[p2p-research] do we need to shift to closed systems again?

Fri Feb 27 16:52:08 CET 2009

Hmmm....

I think it is a real mistake to call these systems "closed".

"Local" is better. I totally agree that we need what he is talking about. I
just think his systems-language is off.

In fact, I think what he is talking about is what Janine Beynus calls "Type
2" and "Type 3" systems.
http://www.massivechange.com/2006/07/11/janine-benyus-interview-october-14-2003/

Our systems are now largely centered around what Beynus calls "Type 1"
ecology, which is part of natural cycles. It is a mass/monoculture system
based on rapid growth. After a damaging forest fire, this is the ecology
that emerges.

In nature, systems tend to move to towards a "permaculture", Shrubs and then
trees grow and establish a more permanent system that is far more self
sustaining. Conversion of sunlight into resources is increased, biodiversity
is increased. Much of the activity happens "locally", but there are larger
regional systems, and even global systems which are affected by the local
system, and vice-versa. This larger regional/global system scale is
something that we tend to ignore, because it's temporal pace is different
than systems that have emerged on human-sense scales. (of course, they are
getting a lot of attention now that climate change is happening).

There is no closed living system, including any human system, in my opinion.
People would be better off understanding the nature of things this way, then
going along thinking that what some people describe as "local" means
"closed". This may seem frivilous. But in my opinion, it is important that
people understand the nature of what they are looking at.

On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 9:50 PM, Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com>wrote:

> Dear friends,
>
> I'm publishing this on march 4,
> http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/do-we-need-closed-systems-for-lean-economies/2009/03/04,
> from the full original at
> http://www.feasta.org/documents/review2/fleming.htm
>
> Counter-intuitively, these localization advocates propose a return to
> 'closed' systems of production.
>
> Reactions would be most appreciated, for publication as comments on the
> blog as well,
>
> Michel
>
> Do we need closed systems for lean economies?<http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/?p=2509>
>
>  This one is counter-intuitive to me, i.e. Irish localization advocates
> are proposing a shift to closed systems of production<http://www.feasta.org/documents/review2/fleming.htm>
> .
>
> Reactions from ‘open advocates’ would be very welcome.
>
> *David Fleming:*
>
> *“Lean thinking, adapted to this context, is about establishing and
> sustaining a closed system which provides food, water, energy and materials
> from local resources and, as far as possible, conserves and renews these
> primary assets in the local economy. A closed system means no material
> imports, no material waste, and dependence on solar energy. Well, you cannot
> get completely closed systems in human affairs, except on the scale of the
> planet as a whole, but, on a local scale, you can get very much closer than
> we are at present.*
>
> *A closed system in the case of food requires fertility to be retained
> locally - that is, not only nitrogen, phosphates and potash - but the
> micronutrients too. If conserved as capital, composted and used again and
> again, fertility - including human waste - can be more than simply
> sustained; it can be built up towards the extraordinarily high local yields
> achieved by such virtuosos of food production as Alan Chadwick and John
> Jeavons.*
>
> *You don’t have to do this, quite, with water, because it rains, of
> course, though we will have to get used to droughts as global warming
> intensifies, but even in a rainy climate, a local economy needs to maintain,
> shall we say, a conservation system in its use of water. Among the reasons
> for this - first, lean production will use aquaculture, which is a more
> productive food system than the soil; secondly, permaculture, which loves
> closed, circular systems, typically has a central place for water - for
> instance, the pond is habitat for water weeds, that fertilise the land, that
> grows the food, which is attacked by slugs, that are eaten by the ducks,
> that live in the pond, and fertilise the water weeds. Water has a way of
> connecting things up. One immensely effective form of it is the Japanese
> Aigamo method for rice production. It can be many times more productive, for
> a given area of land, than the most high-tech agriculture.*
>
> *In the case of energy, closed systems do not really apply since they are
> defined in terms of materials, and energy takes a one-way ticket from the
> sun to dissipation in the form of low-level heat. But the principle is
> similar, because the Lean Economy is built on “solar string” technologies -
> that is, various forms of renewable energy derived ultimately from the sun,
> and strung out in a minigrid in which every member of the grid is generator,
> user or storage depot as opportunity offers.*
>
> *A minigrid uses the full range of technologies including solar, wind,
> water and biomass, conserving energy through the use of the benign army of
> emerging energy technologies that is on the way. It stores energy with the
> use of media such as hydrogen, biomass, supercapacitors, flywheels, ceramics
> and pumped storage. It uses information technology to manage demand. And the
> giant users of energy - transport and industry, and houses that leak energy
> - are not, and cannot be, part of that world.*
>
> *The stabilised Lean Economy gives a sharp and very ambitious meaning to
> energy efficiency. Changes in behaviour, including (for example) a
> drastically reduced dependency on transport, could reduce the demand for
> energy-services by two thirds (a factor of 3); and energy efficiency - the
> energy services provided by a kilowatt of energy - could be improved by as
> much. That multiplies up to a 90 percent improvement - or a demand for just
> 10 percent of the energy we use now - and that is well within the capability
> of renewables.*
>
> *Figure 6. The Carbon Budget for Domestic Tradable Quotas is defined over
> ten years: the first five years (the Commitment) cannot be changed; the
> second five years is set in advance but can be revised. There is then a ten
> year “forecast” which gives guidance on the scale of the reduction that can
> be expected in the future. The budget represents a guarantee that reduction
> targets are met and it enables people to make informed preparation for it.
> *
>
> *The transition will require energy rationing. There is an electronic
> rationing system for energy called Domestic Tradable Quotas (DTQs) which
> uses information technology to distribute fair access to fossil fuels,
> guaranteeing that a year-on-year budget for reduced consumption is achieved.
> The DTQ budget looks like this (figure 6). It is the basis for a
> step-by-step decline in emissions of carbon dioxide from all fossil fuels.
> This is, I would argue, the only way of achieving equitable allocation of
> the declining access to fuel that we will face in the near future. It will
> need to be a national scheme, firmly based on a strong sense of national
> solidarity. And its significance extends beyond energy. A decisive and
> persistent reduction in energy use could provide the pathway by which our
> present day economy can achieve the transition - a massive achievement it
> would be, if it happened - to the stabilised Lean Economy.*“
>
>
> --
> Working at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhurakij_Pundit_University -
> http://www.dpu.ac.th/dpuic/info/Research.html -
> http://www.asianforesightinstitute.org/index.php/eng/The-AFI
>
> Volunteering at the P2P Foundation:
> http://p2pfoundation.net  - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net -
> http://p2pfoundation.ning.com
>
> Monitor updates at http://del.icio.us/mbauwens
>
> The work of the P2P Foundation is supported by SHIFTN,
> http://www.shiftn.com/
>

-- 
Sam Rose
Social Synergy
Tel:+1(517) 639-1552
Cel: +1-(517)-974-6451
AIM: Str9960
Linkedin Profile: https://www.linkedin.com/in/samrose
skype: samuelrose
email: samuel.rose at gmail.com
http://socialsynergyweb.org/network
http://socialmediaclassroom.com
http://localfoodsystems.org
http://openfarmtech.org
http://notanemployee.net
http://communitywiki.org

"Long ago, we brought you all this fire.
Do not imagine we are still chained to that rock...."

http://notanemployee.net/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/attachments/20090227/299a1cf5/attachment.html>