be replaced eventually by something greener. Fressoz does not dispute the severity of the climate crisis. Instead, he points to “the need…for a new understanding of energy and material dynamics” instead of reliance on “bad history.”"