side note:
did you know the history of telephone companies in the usa? i was
reading about it. (someone smart left a book for me to read) =D
it's so fascinating. before the depression, it wasn't profitable for
major telecoms to go to rural communities, especially in the midwest.
they disrespected the farmers and thought they were yokels...
so the midwest used to be pretty left wing too (and the source of a
lot of unrest with the farmers etc), so there was this big tradition
of DIY telephone and telegraphs. someone gave me this history to read,
it was so neat! it's weird that nobody talks about this history now.
it's like it was forgotten!
it's so weird how all these rabblerousers and farmers from the midwest
are totally buried. nobody learns about it in us history, especially
kids in Kansas.
it reminds me of the indie network you are constructing at 510
On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 6:14 PM, Anon195714 <anon195714(a)sbcglobal.net
<mailto:anon195714@sbcglobal.net>> wrote:
Anthony, I know you didn't mean "no grids," but I was concerned
that a quick skim of this discussion by anyone who didn't know the
material in depth, might lead to the wrong conclusions.
For an example of the danger of over-centralization:
Consider the conversion of the public switched telephone network
to VOIP, in light of the desire on the part of telcos to reap a
huge honking windfall by selling off their vast real estate
holdings. AT&T owns about 5,000 central offices, at least one in
just about every medium or larger city in the USA. Comcast has
FIVE nationwide, and AT&T would love to do likewise, and
conversion to VOIP will accomplish just that.
I'm sure you know what it's called when you centralize something
by a factor of 1,000 to 1:
"A high-value target."
Something that's just begging to be hit hard and taken out, by a
crazed dictator or an international terrorist group, or perhaps by
a few sociopaths of the same kind who run ID theft rings and
bank-card skimmer rings, or perhaps by someone out for the sheer
thrill of smashing and wrecking.
The plans for the "smart power grid" will produce more high-value
targets: regional power control systems, centrally managed, all
internet-connected and just daring the assholes of the world to
hit them.
Already, smart meters provide a tasty treat for predators. I'm
aware of a couple of vulnerabilities that haven't been published,
that would enable a single person with a grudge to black out a
neighborhood for a couple of days. This situation will compound
as smart meters, smart grids, and stupid regulatory officials
converge.
All of this over-centralization, and over-reliance on "smart"
things, is causing our entire society to crawl further and further
out on a limb that becomes more and more fragile every day.
Sooner than later, something will break, bigtime.
In a very practical sense, we have to be concerned with resilience.
About which more in my next post.
-G.
=====
On 13-03-26-Tue 5:28 PM, Anthony Di Franco wrote:
To be clear, I don't mean to say "no
grids!1!!1!!!" but just "use
large-scale grids only for what they're best for in the context
of a broader heterogeneous system, not for almost everything as
they are now, and take into account in a rigorous way overall
system efficiency and other concerns like vulnerability to
failures both routine and rare and corruptibility of the social
systems that grow up around the technical systems."
I remember discussing these points a few times in the past with
you, George, and Hol, and others around sudo room; might we like
to get some documentation together on interesting specifics? A
section of the wiki maybe, where we can throw ideas up about the
details and see what sticks?
On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 5:06 PM, Anon195714
<anon195714(a)sbcglobal.net <mailto:anon195714@sbcglobal.net>> wrote:
A lot of the arguement against power grids is ultimately
rooted in opposition to having our energy supply controlled
by distant corporations whose decisions are not sustainable
and not in our interests.
I agree that over-dependence on greedy corporations for vital
infrastructure, merely for the sake of convenience, is a
shortcut to servitude. Google is the worst offender, with
its seductive Gmail and Google Voice offering "convenience"
in exchange for intensive and intrusive surveillance, not
only of those who use the services, but of everyone they
communicate with. (Worst of all, Google Glass: "become a
volunteer surveillance drone!")
The model we should be looking toward, to manage the power
grid, is one of municipally-owned transmission infrastructure
(the wires along the streets), and diversification of power
producers (from individual households to the existing power
utilities). Everyone would be paid the same rate for power
they "upload" to the grid, and everyone would pay the same
rate for power they "download." This would immediately level
the playing field and provide an enormous incentive for all
manner of renewable and new-tech power generation.
Further, the municipal ownership model should also apply to
the wired telecoms grid: telephone and internet. (Even your
mobile device is only "wireless" for the last half mile at
most; the rest of the way it's as wired as my antique dial
phones.) All of these things are using the public
rights-of-way along the streets; they are arguably public
rights-of-way in themselves, and as such, should be owned by
the public.
The municipal internet of electricity would entail each local
power producer (household or larger) having small storage
capacity on-site, and a switching synchronized inverter to
connect to the grid. An onboard microprocessor with an
analog voltage sensors would monitor line power to determine
when power should be uploaded to the grid or downloaded from
the grid. Simple "net metering" would keep track of the
billing.
The small decentralized battery packs would act primarily as
buffers, to level out power production and consumption among
users. Overnight and over multiple cloudy days, and during
peak demand hours, the decentralized solar would be
supplemented by other power sources such as micro-reactors
and natural gas turbines.
The uniform pricing mechanism would prevent predatory
"arbitrage" of electricity, and provide the incentive to
install solar panels on every solar-accessible flat surface,
even on bus shelters and other street kiosks.
The point-of-production microprocessors would be isolated
from the internet to prevent cyber-attacks against the grid:
the best kind of "smart grid" is one that self-regulates
locally without being vulnerable globally.
I should also mention: Yes, electric automobiles can provide
household power storage in the absence of having a grid, but
a) not everyone owns or even wants an automobile, b) if
you've drained your car battery pack overnight to power your
house, it's not available the next morning to get you to
work, and c) even if everyone could afford a new electric
car, there are good reasons to reduce car ownership and usage
in favor of bicycles, scooters, motorcycles, buses, and trains.
Beyond that, we should not be destroying our civic
infrastructure in favor of requiring everyone to have their
own i-Things or do without. Public phones, public bathrooms
(do you really want to carry an i-Pee around?), public
drinking fountains, public benches for sitting, public
transport, etc.: are all civic goods that make the public
sphere more user-friendly and accessible. A public power
grid is another example, as with public water supply, public
sewage treatment, and refuse disposal: life without those
things would be worse than miserable.
Don't destroy it: reclaim it, revision it, and rebuild it.
-G.
=====
On 13-03-26-Tue 3:41 PM, Anthony Di Franco wrote:
Production of alternative energy can be
and for most reasons
probably should be much less centralized, equivalently,
smaller-scale, than production of energy mostly is now.
(Off-grid, as you mention, but very literally.)
Large-scale up front + large, complex distribution networks
is revealed as an obsolete architecture; large scale
distribution networks become relatively less important, so
even if the answer to your question is no, which it probably
isn't given crowdfunding and other disintermediated finance
gaining momentum, it's moot, or at least of much less
relative importance.
Put another way, when the most important goal is maximum
efficiency rather than maximum centralization, large upfront
capital investment + large, complex distribution network is
stupid; proper accounting
<https://homebrewindustrialrevolution.wordpress.com/> of all
costs and benefits in a global rather than piecewise local
sense reveals this now for agriculture, manufacturing,
energy, ...
Even now, buffering between supply and demand is a
constraint on grid architecture leading to great economic
demand within the current paradigm for distributed storage /
production of energy according to someone who came through
sudo room whose name escapes me.
This loosely-drafted email brought to you by the slogan
<http://globalguerrillas.typepad.com/globalguerrillas/2010/11/eaas-non-rival-goods-vs-rival-goods.html>,
"localize production, virtualize everything else"
<http://www.miiu.org/wiki/Resilient_Things_by_Top-Level_Category> and
the acronym STEMI
<http://www.accelerationwatch.com/mest.html> compression
<http://globalguerrillas.typepad.com/globalguerrillas/2008/11/stemi.html>.
On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 3:17 PM, Romy Ilano
<romy(a)snowyla.com <mailto:romy@snowyla.com>> wrote:
Is it possible to create alternative energy distribution
networks (biofuels/solar/ wind etc) that replace
mainstream petrol and natural gas based energy without a
large financial sector?
the vc system that funds these alternative energy
start-ups piggy backs off the investment banks, etc. and
big private equity and institutional investment funds.
vcs are like a fly on the @ss of a financial hippo.
I haven't heard people discuss off-grid that much in the
tech talks I've been to( which are excellent). Is there
a conversation here that would show how off grid is a
viable alternative, even if it's not a big money solution?
On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 1:56 PM, <hol(a)gaskill.com
<mailto:hol@gaskill.com>> wrote:
this talk about imports and exports always reminds
me of energy flow
compare 2011
https://www.llnl.gov/news/newsreleases/2012/Oct/images/25306_LLNLUSEnergy20…
with 2002
http://www.hubbertpeak.com/us/images/us_energyflow2002.jpg
fascinating
_______________________________________________
sudo-discuss mailing list
sudo-discuss(a)lists.sudoroom.org
<mailto:sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org>
http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
_______________________________________________
sudo-discuss mailing list
sudo-discuss(a)lists.sudoroom.org <mailto:sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org>
http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
_______________________________________________
sudo-discuss mailing list
sudo-discuss(a)lists.sudoroom.org