• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans


Adverts help to support the work of this non-profit organisation. To go ad-free join as a Member.


Photo
- - - - -

Ten Days of Hell and What Caused it.


  • Please log in to reply
3 replies to this topic

#1 Live Forever

  • Guest Recorder
  • 7,475 posts
  • 9
  • Location:Atlanta, GA USA

Posted 28 July 2006 - 04:19 AM


Ok, so not really "hell", but "there were thousands who were without air conditioning, lights, refrigeration, internet connections, and, well, modern life generally. What do the consumers do about it? Keep paying the bills, to the same company that let them down. They can't switch. They can't influence the production process. They are powerless in more ways than one." (quoted text from article)

Here is the link.

So, what is the answer? Opening up the long held government monopolies to a more libertarian open market system?

#2 advancedatheist

  • Guest
  • 1,419 posts
  • 11
  • Location:Mayer, Arizona

Posted 28 July 2006 - 05:55 AM

Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr. in this article says,

Markets don't denounce us for our "consumerism" and "greed"; if anything, these things are courted and encouraged. Indeed, isn't this why markets themselves are denounced? They encourage consumers to spend, spend, spend, consume, consume, consume.


Rockwell needs to coordinate his message with that of other people with similar outlooks who want individuals to cut way back on consumption and save every penny so they can eliminate the welfare state. Rockwell even contradicts himself in another article when he writes,

Thanks to the incentives created by the welfare state and the Fed, Americans tend to consume more than they earn. Stocks today trade for about 20 times earnings, whereas the norm is 12–15. Houses usually increase at the rate of inflation, not 10 times as fast.


So maybe the current binge of consumption reflects perverse incentives instead of a rational use society's resources.

#3 Mind

  • Life Member, Director, Moderator, Treasurer
  • 19,085 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Wausau, WI

Posted 28 July 2006 - 06:41 AM

It is possible to live off the grid....but it takes money. Also, regulations are heavy. After the northeast blackout a couple years ago there was a lot of talk about upgrading the grid and creating more distributed generation capabilities. Almost nothing has happenned since then. It is incredibly difficult to get anything done. My town (Wausau) is growing quite a bit and needs more electricity. In order to meet the demand the power company wnated to build another coal generator and create a new high transmission line. Lawsuits from landowners (transmission line) and from the Sierra Club (power generating plant) have put the plans way behind schedule and way over cost.

I lived in California during the last period of rolling blackouts in 2000. Since I lived within 10 blocks of the state Capital my power was never shut-off. Government officials always take care of themselves first.

sponsored ad

  • Advert

#4 advancedatheist

  • Guest
  • 1,419 posts
  • 11
  • Location:Mayer, Arizona

Posted 28 July 2006 - 03:27 PM

The Olduvai Theory
Energy, Population, and
Industrial Civilization
by Richard C. Duncan

http://www.thesocial...wo/xvi-2-93.pdf

The Olduvai Theory states that the life
expectancy of industrial civilization is
approximately 100 years: circa 1930-2030.
Energy production per capita (e) defines it. The
exponential growth of world energy production ended
in 1970 (Postulate 1 is verified). Average e will show
no growth from 1979 through circa 2008 (Postulate 2
is confirmed from 1979 through 2003). The rate of
change of e will go steeply negative circa 2008
(Postulate 3). World population will decline to about
two billion circa 2050 (Postulate 4).


Big Blackouts Are Inevitable

. . . electricity is generated,
transmitted, and distributed by a complex, far-flung,
costly, and fragile infrastructure.
The electric power networks are the largest, most
complex machines ever constructed. They have been
built, rebuilt, and interconnected over many decades
with a baffling variety of hardware, software,
standards, and regulations. The ravenous input nodes
must be continuously fed with immense amounts of
primary energy and then the output nodes deliver
electromagnetic energy to myriad customer loads.
Between the input and output nodes are power
plants, substations, and transmission and distribution
lines and towers.

Inevitably the old equipment wears out or
becomes obsolete so highly educated and skilled
personnel are needed to maintain the grids.
Then there are power control centers that monitor
and manage the generation, transmission, and
distribution of electric power over local, regional, and
super-regional areas. Each control center has
numerous computers, databases, and special software
to monitor and control the flow of power. Thoroughly
trained and dedicated operators are essential to keep
the grids going 24/7/365.

Much faster response times are provided by
“protective relays” that instantly trip for abnormal
conditions, such as short circuits on high-voltage
power lines.

Thus, except for lightning strikes and tornadoes, it
might seem that the power networks would always
operate reliably, thus completely avoiding big
blackouts.

But that is false. Power control specialists J. Apt
and L. B. Lave (2004) have warned:

Data for the last four decades show that
blackouts occur more frequently than theory
predicts, and they suggest that it will become
increasing expensive to prevent these lowprobability,
high-consequence events. The
various proposed “fixes” are expensive and
could even be counterproductive, causing future
failures because of some unanticipated
interaction.


Permanent Blackouts Are Coming

The third catch, according to the Olduvai Theory,
is that sooner or later the power grids will go down and
never come back up. The reasons are many.
The International Energy Agency (lEA, 2004)
estimates that the cumulative worldwide energy
investment funds required from 2003 to 2030 would be
about $15.32 trillion (T, US 2000 $) allocated as
follows:

1. Coal: $0.29T (1.9% of the total),
2. Oil: $2.69T (17.6%),
3. Gas: $2.69T (17.6%),
4. Electricity: $9.66T (63.1%).

Thus the lEA projects that the worldwide
investment funds essential for electricity will be 3.7
times the amount needed for oil alone, and much
greater than all of that required for oil, gas, and coal
combined.

The OT says that the already debt-ridden nations,
cities, and corporations will not be able to raise the
$15.32 trillion in investment funds required by 2030
for world energy. (Not to mention the vastly greater
investment funds required for agriculture, roads,
streets, schools, railroads, water resources, sewer
systems, and so forth.)

Furthermore, because of the rapidly rising cost of
electricity, the increasingly impoverished customers
won*t be able to pay their electric bills. Worse yet, the
really desperate ones will illegally wire directly to the
low-voltage power lines, so without a wattmeter to
record their usage they won*t even have any bills to
pay.


Unfortunately Duncan's accompanying graphs look like they come from one of Jack Chick's evangelizing tracts:


Posted Image




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users