permaculture

["John Schinnerer" <john@eco-living.net>]

Aloha,

> Would you think that in the world of tomorrow there will be no people like
> him? Or do you think it's a market someone had better address on a more
> sustainable basis because if we don't, it'll be addressed on the usual
> wasteful and destructive basis.

I don't care how it's addressed - I don't think the whole scenario is
sustainable in any case.  I don't really care how long into the near
future it can be perpetuated by various slighty less wasteful but no less
dehumanizing technologies.

The end of the petrol binge approaching really is like that - like an
addict going through withdrawal - denial, desperate attempts to "quit"
without actually quitting, excuses and rationalizations and
justifications, lying and cheating and stealing and abusing people in a
desperate attempt to keep living the lie.

I sometimes agree with - was it Edward Abbey? - anyhow, the "let's just
burn it up the sooner the better so we can move on" approach.

On the flipside of that I like the "highest use" approach, which means
something as rare, powerful and difficult to obtain as petroleum would
never be foolishly wasted pushing individual people around in heavy metal
cages at 10% efficiency with toxic emissions, or making zillions of pieces
of throwaway plastic product packaging or movie spin-off action figures or
even "Mobility Barbie" dolls.

One last try - my core question is, does the systemic nature of the energy
source *empower people* to make their own (local and appropriate) choices,
or does it keep them from doing so?

> It is precisely because people's patterns are going to stay
> predictably the same that we have a known market we (humankind) must meet
> with an acceptable product.

"...must meet??"  I have no obligation to meet anyone's wasteful needs.  I
don't think "we" do either, but aside from myself it's up to the rest of
"we" to decide for themselves.  and hey, no product, no waste...

> I'm trying to get a handle on your strenuous objection. If you can turn
> back the clock in your own life to a gentler time, excellent, go to it.

I'm trying to understand why you frame my comments in your terms of
"turning back the clock."  I'm not proposing any such action (it's not
strictly possible anyhow).  I am pondering ways to support human
life/comfort once the petrol binge (which is necessary to create hydrogen
energy technology in the first place) is over.

I am also seeing no likely change in the status quo for the vast majority
of human beings from spending time and money on hydrogen energy
technology.  I'd rather use those resources to support basic human needs
for lots and lots and lots of people than waste them on toys for a small
minority who are already well off (materially, at least...).

> Please anticipate that the rest of the world
> needs something easy to buy locally that will run their chain saws,
> motor bikes, dump trucks, clock radios and computers.

Wants, not needs.  Anyhow, there are plenty of people doing that already. 
They're all in for a rude shock one of these decades.

> It's a market that someone is going to fill, with some
> portable, inexpensive fuel.

So what?  Not my table.  Let them at it, if they can. And, only until they
can't any more.

> I'm just being a realist.

Me too, only with different assumptions and intentions

cheers,
John S.



John Schinnerer, MA
-------------------------
- Eco-Living -
Cultural & Ecological Designing
People - Place - Learning - Integration
john@eco-living.net
http://eco-living.net