[p2p-research] [Open Manufacturing] Re: do we need to shift to closed systems again?

Wed Mar 4 18:18:15 CET 2009

I never contested that this was a real engineering term. Yet, I still think
it is very poorly, and wrongly  applied to local economies/food systems.

My objection is not ideological, it is about the nature of a local economy,
and the way that the author Michel quoted mis-applied "closed" to the
systems that he was talking about (which are different than the system that
you are talking about)

If he is actually talking about closed technical systems, then I agree with
you that this can apply. That is not what I understood him talking about.

The argument about whether there are closed human societies or not in
general is a different argument altogether.

On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 11:45 AM, Vinay Gupta <hexayurt at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> Sam, I find myself entirely unsure what position you are arguing. If you
> are arguing that there are no "closed" human systems or human societies,
> then I would refer you to:
>
> http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=%22closed+society%22&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
>
> I think you'll find many links there that describe *relatively* closed
> human systems with all kinds of attendant problems and
> undesirable properties.
>
> Similarly, closed loop industrial ecologies do exist: your technical
> nutrients stay in the *closed* system, and do not leak out into the
> environment. Things like this really exist - closed loop coolants in various
> kinds of industrial processes, closed vs. open cycle OTEC systems... closed
> has a technical means: crap, often toxic crap, does not escape into the
> world.
> Closed is a useful property of systems which contain things you do not want
> to spread. Things which are toxic-but-useful - *solvents* are a great
> example - stay in closed systems under ideal conditions.
>
> This is a real engineering term. It is used, every day, in industry, in
> science, even in ecology, to describe a property of systems.
>
> You might not *like* the word "closed" because of one ideological stand or
> another, but I think that if you are going to do any *actual systems
> engineering* you'd do well to actually understand what the term "closed
> system" means and learn to recognize where and when to apply it.
>
> Similarly, if you want to discuss societies, the "open society" vs. "closed
> society" model is one way that people discuss the issues, although it's not
> a way of discussing the issues that I have a particularly
> deep allegiance to, but it is common enough in the field.
>
> Enough ideology, please.
>
> Vinay
>
>
> --
> Vinay Gupta
> Free Science and Engineering in the Global Public Interest
>
> http://guptaoption.com/map - social project connection map
>
> http://hexayurt.com - free/open next generation human sheltering
> http://hexayurt.com/plan - the whole systems, big picture vision
>
> Gizmo Project VOIP : (USA) 775-743-1851
> Skype/Gizmo/Gtalk/AIM: hexayurt
> Twitter: @hexayurt http://twitter.com/hexayurt
> UK Cell : +44 (0) 0795 425 3533 / USA VOIP (+1) 775-743-1851
>
> "If it doesn't fit, force it."
>
> On Mar 4, 2009, at 4:27 PM, Samuel Rose wrote:
>
> Vinay,
>
> You cannot apply engineering systems definitions to humans. That is what I
> am saying. Humans and human systems are not machines.
>
> There are no actual closed loops in human systems.
>
> There are actual closed loops in machines.
>
> That is the difference. Think about it.
>
> It's not "prissy"
>
> It's FACT
>
> On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 6:17 AM, Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Hi Vinay,
>>
>> I understand what you're saying, but words have both a objective, and a
>> political meaning,
>>
>> using closed in this particular context, will have the additional effect
>> of 'closing' some minds to these otherwise necessary ideas,
>>
>> Michel
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 6:22 AM, Vinay Gupta <hexayurt at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>  http://www.google.com/search?q=%22closed+loop+industrial+ecology%22
>>> C'mon guys, this is a precise term of art. It's got an exact meaning,
>>> it's the correct language, it exactly says what it means, which is (to a
>>> significant degree) what we're talking about in this specific thread.
>>>
>>> Let's not be prissy about "closed" - doors can be open or closed, systems
>>> can be open or closed, sometimes you want a closed system. "Open" is not a
>>> panacea word - it's got a precise meaning when paired with source, and
>>> another when paired with "loop." :-)
>>>
>>> Vinay
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Vinay Gupta
>>> Free Science and Engineering in the Global Public Interest
>>>
>>> http://guptaoption.com/map - social project connection map
>>>
>>> http://hexayurt.com - free/open next generation human sheltering
>>> http://hexayurt.com/plan - the whole systems, big picture vision
>>>
>>> Gizmo Project VOIP : (USA) 775-743-1851
>>> Skype/Gizmo/Gtalk/AIM: hexayurt
>>> Twitter: @hexayurt http://twitter.com/hexayurt
>>> UK Cell : +44 (0) 0795 425 3533 / USA VOIP (+1) 775-743-1851
>>>
>>> "If it doesn't fit, force it."
>>>
>>> On Mar 1, 2009, at 6:25 PM, Samuel Rose wrote:
>>>
>>> The author that Michel quotes writes:
>>>
>>> "A closed system means no material imports, no material waste, and
>>> dependence on solar energy."
>>>
>>> This will not be happening in most human systems in our lifetimes, I
>>> contend, and that is my point. It's a dumb picture to paint.
>>>
>>> I understand closed loop, open loop, open and closed systems, etc. I have
>>> background in machining, electronics, and complex systems theory
>>>
>>> The point that I am making is that people will not stop:
>>>
>>>
>>>    1. creating material waste
>>>    2. importing materials
>>>
>>> But, we may *change* the way that we do 1 and 2 above.
>>>
>>> My point of contention is that thinking that people will create "closed
>>> systems" (even closed loop systems) is probably going to turn out to be
>>> wrong.
>>>
>>> What will probably happen with material waste is that it will become
>>> *food* for natural or technological production systems. Some of those
>>> natural and/or tech production systems will not necassarily be local.
>>>
>>> I think you might be surprised by what people on these lists understand.
>>>
>>> On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 12:53 PM, ben lipkowitz <fenn at sdf.lonestar.org>wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> thanks for clearing up the confusion vinay. I think a lot of people on
>>>> these lists don't have a science or engineering background (can you believe
>>>> it?) so the phrase "closed system" or "closed loop" doesn't mean anything to
>>>> them.
>>>>
>>>> if you're looking for alternative words, how about "complete system"
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, 1 Mar 2009, Vinay Gupta wrote:
>>>>
>>>>  closed loop: you don't dump stuff into the environment.
>>>>>
>>>>> open source: your ideas are free to propagate anywhere.
>>>>>
>>>>> Some things you want closed, some things you want open. I don't see a
>>>>> point of contention here.
>>>>>
>>>>> Vinay
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Vinay Gupta
>>>>> Free Science and Engineering in the Global Public Interest
>>>>>
>>>>> http://guptaoption.com/map - social project connection map
>>>>>
>>>>> http://hexayurt.com - free/open next generation human sheltering
>>>>> http://hexayurt.com/plan - the whole systems, big picture vision
>>>>>
>>>>> Gizmo Project VOIP : (USA) 775-743-1851
>>>>> Skype/Gizmo/Gtalk/AIM: hexayurt
>>>>> Twitter: @hexayurt http://twitter.com/hexayurt
>>>>> UK Cell : +44 (0) 0795 425 3533 / USA VOIP (+1) 775-743-1851
>>>>>
>>>>> "If it doesn't fit, force it."
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mar 1, 2009, at 4:59 PM, Samuel Rose wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>  Yes, I mean, I definitely agree with most of what he is saying.
>>>>>> It's a point of contention on language.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think he is trying to emphasize the shift from global to local.
>>>>>> But, putting the metaphor of "closed" in the minds of people is
>>>>>> kind of a step backwards to me, like thinking that we'll start
>>>>>> building walls around our hamlets, and switch to fuedalism. At
>>>>>> least,that is the image that "closed" invokes in my mind.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't think it is going to be like that. Local economies, I mean.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think there will actually be more connectivity among people who
>>>>>> operate in commons-based economies. Resources will be local.  But,
>>>>>> minds, communications, governance, information, knowledge, will be
>>>>>> open.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 2:20 AM, Michel Bauwens
>>>>>> <michelsub2004 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Hi sam,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think that indeed equating local with closed is a recipe for
>>>>>> political disaster  and can only attract reactionary forces ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Michel
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2/27/09, Samuel Rose <samuel.rose at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> 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?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This one is counter-intuitive to me, i.e. Irish localization
>>>>>> advocates are proposing a shift to closed systems of production.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 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/
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> 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/
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> 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/
>>>
>>> --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>>> "Open Manufacturing" group.
>>> To post to this group, send email to openmanufacturing at googlegroups.com
>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>>> openmanufacturing+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com<openmanufacturing%2Bunsubscribe at googlegroups.com>
>>> For more options, visit this group at
>>> http://groups.google.com/group/openmanufacturing?hl=en
>>> -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> 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/
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> p2presearch mailing list
>> p2presearch at listcultures.org
>> http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> 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/
>
>
>

-- 
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/20090304/58528409/attachment-0001.html>