Localization

Cheap and abundant oil is what made globalization possible to begin with, because the low cost of shipping goods from places like China was more than offset by the advantages of exploiting the cheap labor there.

However, there's a much higher cost associated with oil, in the form of the wars we're currently funding in the middle east. You think we'd be over there if oil weren't part of the picture?

How about if instead of funding those wars we take that money and invest it in localized sustainable sources of energy, like solar and wind? Remember, efficiency drops the further the energy is transported, in the form of voltage drop over the power lines and fuel costs of transporting liquids and gasses, so it makes the most sense to subsidize energy production at the source of demand, in our homes, or at least in our towns. To some extent, it's subsidized already in the form of tax breaks, but it's not encouraged, nor is it well known, because if we all go off the grid and produce our own energy, the power companies and the government lose control over us, and we can't let that happen.

A buddy of mine wants to grow his own smoke, but he doesn't wanna risk getting busted and losing his house and family. I told him he should get a solar setup to run his grow lights, 'cause the power company flags spikes in demand.

 

I think the term "efficiency" needs to be better defined. Contemporary economics hold this dogmatic set of beliefs that efficient always =good and inefficient = bad.

Localizing energy production and distribution would actually make the process as a whole far more inefficient than the centralized, top-down system we have now. BUT, efficiency isn't always good. Localization provides plenty of redundant but meaningful livelihoods to people in specific communities. With this socically-beneficial inefficiency, people per-capita have less real wealth/income but the gain from it strongly in terms of better social ties and a unique sense of community.

Example, in the days before warehouse-sized supermarkets, a town/village/city neighborhood had a main street lined with a plethora of specialized food shoppes that would today all be under the same roof of a big-box store. The butcher, baker, deli, produce market, fishmonger, pastry shop, brewery, ect. were all freestanding business that composed vibrant and community-defining business districts which made neighborhoods walkable, sociable and somewhat self-sustaining. Way more people ran little shops of their own rather than being corporate pawns (employees/associates) of impersonal chain stores that are highly indifferent to the communities they're located in. The small business owner is far more likely to be vested in the interests of their neighborhood and its people rather than just wanting to make a quick buck and disappear to some anti-social exurban subdivision at the end of the day.

We have to define "wealth" in terms of both material value and community integrity. As personal income and individual space become more, community becomes much less and everyone feels alienated from one another and doesn't have much incentive to give a shit about their own neighborhood, town, or city. America is the land of isolated subdivisions and fugly, parasitic stripmalls/big box pods. This living arrangement is very EFFICIENT in terms of people being able to consume more than ever but has proven to be a nasty cancer to our social fabric.

Inefficiency can be great!

 

This sounds like the argument globalists like to sell us, right up there with division of labor and economies of scale, but it seems to me the equipment and personnel (and resulting bureaucracy) required to build and maintain the grid make it less efficient, though the power distribution industry does create jobs. However, as you point out, it depends how you define efficiency. Wealth is also subjective, and I agree we are materially rich, yet community poor. Furthermore, the two seem to be mutually exclusive. Or are they? There are plenty of resources to go around, why does everyone feel a need to horde them?

A couple years ago I worked on a contract basis as a design engineer for a large corporation. Like all big corporations, their thing was outsourcing the jobs of guys like me to engineers in India, where they could get the work done cheaper, or so they thought. Their other thing was using management metrics like kaisen to keep track of performance, which really amounted to a means for management to simplify their jobs while making their workers' jobs more difficult. The problem with these management practices is that they tend to dehumanize the work force, eliminating the creativity, freedom, and individuality that makes a job rewarding and fulfilling.

 

I have mixed feelings about off the grid electric power generation. I tend to think it is unrealistic, and will be “distributed” along economic classes, ending up in a wider and more obvious two class system of haves and have nots. Plus, managing your own electric system is great if you are able bodied, but you are screwed if you have a disability. I would rather see a system where local taxes also pay to generate electricity.. This would also eliminate the “not in my back yard” syndrome where people are all in favor of something like a nuclear power plant, as long as its not in their back yard.

The other problem with personal power generation is that you quickly learn there is not an unlimited supply of energy, and so you cut back on power usage. When you have conserved enough to make home generation feasible, you are using so little electricity you might as well buy it from the grid rather than invest $20 K in your own power plant.

 

Feasibility is subjective. I agree 20K is a lot to throw down on a new power generation system, and most folks don't have that kind of money to invest in something that'll take several years to pay for itself, but it needn't be all or nothing, you can start small and work your way up, with a system that only powers part of your house, something that can kick in during power outages, or times of low demand.

Self sufficiency is the ultimate form of localization, but the powers that be will always discourage it because they don't want to lose our dependency on them, and their power over us.

 

Which is why it actually can have a great impact to BOYCOTT those "powers that be" when at all possible. We simply do not NEED as much as they would have you believe.

Case in point: We have LOCALLY been fighting against huge power lines that the electric company wants to string across our county for the cities up north. LOCALLY, other groups across the state are doing the same thing. Add to that OTHER groups LOCALLY fighting coal fired power plants which would be connected to these lines, and others who are LOCALLY fighting mountaintop removal. Then add again those others who are simply saying enough is enough and are actually boycotting the industry INDIVIDUALLY by cutting back on consumption.
These LOCAL acts, when all added together, are now causing the power company to rethink whether or not they even WANT to go ahead with their destructive plans in the first place! So, don't ever think that a few people on a local level can not make a difference on a much bigger scale.
This is the kind of thing that we NEED as a nation in order to survive. The "powers that be" have no clue, so we need to take the bull by the horns so to speak, and do their jobs FOR them... LOCALLY.

 

I do see your point, and self-sufficiency will be the name of the game when peak oil hits, I just think everyone running out to buy their own power systems is the last step, not the first step.

For example, our infrastructure for living locally has been totally dismantled, right down to our family structures. Multi-generational families all live seperately (accept for "poor" people), multiplying consumption. This is not how people used to live locally.

Yes, each household could buy a $1000 solar panel, and $400 in batteries, and another $400 for a good inverter, and that would allow them to power a few 100 watt light bulbs for "free" until some part of the system needed to be replaced. The money would be better spent remodeling a space for the grandparents to live and sell their house. And these kinds of changes will happen, in a much more organtic manner, when peak oil hits and we're all forced to live locally, but until then, we hope for a techno fix.

The powers that be run far, far deeper than we like to believe.

 

Actually, simply HAVING electricity is a trap. Because no matter how you look at it, it's one of the main things that keeps everybody enslaved. You can do without a phone, you can do without a car, but society is mostly set up revolving around electricity and only a sane few are not so firmly entrenched in that lifestyle that they can actually survive WELL without that huge expense.

Altho I still have electricity, at present we use so little that we probably have the lowest bill in the neighborhood. AND we are totally prepared for the possibility of having none if necessary. I grew up in an AMISH community and completely understand what it takes to live that way. And the bottom line to all of this is that out of EVERYTHING that we have done for ourselves and our living conditions, just KNOWING that we are in good shape as far as the food/clothing/shelter scenario goes, is the biggest weight off our shoulders imaginable. I actually feel stress free in the knowledge that we are not addicted to electricity, we can feed ourselves without outside help, and even if our home were to burn down tomorrow, we would still be able to set up to live well within a short time.

Localization is the way to survival and peace of mind, but as long as people are addicted to their electrical contraptions, they are gonna be slaves to the system. I actually experienced what happens to some folks who are so used to having electricity that they think they can't live without it, and then they are in a situation where they needed to live without it. It's not a pretty sight. Sort of resembles drug withdrawl...

 

I agree it's the public's perception that we can't do without the grid and oil that enslaves us, the biggest factor being our dependency on energy. We'll never have peace of mind until we become independent, because the powers that be will always change the rules of the game to profit most from us while we're left wondering how to afford our addiction. I read somewhere that something like 80% of our electricity comes from coal (0 for me, as I've opted to pay about 7% more on my electric bill to have 100% of my electricity come from solar, wind, and hydro). That's staggering! No wonder king George has given the mining companies a free pass when it comes to mountain top removal in appalachia, our culture demands it.

All I can say is I'm looking forward to the changing of the guard in a couple weeks. Obama might be in the back pocket of the corporate elites, but at least we have a shot at restructuring our energy infrastructure. We may also get tax breaks on solar panels, and it'll make a huge difference if half the cost of the equipment is shouldered by the government. I'm not heart broken to hear that the oil companies are sucking wind now that the demand for oil has dropped due to the recession, maybe this economic disaster is a blessing in disguise.

I just found this link for a solar panel backup system. Nine grand for 3600 watts (or about 30 amps), which is enough to run most appliances. Of course, this is the cadillac of systems with an automatic transfer switch. I'll bet you can do it a lot cheaper if you buy the components separately, and opt for a manual transfer switch.

Beware of third parties out their who want to show you how to be self sufficient. It's usually a marketing strategy to charge exhorbitant prices for their equipment, when you can build the stuff yourself much cheaper. I went through this when I looked into making biodiesel, but the cool part is you can look at their equipment to give you an idea how to imitate it, then build it yourself.

Of course the first step is to limit demand. The cost of solar equipment is more than offset by the cost of energy efficient appliances, and insulation in your home.

 

Again, I agree with both of you, I just have a different take on how to get from where we are to where we should be. I don’t mean individually, but as communities. I am not interested in avoiding the powers that be, I am interested in communities being able to use the powers that be, rather than have the powers use us. No electricity is fine for a healthy family, but it won’t work for a hospital. And it might work for a small town under extremely special cases, but the people living in cities would be doomed.

I lived for 7 years on a small homestead attempt, with no electricity the first year. I never came close to be being self-sustaining. I did manage to be somewhat economically self-sustaining, and managed to pay off the land in 5 years. There were many things that, if I had the cash or a line of credit, I could have done, or done sooner. But the experience to me was that everything is a trade off, and what I did manage to do was based on the fact that I was healthy and able-bodied. Not everyone is. If I had had an accident and broke my legs, for example, I would have been finished. Individual security is a fleeting thing.

I do live in a small town (12,000), and so the problems of returning to a local economy are a bit easier to see. We have a good base (a college) which employees a nice percentage of people, then a few percent employeed locally in a few retail and service jobs, and the rest fill up their gas tank and drive 50-75 miles a day to work.

We have a long cold winter here, and last year with gas and oil prices up, people hit a wall, as did the town budget. When peak oil hits and we have sustained gas and heating oil prices of $5 a gallon or more, it will be a crisis. That is where we are at. And don’t mean a crisis that is mainly in people’s brainwashed heads. I mean people freezing to death.

 

The fact that I can even demand "green" energy from my power company is a start, but I fear that my community will never provide me with independence since no one makes money that way, so I feel a need to take it upon myself to do so, but I look at it as a hobby, something to plan for and eventually implement. Mind you, it's not reasonable to expect everyone to do the same, you're not gonna buy solar panels if you rent an apartment or if you're struggling just to put food on the table, and just 'cause you have them doesn't make you better than anyone else. Also as I mentioned before the first step is conservation. I have trouble taking folks like Al Gore seriously when I read that they consume exhorbitant amounts of energy, I mean it's great they're pushing green energy, but how much of our resources go into producing the energy to fuel their over consumption?

Progress begins with a vision, it's not something that happens overnight. The only way for localization to become a reality is to cultivate a spirit of cooperation instead of competition. That means people need to stop being so self centered and start thinking in terms of what's best for the group instead of what's best for themselves.

 

Interesting that someone could find a town of 12000 "small"... Our whole county is only about 7300.

There is of course more to it that simply being self sustaining. Because if you feel in a position to be self sustaining, the next step is to HELP OTHERS. Teach others. Lend a hand to your neighbors. There certainly ARE situations where electricity is necessary, and those situations should be powered by the least harmful and least costly methods available. But anyhow, the way that localization would actually WORK is people looking out for people. So that if you are sick or have a broken leg, you don't have to worry. Again, the AMISH seem to have the best grasp on these things of anyone. And that's as localized as it gets.

Anyone have any thoughts on creating electricity with firewood?
We had an ice storm a few years ago and the woods are still littered with enough dead wood to most likely power the whole town for 3 years! Everyone in this neighborhood heats their homes with wood already and it does not even make a small dent in what is available. A look at Google Earth shows that WV is mostly woods. I'm no electrician, so I don't know how things like that work, but it would seem that it makes sense to use something that is already available in abundance and widely used already in order to generate power...

 

Just doin' some thinking... Years ago there was a BIG State hospital in the nearest town. That hospital had it's OWN steam electric generator. I don't have a clue what they were using to power it. But there it is in a nutshell. It most certainly IS possible. Some folks would argue that all that wood smoke would be terribly polluting, but you have to use a bit of common sense. If there WERE NO HUMAN RACE at all, the world would have far bigger tracts of wood land than it does now. And whenever a forest fire would happen, there would be no one to put it out. That would create a far greater amount of smoke than any small individual wood fires ever could. Yet the earth seems to have always been able to handle natural events like forest fires just fine... Also, there is a farm in NY where I am originally from that has been labled historically as the FIRST dairy farm in that area to have electricity. It's a huge farm, by the way. It has it's own WIND turbine. All gears made from WOOD...

 

You’re right. I get caught up in thinking in terms of a budget, and what makes “economic sense” and I read your post and thought, that’s a damn good way of looking at it. We live in such a strange world, don’t we? We demand our energy supply makes “economic sense” at the same time we run out to buy the newest video game or cell phone or flat screen tv or car, which makes no economic sense.

A good store selling the supplies needed for local energy generation would be a hell of a lot more positive in a community than another cell phone store.

 

I toured a wood biomass generator once. It was just this big, ugly thing that had a steady stream of trucks hauling chipped trees to it. At that scale, it was far from clean, and all it did, in my opinion, was increase clear cutting because now the good ole boys in the tree killing business had a market for those young trees that “weren’t worth anything.” It was also miles from the nearest population because no one wanted it in their backyard.

I heard the Swedish do it better, but haven’t researched it myself. My understanding is that in some communities, they actually thought ahead and built the housing around centralized energy sources. They burn wood, which turns water to steam to make electricity, and then the cooled steam is piped to the houses for heat and then recycled back to the generator to reheat.

The number I've always heard for sustainable wood harvesting is 1 cord per acre per year

 

Well thank you. It's no surprise anyone looks at things in terms of "economic sense", we all do to some extent, we're programmed to, but as the recent turn of events has proven, nothing's sacred, not even money. If instead of investing all that money into an IRA that bit the big one a few months back I had invested in solar panels, I'd be living off the grid right now, not grumbling about how those scumbags on wall street made off with the loot I was supposed to retire on.

As for wood burning, a steam turbine's the best way I know to get it done, and sure burning wood or anything pollutes the air, but it depends how much you burn. If you wanna live like Al Gore, you won't make friends with your neighbors. If you want to learn something interesting, check out how the first steam turbines were designed, makes modern day engineering, at least what I'm familiar with, seem pretty lame by comparison. The only bummer was that some of those old steam turbines had a tendency to explode when something went out of whack.

Most farmers, at least the smaller ones, are very resourceful with how they use energy, they have to be to survive. Observing how they get by is an education unto itself. If I'm not mistaken, the pioneers of biodiesel use were farmers who used the oil from corn they grew in their farm machinery.

I was a licensed electrician once, back when I got out of the military and needed a job to put myself through school to be an electrical engineer, so I have a bit of an advantage when it comes to some of this stuff, but I know plenty of people far less "educated" in the traditional sense who can blow my doors off when it comes to self sufficiency. They're my teachers.

 

Building around green energy is a lot easier than retrofitting what you've got, and from what I've heard geothermal is the way to go if you can afford it, though it'll cost you thirty grand.

I broke ground on a new kitchen addition for my house a year ago. Now a year later, the foundation's done, the walls are up, and the roof's on, as is the electrical and plumbing rough ins, all of which I did myself (except the foundation). I didn't know a whole lot about carpentry and roofing before, and I made my share of mistakes along the way (nothing too expensive), but I learned a lot in the process, and I saved a boat load of money. It's southern facing, so it gets a lot of light. A buddy of mine talked me out of sky lights, and instead I made the roof rafters extra thick to allow me to insulate the hell out of it. The next step will be solar panels on the roof, and possibly a small wind turbine if I determine that my roof can support it structurally.

The heating guys told me the radiant floor system I'm putting in my new kitchen and retrofitting the rest of the house with won't work, and by the way, they've got something else that will work. I basically told them in a polite way they're full of shit and it's my way or the highway. Then they conceded that it'll work, and the reality was that they're scared of it 'cause they have no experience installing it. I know it'll work, and soon I'll have the hydronics experience they don't have. Imagine me having more experience in hydronics than heating professionals. Maybe I should go into business for myself, lol.

I read somewhere that wood powered the beginning of the industrial revolution. The problem was that the demand for wood on an industrial scale depleted the supply, leaving large areas of the mid-west barren. If you can keep your demand at sustainable levels, you're good to go. Same with biodiesel. I don't see it as something that'll ever be feasible to supply everyone with transportation, but my hat's off to the hobbyists and the town where I live for making it and using it in their commuter buses.

Localization has been good to me. A while back I worked for a big corporation, pigeon holed and limited in the scope of my work, it got downright mundane. Not to mention the political BS, what a pain in the ass to constantly be confronted with justifying my existence to business types who can't see past the next quarter's earnings, and have no appreciation for what I do or what I know. Now I work for a much smaller local company in which each of us wears a variety of hats, we have to to get things done. It's much more interesting and rewarding. I don't get paid as much, but then again it's not about the money, it's about the freedom.

The key to self sufficiency and localization is to be open minded, innovative, and resourceful. It's a mind set, you have to be willing to educate yourself and be adaptive, but the freedom is priceless.

Pardon the rant, I hope someone gets something out of it.

Be well.

 

I think what it all boils down to is that if we all took advantage of the power sources we have LOCALLY, then we would not have to worry about having too much pollution, mountaintop removal, over use of resources, etc. Mining coal in WV for electricity in NY City, for example, is NOT efficient and instantly creates overuse of resources. I am not saying we should try to ban any reasonable energy source (I don't see nuclear energy as being reasonable), just use what you have. Big cities on the coast have access to wind, water, solar, ocean waves, etc. Why do they need Coal from WV or Kentucky? We have an abundance of wood. AND wind, AND water, AND coal. Other places have other things. The possibilities are only limited by imagination. Why couldn't methane be collected from landfills for example? And then there are wonderful experiments involving using certain types of algae that are about 50% oil....

There is no one thing that will work for all. "Consolidation" has probably been the worst thing anyone ever thought of for our civilization! From schools to industry. Bigger is NOT better!!! If we could just live with and use what is available to us, I believe the earth balance would be maintained with minimal harm.

 

Oh, Mellow, I am pretty interested in hydronics. We know someone who is working on installing piping in his new floor. Haven't gotten to see how it works yet.

What I'm thinking is that soon we will be replacing part of our downstairs floor and installing STONE in place of WOOD. We are also planning, about the same time, to purchase a wood cookstove that has the hot water resevoire which you can connect into your plumbing... I NEVER do anything upgrade-wise around here unless it's something that can work WITHOUT electricity, even tho we HAVE electricity. Maybe you can see where I'm going with this. That stone floor will probably get a lot colder in the winter than the wood floor does. Our entire house, and especially the wood floor downstairs, sits on a concrete pad at the base of a hill. An old tractor shed, converted. It has always taken on dampness, and the tongue and groove flooring is heaved up all over the place, especially in summer months when there is no wood fire going. Which is the reason for replacing the worst of it. Maybe you have some ideas.....?

 

Right on. It's the anonymity of globalization that makes it seem so appealing. New Yorkers don't see the mountain top removal in West Virginia, so it's not something they give much thought to. That would be a different story if it was happening in their back yards. That sort of thing never happens in rich peoples' back yards because they have the influence to prevent it. It doesn't seem fair, does it? Yet we could all benefit from knowing that the energy we consume is being produced in our own back yards, then we don't have to feel guilty about it. It makes me uncomfortable to think my energy use might contribute to mountain top removal.

As for hydronics, I dealt with the Radiant Floor Company in Vermont, lotsa good information on their web site, and they're very helpful for do-it-yourselfers, but you can probably get the stuff locally at a plumbing supply store. You could run pex tubing under your stone floor by laying out the pex and pouring a thin concrete subfloor around the pex. That would provide an excellent thermal mass and make it comfortable to walk around barefoot in the winter. If you've got a wood stove you can connect to your plumbing, that would provide a good heat source, but you gotta be careful not to overheat the water in your pex, it's only rated for 120-135 degrees. One way to keep the temperature down is to use a mixing valve like I've got, which bypasses some of the flow from the return to the supply, or a heat exchanger, which is basically a hot water storage tank (or indirect water heater) that takes the hot water from your stove and runs it through a coil to heat the water in your pex. You could also use a hydronic solar panel (versus photovoltaic) for your heat source.

I reckon I got off on a bit of a tangent on this energy bit, but energy seems to be the primary source of most of our problems.