| | | Exposés S1. |  |
| | | Auteur | Message |
|---|
thestral.
Messages : 807
Date d'inscription : 12/02/2015
|  Sujet: Exposés S1.  Sam 6 Jan - 0:54 | |
| - Géographie (culture).
- Philosophie (Hume).
- Histoire environnementale des USA (nucléaire).
Dernière édition par thestral. le Sam 6 Jan - 2:11, édité 1 fois | |
| | | | thestral.
Messages : 807
Date d'inscription : 12/02/2015
| | Sujet: Re: Exposés S1. Sam 6 Jan - 0:56 | |
| - Consignes:
sujet : CULTURE pdf : here (chapitre 13, page 298 à 313) Faire un exposé dans mon cours est aussi exigeant que monter une pièce de théâtre ! il s'agit de bien 1. lire et comprendre le texte proposé, 2. savoir le transmettre de manière pertinente, donc hiérarchiser l'information, savoir repérer l'essentiel et l'accessoire, 3. ne pas en rester à des généralités mais s'appuyer sur des exemples convaincants 4. travailler la mise en scène de l'exposé qui doit être aussi clair, vivant et brillantissime que https://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_religions_and_babies?language=enLe tout en deux fois 10 minutes chrono, avec un diaporama enregistré sur clé usb au format pdf
PART 1."We could think of culture as aprocess we are all involved in rather than a thing we all possess." - Philip CRANG.
Intro ; Culture is a complicated word. Did you know that by the 1950's, there was like 150 definitions of culture ? Mike Crang said that culture "can only be approached as embedded in real-life situations, in temporally and speaking ways" which means that culture is kind of material, and not only spiritual. (milla)
So, culture is a part of our everyday's life - indeed, it takes its basis on language, religion and ethnicity since that's where our way of living is also from. Two persons who speak swahili but are from different religions, and different origins, won't have the same culture, although they will share the same language. Two christian peoples from two different countries will not have the same way of living. (elise)
When you think about culture, you always think of your culture. The one you've grown in, been raised by. The one that influed over your way of thinking, eating, dressing, speaking, even the way you interract with others. But you never think of the fact that YOU are the one who makes your culture. (emma)
Enjoying a croissant for breakfast is cool : but do you think that 3 centuries ago, french people were doing so ? Someone brought croissants here and made them famous - and culture evolved. What did make culture evolve ? People ! Just like us ! (elise)
Now, think about this croissant you love so much. Visualize it. Feel it. Smell it. You can find them all around the globe, and not only in our dear old France. Eating a croissant in a cold morning in Iceland, a warm summer in Istanbul, a rainy day in London is possible ! (milla)
Is culture forced to stay in a specific territory ? This, guys, fall right into the problematic we are going to study : to what extent does culture have a global impact ? With the example of the croissant, we've seen that indeed, culture seems to spread itself all over the world. (emma)
milla dit la pb
We will begin by studying cultural globalization, since globalization is a recurrant subject in the question of culture. We will then talk about multiculturalism and hybrid cultures. Then, we will finish by talking about geographers and culture. (elise)
I ) Cultural globalization.
- Impact of globalization on local culture.
(Emma)
II ) Multiculturalism and hybrid culture.
(Milla)
III ) Geographers and culture.
A ) Cultural geography
I'd first like to introduce you to the concept of Cultural geography.
After noticing that the world changed a lot on the past two decades, geographers started to pay some attention towards a cultural explanation for these changes - that's how Cultural Geography was born. It is a branch of Human Geography which permits to study the link between the interactions of culture, and how it affects the world, the material world. It gives the possibility to focus on the impact of human culture on the natural environment, and the organization of space.
It was led by Carl Sauer, an american geographer of the 19th century, also called "the father of cultural geography", who said that landscapes make culture develop, but that culture also helps to develop the landscape.
This phenomenon can be observed in the way Native Americans live and have lived in Alaska : the way their houses are built depends on their landscape, and the landscape also influed over their way of living (ex : they mostly eat mooses beacause it's a widespread specie in this state).
B) Cultural and spatial turns in social sciences.
Indeed, the changes in the world were both cultural and spacials. That's why cultural geography finds favor to the eyes of geographers : it is not only a look over the people, but also the world. And that's why I would like to talk about cultural and spatial turns in social sciences.
For example, the feminization of the workforce or the decline of manufacturing were cultural changes which resulted in an affect over the economy.
Also, culture is becoming so easy to access that it becomes into a source of money, it is turned into material goods that can be sold. Example : St. Patrick's Day in Ireland. It is known as a religious celebration, has spread a lot and now many material goods linked with this day are sold. You can now buy "Saint Patrick's set fancy dress costume", hats, and many things which are related to this celebration.
As we said, spatial turns also happened in the world. The expansion of the Internet means that the world is becoming more and more interconnected, wich makes communication easier. It has been said that culture can operate at three scales : national, global, and local, which shows its power. These include the movements of people for different reasons (tourism, religion, music, cinema, etc). For example, the amount of people who travel to Mecca every year : it is a spacial influence of culture since religion is deeply cultural. Or the Comic Cons which attract a lot of people.
CC HP : Emma
---
CC générale : So we saw that culture had indeed a global impact over the world. We studied this problematic first through globalisation, which can be seen as a positive effect because the world we live in today is the result of several cultures. But it also can be seen as a drawnbacks because globalisation often leds to the uniformisation of forms of living, and the vanishing of particularities. (moi)
We then talked about the mixture of culture, which resulted in hybrid culture and multicultural spaces. We focused on what was the impact of these two "cultures", whether it was good or not. Finally, we studied and gave the definition of cultural geography and its origins, before focusing on the social and spatial changes engendered by culture. (milla)
docutment : ici (primark oxford spécial hp)
I ) Pourquoi ce doc + lien avec la problématique : Milla
II ) Description et échelle (expansion dans le monde) : Emma
III ) Critique du document et impact économique : Elise
We're not coming to our third and last part which consists of giving a critical view of this document, and then seing the economical impacts of culture over the world throught the example of this document.
So, first of all, we need to talk about this document. As we have all seen it, it is mostly an aesthetic video which has the purpose to attract possibles customers. It is marketting. It doesn't give any numbers, we don't see anyone talking, they basically just show us their products with a harry potter-related music in the background. The only information is the adress of the shop : we know it is the Primark of London, in Oxford Street, which is a street mostly known for being a commercial avenue.
https://sc.cnbcfm.com/applications/cnbc.com/resources/files/2016/10/13/potterTreemap-01.png
from a cnbc article, writtent by Nick Wells and Mark Fahey, 13 Oct 2016, total value of hp's franchise since the beginning.
METTRE SUR LE DIAPO CETTE IMAGE + def franchise
This graphic show us that by-products should not be neglected. They represent by themselves 7.3 billions of the 25 billions' euros franchise. That's even more than the movies, which are the second main carriers of the "Harry Potter universe" after the books, and represent "only" 7.2 billions euros of this franchise (which is less than the by-products).
By-products are a way to expend culture throught the globe - many of us already have some. I have by-products from many different's sources, such as Emma, Milla, and y'all, I'm sure about it. These by-products, or places, can also have a spacial impact such as over tourism : many Harry Potter's fans go to London to visit the Warner bros studios, and it goes the same way for the Harry Potter attraction park which opened in Hollywood.
- pdf, def of culture:
13.1 What is culture?
This chapter explores some of the challenges posed by
and for culture in the twenty-first century. First, however,
it is necessary to define what is meant by culture.
This itself is a complex and difficult task. By the 1950s,
for example, there were over 150 different academic
definitions of culture. As Mike Crang (1998: 1) argues,
despite sounding like the most airy of concepts, culture
‘can only be approached as embedded in real-life situations,
in temporally and spatially specific ways’.
Cultures are part of everyday life. They are systems of
shared meanings often based around such things as
religion, language and ethnicity that can exist on a
number of different spatial scales (local, regional,
national, global, among communities, groups or
nations). They are embodied in the material and social
world and are dynamic rather than static, transforming
through processes of cultural mixing or transculturation
(discussed below).
Cultures are also socially determined and defined
and, therefore, not divorced from power relations.
Dominant groups in society attempt to impose their
ideas about culture and these are challenged by other
groups, or subcultures. The latter might include
various types of youth cultures, gang cultures, and different
ethnicities or sexualities, where identities are
organized around different sets of practices and operate
in different spaces from dominant cultures (Crang
1998; Skelton and Valentine 1998). Culture makes the
world meaningful and significant. As Phil Crang
(1997: 5) argues, we should think of culture as a
process we are all involved in rather than as a thing we
all possess (see Spotlight box 13.1).
- III) cultural ans spacial turns:
13.1.1 The ‘cultural turn’.
As Kahn suggests, culture has generated a great deal of
interest in recent years, for academics, policy makers,
and at the popular level. Geographers have turned their
attention towards cultural explanations of global,
national and local phenomena, exploring issues such
as the cultural embeddedness of economic processes
(e.g. Amin and Thrift 2004), the relationship between
cultures, identities and consumption (see Chapter 18),
and cultural constructions of social relations of gender,
ethnicity and class that shape people’s lives (e.g. Nelson
and Seager 2004). However, the current popularity of
culture is not simply a trend in academe, but is reflective
of a broader cultural turn in (Western) society as a
whole.
The world has changed fundamentally in the past
two decades and these changes are deeply cultural
in character. For example, enormous changes have
occurred in ‘advanced’ economies since the early 1980s
(the decline in manufacturing, the growth of
services, the feminization of the workforce, increased
flexibility – all characteristic of ‘post-Fordism’ as
discussed in Chapter 3, p. 77). However, as Stuart
Hall (1996: 233) argues, if ‘post-Fordism’ exists, it is as
much a description of cultural as of economic change.
Florida (2002) characterizes this as a shift from an industrial
to a creative age, with 40 per cent of people in the
US and UK economies now working in ‘creative’ sectors
of science, technology, culture, arts and entertainment,
and creative economies burgeoning in cities as
diverse as Shanghai and Bangalore. Modern consumption
depends overwhelmingly on image (for example,
the marketing of food and drink products and fashion
clothing) (see Plate 13.1). Movements around the world
of images, symbols, modes of thought and communications
are unparalleled in terms of their volume, speed
and complexity. As computer technology, video imagery
and electronic music demonstrate, the material world of
commodities and technologies is profoundly cultural. In
addition, culture has become increasingly commodified;
in other words culture is being translated into
material goods that can be marketed and sold. For
example, the annual Gay Games in New York has been
transformed from a political event into a cultural commodity.
The Games draw the support of large corporate
sponsors eager to capture the ‘pink dollars’ of a supposedly
affluent gay population. The mainstream press
covers the games as a cultural, rather than a sporting or a
political event. As Zukin (1995: 263) argues, culture now
has great appeal – culture sells.
13.1.2 The ‘spatial turn’
There has also been a ‘spatial turn’ in explanations in
cultural and social theory. The world is changing fast,
and the rate of change is probably greater than ever
before. New technologies such as the Internet and
satellite communications mean that the world is
becoming more global and more interconnected. The
increased speed of transport and communications,
the increasing intersections between economies and
cultures, the growth of international migration and the
power of global financial markets are among the factors
that have changed everyday lives in recent decades.
There is no historical equivalent of the global reach
and volume of ‘cultural traffic’ (Held et al. 1999)
through contemporary telecommunications, broadcasting
and transport technologies. The challenge for
geographers is to find ways of understanding and
interpreting these changes.
Culture can be said to operate at three spatial scales:
local, national and global. Two main interpretations
have dominated discussion. The first highlights the
global aspects of change. At its simplest, this approach
suggests that it is possible to identify processes of
cultural homogenization – the idea that everywhere is
becoming the same – dominated by the USA and most
easily recognized in terms such as ‘Coca-Colonization’,
‘McDonaldization’ and ‘Hollywoodization’ (Cochrane
1995: 250) (see Chapter 18, pp. 380–87). This cultural
globalization involves the movement of people, objects
and images around the world through telecommunications,
language, the media industries, radio and music,
cinema, television and tourism. The second interpretation
places emphasis on the local and the localization
of people’s everyday lives and experiences. Instead of
homogenization, emphasis is placed on the diversity
of culture, on the ways in which global icons such as
Coca-Cola or McDonald’s are reinterpreted locally so
that they take on different meanings in different places.
The emphasis here is on the interconnectedness of global
and local processes. For example, although the same
event can be witnessed simultaneously around the
world (e.g. an incident broadcast in a CNN news report,
or an international sporting event), this event will be interpreted
differently in different places. Furthermore,
locality does not necessarily refer to the opposite of
globality. For example, some environmentalists imagine
the world as a locality, a ‘global village’. Cultural
theorists have a growing interest in how increasing
globalization, especially of cultural production and
consumption, affects people’s sense of identity and
place at both local and national levels (McDowell 1994:
147). Thus a geographic or spatial perspective has
become central to studies of culture more widely. These
are some of the concerns that form the focus of this
chapter. Subsequent sections explore in more detail
ideas about a global culture, examine ways of rethinking
local cultures, and explore progressive ways of thinking
about cultures in contemporary contexts.
- III) geographers and culture:
Conclusion
In this chapter it is suggested that there are two apparently
contradictory tendencies in thinking about
cultures – the attempt to secure the purity of a culture
by conceptualizing it as strong, fixed, bounded, permanent
and homogeneous, and the hybridity of most
cultures. Culture is thus a contested concept. A progressive
way of thinking about culture is to reject the
idea of boundedness and internal cohesion. In the
modern world especially, culture is a meeting point
where different influences, traditions and forces intersect.
There is, therefore, a continual process of change
in cultural practices and meanings. Globalization is
undermining closed, fixed ideas of culture and leading
to new ways of conceptualizing cultures (transculturation,
contact zones, hybridity and diaspora). However,
the fact that cultures are not fixed or homogeneous
does not mean that we will stop thinking of them in
this way. As Stuart Hall (1995: 188–9) argues, this is
because some people need ‘belongingness’ and the
security that closed conceptions of culture provide.
Despite this, recent years have witnessed a decentring
of culture, with nation-states increasingly superseded
by transnational institutions that are producing
cultural globalization and greater cultural diversity.
There has also been a shift in the awareness of the
cultural capital of the West, and an understanding of
the cultural dominance of developed countries. At the
same time, there are now more voices talking back,
reflecting the cultural assertiveness of marginalized
groups and making us aware of new levels of diversity.
Even though most people remain physically, ideologically
and spiritually attached to a local or a national
culture and a local place, complex cultural flows and
networks ensure that it is becoming increasingly
impossible for people to live in places that are completely
isolated and disconnected culturally from the
wider world. Thus,
if there is a global culture it would be better to conceive
of it not as a common culture, but as a field in which
differences, power struggles and cultural prestige
contests are played out. . . . Hence globalization makes
us aware of the sheer volume, diversity and manysidedness
of culture.
(Featherstone 1995: 14)
This points to a ‘more positive evaluation by the
West of otherness and differences’ (ibid.: 89). For
Massey and Jess (1995b: 134), globalization is not
HUMG_C13.QXD 5/14/08 12:23 PM Page 287
288 SECTION 3 SOCIETY, SETTLEMENT AND CULTURE
simply a threat to existing notions of culture, but a
‘stimulus to a positive new response’.
People around the world have different cultures and
systems of meaning, but we cannot avoid reading the
world from within our own cultures and interpreting it
through our own systems of meaning. Understandings
of global culture for the majority of the readers of this
book are filtered through the logic of the West (Spivak
1985). Western ideas and cultural forms are still considered
superior and have become hegemonic, or dominant.
Similarly, one’s own cultural positioning (on the
basis of gender, ethnicity, class, location, sexuality, stage
in life cycle, ability) also influences understandings of
local cultures. The same processes operate at local
levels; dominant cultures marginalize others on the
basis of ethnicity, sexuality, gender and religion.
However, as we have seen, those dominant cultures also
produce resistances that have the potential to create
new ways of thinking about culture.
The challenge is to confront the limits of ‘our’ knowledge,
to recognize other worlds, to acknowledge the
legitimacy of other cultures, other identities and other
ways of life. Accepting ‘cultural translation’ (Bhabha
1994) involves understanding the hybrid nature of culture,
the influence of marginal cultures on dominant
cultures, and that people in marginal cultural systems at
local, national and international levels are also active
in creating their own systems of meaning. They do not
simply absorb ideas from, or become absorbed into,
more dominant cultures. It is possible to develop cosmopolitanism
in the twenty-first century that is global,
sensitive to cultural difference, and dynamic
| |
| | | | thestral.
Messages : 807
Date d'inscription : 12/02/2015
| | Sujet: Re: Exposés S1. Sam 6 Jan - 0:56 | |
| 12 mn 6 et 6 chacune 2 et 2 pour présenter 4 et 4 pour développer chacune un point diapo 1. Hume interrogates the principle of identity here, since he's searching to define it. His scepticism pushes him to question even more harder his thoughts, since he doubts of everything. 1st - seing an object isn't enough to give the idea of identity. hume says that the fact that there's in the sentence "an object is the same with itself" a word to say "object" and to say "itself" shows that the identity doesn't exist since there need to be a word to show the existence of the object. the word "itself" shouldn't exist since the identity of somebody shouldn't be reducted to just the word "itself". (l. 15 to 21) he then ads that several objects will never be able to give the idea of "identity", since the identity is individual and not plural. (l. 22 to 26) he comes to the statement that identity is neither related to the number ou the unity, so nothing because it doesn't exist something that isn't singular or plural. he even says that "there can be no no medium, no more than betwixt existence and non-existence". it exist, or it doesn't exist - there's nothing in between. (l. 27 to 33) he uses the image of time to illustrates his idea and simplifies it : time = implies sucession > when we implie the idea of time to an object that cannot be changed, it's only thanks to imagination (because the object can't change so we rely on our capacity to imagine the future) to which the "cannot be changed object" is participating thanks to existence of others objects. so we rely on our experience and what we know to guess the future of an object that cannot be changed by the time. he compares this example to the idea of identity, and says that maybe we define identity the same way we imagine the future of the object that can't be changed : we use our mind to imagine identity, so the idea of identity is purely hypothetical. 2nd part : distinction btw object and perceptions. sensations = the true objects, and not the object itself. ex : if i see a girl, the object is her scent, her texture, the noises she makes, not the girl herself. senses permits to distinct the object. diapo 2. some philosophers say that we are fully aware of our SELF and that we are certain of its identity/simplicity. passion/sensation > doesn't distract us from this view but fix our view more intensely > we consider passion (sensation)'ss= influence on the SELF either as PLEASURE or PAIN. passion's influence on the SELF can be a proof of the existence of the SELF, but is it enough ? we can't be sure of anything (>scepticism). since self is supposed to exist through pain and plesure, it means we should always feel them - but it's not the case. passions and sensations don't always exist all at the same time - so the self can't exist through them, since it means that we should always feel them all the time. > so how does our sensations belong/are connected to the self ? h. : can"t find his SELF without a perception, and can't watch something else that this perception. if it's light = he sees the light, cold = he feels the cold, one at a time. when there is no sensation (=ex sleep) he doesn't feel himself, feels like his self doesn't exist. he also says that this is his perception of his SELF and that someone else might feel it in another way. but for h., the self =/= continued. we can't trust our senses to feel our SELF (= ex can be alterate, our thought is variable). our mind is always changing, so can we really think that there is a SELF which never changes, and is constant ? what makes us wanna give an identity to all these changes/successions and supposes that we exist uninterrupedly for all our life ? we need to separate : - personal identity as it regards our thought/imagination. ex : idea of an object, invariable and uninterrupted throught time (= identity, or sameness, doesn't change). idea of some other different objects existing in succession, connected together by a relation : diversity. object 1 > object 2 > object 3 > etc. (succession, the object change, maybe that's how the self work ?). these objects = the same, yet interrupted in time. - personal identity as it regards our passion/concern in oursleves. diapo 3. hard to give an answer. when we use "self" or "substance" we need an idea for those terms, otherwise we won't be able to get somewhere bc those words are very unclear. (= define your terms when you use them, so you know where you're going). all perceptions are distinct from each others. they exist separately. when i see a table and a chimney, nothing's present but perceptions. but table and chimney are two different objects > they exist separately. so i feel diffrent perceptions from each one. when i try to perceive my SELF, i can never rely on perceptions. what is the difference btw self and substance ? all our distinct perceptions are distinct existences. the mind never perceives any real connexion among distinct existences. - le point que je voudrai éclaircir moi : ex : idea of an object, invariable and uninterrupted throught time (= identity, or sameness, doesn't change). idea of some other different objects existing in succession, connected together by a relation : diversity. object 1 > object 2 > object 3 > etc. (succession, the object change, maybe that's how the self work ?). these objects = the same, yet interrupted in time. + traduction ici pcq je craque http://philotra.pagesperso-orange.fr/tnhI_IV.htm#livreIpartieIVsection2mon développement : In the second excerpt that we had to read, there's a point that i'd like to talk about. As I said earlier, Hume separated personnal identity in 2 : as it regards our thoughts or imagination, and as it regards our passion or concern in ourselves. I'd like to improve what he said about the first (thoughts / imagination). He gave the following example : Take an object. It's invariable, and uninterrupted throught time (it's identity doesn't change, for example a chair will always be a chair). That is one way of seing identity. Take another objet. Then, he exists in another succession of objects - and they are all connected together by a relation of diversity. Take a tree which then will become a chair, which will be broke and recycled in another object, which will itself be recycled in another object again. That's the other way of seing personal identity - like somethings who's constantly changing, but keeps the same nature. So the proper of the identity is to be constantly evolving ? Like you can't say "ok this is me, and that's it, forever". People change, so does their identity. If you are shy today, that doesn't mean that you'll be so in 40 years. I think that, to me, this is the better description of identity that Hume gave in what we've read - and the more accurate. Since identity exists through human beings, and that human beings are constantly evolving, it seems that their identity, their SELF, should also do so. | |
| | | | thestral.
Messages : 807
Date d'inscription : 12/02/2015
| | Sujet: Re: Exposés S1. Sam 6 Jan - 0:57 | |
| Plan exposé histoire environnementale
INTRO 30 sec
Problématique: How did the history of the USA gave birth to a controversial view
of the nuclear energy ?
We will study this problematic by focusing on the history of domestic use, military
use and then the vision americans have of nuclear nowadays.
I. Domestic use 6mn (1mn30 par point)
A) History MILLA
B) Effects of fukushima MILLA
C) Energy reorganisation act ELISE
1974 : Nucl. Regulatory Comission (nrc) = new fed. law : "energy reorganization act" (era).
since the atomic energy act of 1954 : us atomic energy comission was only agency supervizing way nuclear was used
en. reorg. act. = rights of supervization split in two btw us atomic energy comission and energy research and dvlpment administration (erda) (currently : united states department of energy).
erda was given the responsibility for :
- the development and production of nuclear weapons
- the promotion of nuclear power (+other energy-related work)
+ the E.R.A assigned to the NRC the regulatory work (doesn't include regulation of defense nuclear facilities).
this federal law even gave (after a later amendment) a protect° to the whistleblowers (might suffer reprisals for raising nuclear safety concerns).
D) Incidents safety EMMA
II. Military use 6mn (1m30 par point)
A) History ELISE
US = heavy history w/ nuclear us in war.
1st country to get nuclear weapon (w/ help of uk, canada, australia).
only country to use it against ennemy (h&n, we'll see with emma later).
us carried out more than a thousand nuc. tests (large number, compared to France "only" 210, and the uk 45).
US held very 1st nuclear test : trinity test (july 1945, desert of jornarda del muert, new mexicio).
trinity test = part of manhattan projet (research during wwII, headed by the us). manhattan project = approved by canada and the uk.
manhattan project = origins of nuclear use in us, bc gave birth to desire to surpass other countries (especially whil the us were in a hurry against the nazi germ.) origins of military use of nuclear.
B) Nuclear war plans ELISE
SIOP created in 1961 (Dwight Eisenhower directed it).
Succedeed to H. Truman.
Truman was pessimistic & wanted to empower US" Nuc. Strenght.
Eisen. = inherited large budget for Nuclear. Cut it off from 5 billions dollar (too much + threatened US economy).
SIOP reunites Nuc.Weapons of : U.S Navy and U.S Air Force (increases its strategies of attack & defense bc both armies in it).
Purpose : set up a list of condit° in whicb Nuc. Weap. would be used in Nuc. War.
Eisenhower :
"on strictly military targets and for strictly military purposes, I see no reason why they shouldn't be used just exactly as you would use a bullet or anything else" (about tactical nuclear weapons)
> shows that the us govt. saw nuc. as smthing common
SIOP's creati° > shows that the us saw nuc. as a basis of their strategy, rather than a last resort opt°.
C) Hiroshima - Nagasaki ? EMMA
D) Current status EMMA
III. Nowadays 6mn (1mn30 par point)
a) Pollution MILLA
b) Alternative energies ELISE
- renewable energies = use sunlight, wind , tides, geothermal heat, biofuel, biomass to produce energy such as electricity (ex. wind with the wind turbines)
renew. energies = 14.94 % of the domestically produced electricity in the United States while nuclear = 19.7% of the nation's total electric energy generation. (both 2016 numbers)
> shows that renewable energies slowly catch up with nuclear (will surpass it maybe ?)
- "a new era of energy exploration" (< obama)
obama asked that the us doubled its use of the renewable energy in 2009 : it worked.
(renewable energies = 3.6% of electricity generation in 2009, 14.94% today).
c) Economy MILLA
d) Views, now & debates EMMA
CCL 30 sec
BIBLIOGRAPHIE :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_Reorganization_Act_of_1974
https://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/governing-laws.html#energy
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapons_of_the_United_States
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapons_testing
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinity_%28nuclear_test%29
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manhattan_Project
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_Integrated_Operational_Plan
| |
| | | | Contenu sponsorisé
| | Sujet: Re: Exposés S1. | |
| |
| | | | | | Exposés S1. | |
|
| | Permission de ce forum: | Vous ne pouvez pas répondre aux sujets dans ce forum
| |
| |
| |
