Update: The game is now live for all at:
Chevron is going to unveil a game tomorrow called Energyville. The details are:
Chevron, one of the world’s leading energy companies, is launching on September 5th an interactive game called “Energyville,” developed by the Economist Group. Energyville challenges players to figure out how to power their city. Using a combination of energy types (solar, hydro, petroleum), the game is a simulation that takes into consideration environmental, economic and security factors to create an ‘energy management score.’ All of the data and research used during the game was sourced by the Economist Group’s research arm, the Economist Intelligence Unit. During the game, players also learn about different types of alternate energy sources and the pros/cons of each of them. After playing the game, players are invited to ‘challenge’ a friend to see if they can score better. The goal of the game is to drive overall energy literacy & create a global debate about the energy issues we all face.
Since you happened to drop by today, you can play it early if you wish. I don’t have time to look at it yet, but if anyone has some time to check it out, please post your impressions. I certainly support the objective of improving energy literacy, so if this is a useful tool, spread the word.
Here are the details:
To get a sneak peek at the game, please visit:
P.S. Heh. I gave it a quick look. I was piling on the solar, biomass, wind, and hydropower, and I suddenly got “Warning. City needs petroleum.” As far as I can tell, it forces you to use at least some petroleum.
My final energy mix in 2030 was:
Petroleum – 8.3%
Wind – 8.3%
Solar – 33.3%
Hydropower – 16.7%
Biomass – 33.3%
Then again, that was just a test run.
5 thoughts on “Energyville Sneak Preview”
I’m not sure what their goal is with this. Is their message, “You can’t make it without fossil fuels.”? There doesn’t seem to be a way to proceed if you don’t select some petroleum. My score was 629,728,163.
I chose the highest level of conservation at each question.
I just tried it again, and was able to get petro down to 8.3% and wind up to 58.3. Looks like 8.3% is the minimum for petro.
What is the point?
It could have been great.
They could have had their engineers program in real systems and resource levels, and then hired Sid Meir. Imagine the scenarios! The guys over at TOD could play Peak Oil to their hearts content. You could have:
conquer the world and control the oil, dieoff, peacefull powerdown, or even develop sustainable energy and live happily ever after!
Come on, Chevron! Make it a real game!
I guess nuclear power needn’t apply, and some miracle technology is at hand to store and re-distribute power from solar and wind, eh? And I guess we won’t have any problem kicking the coal habit?
I played a couple of times. My high score was just shy of 700,000 which got me into the top 100.
You need petroleum for running cars. Most people overestimate the amount of gasoline BTUs they use and underestimate the electricity and natural gas/fuel oil.
Also I noticed the scenarios change from game-to-game. One time you might get a nuclear power accident that cranks up the security score. The next time the game might throw in licensing a nuclear waste repository, lowering the security and economic impact scores.
The point of the game is to get people to think about the energy mix and the practical and theoretical limits to some forms of fuel. At public meetings we frequently hear, “Let’s just put in all wind or solar power.” People wrongly believe these decisions are “free”.
Some folks in New Zealand recently introduced a similar game:
Personally, I found Electrocity to be a better game, since it dealt with both the issues of city development and supplying power to support that development. It also forced you to deal with fuel issues (including mining opportunities) for fossil fuel energy. It’s actually quite a cool little game.
Comments are closed.