Tuesday, January 26, 2010
The Mother of Invention
What's important about Cuba's situation is that they've truly managed to live without an abundant oil source. With that channel of energy closed off, they've clearly developed stronger communities and lived very well without the use of oils. The U.S. can certainly turn to Cuba's model for a simplistic standard of living.
Though Cuba is a lifestyle I'd certainly like to take up, there are some hiccups in the situation that are notable.
First, Cuba is very small in comparison to the U.S., being roughly the size of Pennsylvania. This in and of itself makes simpler, more eco-friendly transportation a viable option. With the number of (long) distance commuters today, switching to bikes or walking really is difficult. It isn't impossible for everyone; if people committed to biking farther, and maybe if work sites eliminated dress codes (it's okay to abandon the business attire after a 20 miles bike ride..) this could look better for those farther from work.
The author of the article also states how they identify better with the Cuban way of life (right on board with them there, it sounds wonderful); but they made a couple of comments (page 2 and 7) about the U.S.'s decision to ban visits to Cuba as efforts to keep us from learning about their culture. From what I've known and read about the embargo situation, it's more of a statement against their political platforms than our reluctance to learn from their successful standards of living. We've sacrificed some great learning opportunities here, and considering our current oil addiction, we should be taking notes, but I think this is a result, not the purpose of the ban on Cuba. Hopefully, all will be settled sooner than later and we can openly visit and apply some of their principles to our society as we face a similar crisis.
A question I have is, not whether the principles of Cuban living can be applied to us, because I think they can be, but rather, can these be applied to our society as a whole given the number of factories, buildings, machinery, developed areas we have. To stop cold turkey is seemingly ideal, but is the simplistic life really attainable for us? Have we compromised that opportunity?
AH, do we need to physically eliminate the areas/machines/vehicles that use the resources we don't have so we can finally learn to live without them? Like taking the whole cookie jar away so we don't have the temptation of grabbing from it. Hopefully not that extreme.
Also, I liked the Cuban phrase, "Necessity is the Mother of invention". I totally agree with this, or at least I think necessity should be the driving force of invention. I'm reading a book on the philosophy behind capitalism, and it discusses the relationship between innovation (invention) and profit. It reads,
"From the point of view of an individual, a successful innovation is a source of profit. From the point of view of the community, a successful innovation is an engine for progress" (Pejovich 3).
These two approaches seem to represent our two cultures; the Cuban phrase shows that necessity is what ignites progress and innovation, whereas for us in our economic system, profit ignites innovation, not necessarily necessity. One might argue that profit is a necessity, which, to some degrees it is, but there are limits to that approach.
Eating Fossil Fuels
I seemed to have combined the homeworks, but here is my summary with some additions:
The article from Eating Fossil Fuels, Oil, Food and the Coming Crisis in Agriculture touched base on a few topics concerning fossil fuels. Predicting where the peak oil point was attempted by Dr. King Hubbert, saying that it would peak in the 1970’s, and he was able to calculate this because of his experience in developing production curves. His estimate was correct, and it has been on the decline since. Finding reliable and available data is possible, like through Petroconsultants, but other organizations like USGS have not provided realistic data. Because we are at the peak production point, instead of finding locations abundant with oil, many smaller pockets have been tapped into to keep up with the demand. Unfortunately, demand has remained high, and the supply is being depleted. The use of natural gas is possible, being that it’s less costly, but the decline rate is much faster than that of oil, at “five to ten percent, compared to oil’s two or three percent” (36). Also, agriculture has had its own detrimental effects, but fossil fuels have only furthered the problem. In North Korea, they experienced a shortage in hydrocarbons and fuels because they depended on the Soviet Union for their supply. They saw several declines in markets, and the agricultural collapse correlated with the petroleum decline. Because they didn’t have access to the fuels needed, crops suffered. They didn’t have the adequate amounts of fertilizer to continue growth, and amounts of fuels used for agriculture went from 120,000 tons of diesel fuel per year down to 25,000-35,000 tons (46). The DPRK’s collapse poses as a model for what can be affected by an energy crisis, and is something we should seek and implement alternatives as soon as possible.
Our dependence on fossil fuels to power our agricultural system for production makes us very vulnerable. If any element of the power needed is gone, then the entire system compromise. As we discussed in class for a bit today, we’ve lost the knowledge and skillsets vital to producing and growing without such an intense reliance on fossil fuels (fertilizers, electricity, machinery, etc). Until these skills can be re-learned and practiced, we’re putting ourselves in a fragile position.
The DPRK model is an actual event that should be ringing louder in our society’s ears. The results of their energy crisis can help us plan ahead better so if this should happen (which at this rate we’re looking at our own energy crisis in the face) we can avoid some of the problematic situations they experienced.
Monday, January 25, 2010
some GOOD ideas
Some investing approaches to localizing:
http://www.good.is/post/slow-burn/
Driving at 55 :
http://www.good.is/post/you-can-drive-55/
Joyriding
The second article, Joyride, described the various problems that stem from the use of cars. When streetcars were originally in use, corporations such as GM sought to eliminate public transportation and replace it with private. Mass transit wasn’t going to rake in the profit cars could by needing roads (from taxes) and such. This created a new market of personal cars, which then led to other markets, such as housing. Because public transportation was not receiving adequate funds to stay in business, Americans developed a goal set on having a car for every family or person. The result was convenient travel. Driving out of the city to the country side led to the ever growing suburbia. It allowed people to commute to the city, while returning to the comforts of their lovely home. Unfortunately, the mortgage system was faulty and allowed people to buy houses they couldn’t afford. Also, farming changed quite a bit because of the new availability of farm machinery. This increased production, but provided a supply far greater than the demand, dropping prices, and making it difficult for farms to continue in business.
2. Answer the following two questions:a. How did the car/tractor shape American culture and American’s lifestyle?
It cultivated this idea that everyone needed that personal space, a way to get somewhere at one’s own convenience. It settled in with this “American” dream of receiving rewards for going through a difficult time. However, after the depression and war, life’s difficulties weren’t as pronounced, yet people were still demanding material goods at escalating rates. A car jumped into production once again after the war, and from this suburbia was born. Cars have ultimately provided the beginning frameworks for class status and separations.
3. Three thoughtful questions.One of the quotes that really struck me as important, and is in line with what I’ve been struggling in my own thought life lately, is “Profit justifies existence”. Clearly, our country and society has utilized profitability as a means for continuing bad habits and decisions; can we envision and actually reshape our culture to where quality really does replace the push for quantity?
Could we, if we reached a point where implementing this was feasible, reduce the number of cars considering the number of suburban communities? Because the distance from homes and shops/groceries, etc. is pretty extensive, can we adjust our culture to fit bikes or walking, or have we already missed that opportunity?
Thursday, January 21, 2010
TED Talks!
Ray Anderson - Green Entrepreneur
http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/ray_anderson_on_the_business_logic_of_sustainability.html
Chapter Six
anaerobic- living or active in the absence of free oxygen;
The economy can become more efficient through transportation because engineers can develop new designs that allow machines (cars, trains, planes, etc.) to travel farther on less fuel. What this does, however, is increase popularity among them, and transportation use increases, generates more revenue and use, and then the fuel use increases, too. As demand grows, new designs are made to imrpove efficiency levels.
Communication opens up conversations and idea-swapping between countries as they experiment and implement programs, new machines and models, to reduce energy use. Reducing energy consumption isn't something to be made secret and exclusive to the country using it, but rather, they're sharing new methods of efficiency. With the internet as widely used as it is, and the transportation available to make lives far more convenient, innovative designs and ideas can be more easily shared and fine tuned to fit the needs of a country, as well as the global community and environment.
Recently, Dan Morse showed me a blog that showed that 600,000 people in Denmark biked to work by 12:30 pm, being the most widely used method of transportation there. I'll try to find the link for that!
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
Fossil Fuels
Chapter five describes the progression from earlier uses of fossil fuels, to more complex and technologically advanced methods of generating electricity. Smil recognizes that the food supplies available have risen significantly, and because of the increased use of fossil fuels, alternatives will be needed in time, though it will be a gradual adjustment. Picking up from the innovations of preindustrial society, he shows that it did not take long for countries to enter the booming market for coal. Coal, natural gases, and crude oils have found their own markets, and since then, drilling sites and pipelines have extended their use worldwide. Energy sources also include turbines, which have contributed to the design of engines, or electric motors, which could turn electric currents into rotary motions. As technologies constantly introduced newer, more efficient designs for electric use and power, there are environmental damages to be answered to.
Prorate- To divide, distribute, or assess proportionately.
Armature- The rotating part of a dynamo, consisting essentially of copper wire wound around an iron core.
Nuclear reactors and hydro-turbines are in this chapter because they’ve contributed to increased electrical use. With fertilizer, it produces nitrogen, a natural gas, which is related to the fossil fuel topics of the chapter.
I tried to look into the Sanxia Dam in China he made note of, and found some sites, though I did find an article on JSTOR that briefly discussed that there were faulty areas of the dam. Here is a general overview about it though
http://www.china-hiking.com/ThreeGorges/1.htm