i don't know about you but my kitchen is not always en route Mar 25, 2013 09:08:44 AM, romy(a)snowyla.com wrote: I like that statement made last week >It's not interesting to be constantly promoting products from private

> >I mean you can be polite about it and appreciate the love but you are

_______________________________________________ sudo-discuss mailing list sudo-discuss(a)lists.sudoroom.org http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss

http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss

I'm kind of into this trading-money-to-get-time idea someone came up with a few thousand years ago. On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 10:26 AM, <hol(a)gaskill.com> wrote: companies all right: what's the point of a creative space if the members ideas are getting hijacked to do free pr for companies with business plans ? food? -- Naomi Theora Most naomi(a)nthmost.com +1-415-728-7490 skype: nthmost http://twitter.com/nthmost _______________________________________________ sudo-discuss mailing list sudo-discuss(a)lists.sudoroom.org http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss

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

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

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> wrote: _______________________________________________ sudo-discuss mailing list sudo-discuss(a)lists.sudoroom.org http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss

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> 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 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, "localize production, virtualize everything else" and the acronym STEMI compression. >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 3:17 PM, Romy Ilano <romy(a)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> 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 >>>> http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> sudo-discuss mailing list >>> sudo-discuss(a)lists.sudoroom.org >>> http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss