The question of the long-term viability of various energy sources and their effect on the environment pervaded the discussion.

The question about energy sources, along with the Energyville game, prompted a spirited discussion. Proponents of various energy technologies touted the benefits of their choices, with renewables the most frequently mentioned. Solar photovoltaic and wind topped the list. There was also strong support for including conservation and improved efficiency in the conversation. Nuclear energy had a large number of backers, suggesting that a more positive view of this energy source had evolved since the previous discussion about Renewable Energies. Fossil fuels were generally regarded as ‘old’ sources that belong to the past rather than the future, although there was disagreement about when they would fade from the scene.

Several participants in the conversation considered the Energyville game entertaining and educational. Others suggested that its assumptions (such as the rationale that the game uses for ranking the mix of energy supply choices) could have been more transparent and it should have enabled players to select specific conservation, efficiency, and urban design measures to reduce energy demand. Over time, the discussion of Energyville evolved from the original concept of powering a typical modern city to constructing a model ‘green’ city designed to provide maximum functionality while using a minimum of energy and resources. Respondents were optimistic that by reducing demand through such measures, a variety of innovative energy sources would become more viable.