Log in

No account? Create an account


« previous entry | next entry »
Apr. 26th, 2006 | 03:16 pm

In hanging out with some of the green party/peak oil types, there's always been something that's bothered me--here tends to be a noticable anti-technology bias. I stumbled across a copy of Wired magazines look a Patrick Moore who helped founded greenpiece but is now a sustanability consultant for big business, which suggests he decided to move from being against development toward sustainabile development.

The peak oil activists that I've met are into relocalization by encouraging people to develope 19th century skills, gardening, sewing, pottery making, etc. (And that's more technology that a few I've met who think that Eden was when humans were hunter gatherers).

I'm all for relocalization and distributing the means of production as widely as possible, but I'd rather be using desktop fabbers and decentralized community networks (like seattle wireless).

I even agree with the idea that technology wont save us from the various global catastrophies that we're facing. We really do need to include social change, we need to replace the throw away society with one where everything is reused (somehow).

In the US we could really stand to be less worshipful of the car and start switching to some more energy efficient transportation options like bicycles, trains, skateboards, rollerblades, walking, neighborhood electric vehicles and hyper efficient small cars.

Some time ago I heard an idea that there was actually a large swath of american society that was against change. The cultural conservatives were trying to reverse social change, and large chunks of the green types were trying to reverse technological change. But in both cases they're trying to return to some imagined golden age.

If there's anything all of my reading of about various future scenarios has left me with, is that the fealing that future is going to be radically different from today.

Link | Leave a comment |

Comments {3}

[you'll find a light, find a friend, find a way]

(no subject)

from: artemii
date: Apr. 26th, 2006 11:07 pm (UTC)

i think so many peak oil people are focused on those kinds of skills because they assume that the things we depend on today (e.g., transportation of goods, coal-fueled electricity [the latter of which, i know, is much bigger out here in the east of the u.s. than it is in the part you're in]) won't be around as much, if at all, once oil scarcity starts increasing.

i do also think, though, that more generally, many emphatic environmentalists are fairly anti-technology.

Reply | Thread

Diane Trout

(no subject)

from: alienghic
date: Apr. 26th, 2006 11:41 pm (UTC)

It's certainly true that transportation and plastics would be affected by peak oil, but we could be rolling out wind and solar thermal electrical power plants right now for prices that are fairly competitive with fossil fuel power plants.

We might not have a good alternative to oil, but we don't have to give up electricity.

Just to share something amusing hamster powered night-light even hamsters can make electricity.

Reply | Parent | Thread

her other side

(no subject)

from: saltbox
date: Apr. 27th, 2006 05:06 am (UTC)

The treehugger webzine isn't too anti-technology.

Reply | Thread