Peak Oil is You
Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)
Page added on February 2, 2014
“The “Impossible” But Inevitable Solution: Decentralization
What lies beyond the current failing, unsustainable versions of Capitalism and Socialism? Decentralization.
Correspondent John D. recently sent in a link to an interview with energy expert and author Jeremy Leggett. The title, “Make no mistake, this is an energy civil war” is a bit sensationalist, but the gist of his point is that centralized control of energy (and the capital that controls the energy and distribution networks) are colliding with new models of decentralized, locally autonomous control and ownership of energy generation and distribution.
Given the immense power of the banking/energy/political Elites that directly benefit from centralization of energy, capital and political power, I term this decentralization solution “impossible.” Yet because it is driven by the diminishing returns of the centralized model and the emergence of the Web as an unstoppable force distributing decentralization and new models, the transition from ossified, failing centralized models to adaptive, faster-better-cheaper decentralized models is also inevitable.
This is the context of Leggett’s view that there is an ‘energy civil war’ between the powers defending centralization and those promoting community ownership and control of energy:
You’ve just published a book called The Energy of Nations. Could you just tell people in a nutshell what they might expect to find in there?
I worry that the energy industry is in the process of repeating systemically the mistakes of the financial sector, and on multiple fronts.
It’s not all bleak because I think the neuroscientists also tell us that we have this great yearning as human beings for community and all the rest of it, and individualistic or selfish, perhaps what people on the right of the political spectrum constantly try and persuade us that we are. That all points towards the possibility of a road to renaissance and that’s why I titled the book The Energy of Nations: Risk Blindness and the Road to Renaissance. I talk about the importance of things like the Transition movement as the building blocks for this road to renaissance.
What can we learn from Germany, do you think in terms of practicality and in terms of ambition?
I think that it’s altogether very encouraging indeed. We can learn that it’s possible to renewably power a modern economy like Germany 100% with renewables, and do it much quicker than people anticipate. We can also see that the ownership structures can change radically, so that people power comes into the mainstream. As you know, more than half the renewable assets in Germany are owned by people, by people and communities.
That’s not just the small energy co-ops that are being set up by the multiple hundreds, but whole cities are talking about taking their own power into their own hands, even Berlin, with a membership movement to take control of the way that energy is created in cities. Germany is vital in the whole narrative going forward.
You talk about a localisation mega-trend and peer-to-peer lending and community-led initiatives like Transition and others, need to sit alongside the bigger things as well in terms of investment etc. How do you see those two things sitting alongside each other?
I think inevitably what’s going to happen whether people like it or not, is that communities, towns, individual houses are going to get themselves off that grid and the march of technology is going to help them. People and communities are going to become increasingly self-sufficient. When you do that, where’s the role for the national electricity grid, at a certain point? Where’s the role for a giant company like National Grid?
I think it’s an exciting vision, because you get all sorts of spin-off benefits from a transition of that kind. I don’t have a blueprint template of how we get from A to B, the globalised national, international infrastructure world to the localised world. I think that’s a work in progress that we’re all going to have to be active players.”
You say at one point in The Energy of Nations, “I’m now convinced that capitalism as we know it is torpedoing our prosperity, killing our economies, threatening our children with an unliveable world. It needs to be re-engineered root and branch.” Does capitalism still have a place? What would re-engineered capitalism look like, and what does that mean for economic growth?
It depends on your definition of capitalism. Economic growth as it’s currently measured? I think its days are over. That used to be that the mantras of the people classified as the lunatic fringe, but not any more. You can read this kind of thinking in the commentary in the Financial Times. In a world with a global economy on route to six degrees, how can such a system be viewed as sane any more, much less survivable?
The more of us who start using this language, this new type of capitalism – others won’t call it capitalism at all of course – a new type of capitalism. Certainly my point in the book is that modern capitalism, the form of capitalism that’s evolved in the last few decades is basically suicidally dysfunctional and we have to turn our backs on it and introduce an alternative set of systems. That’s what I think we have the opportunity to do in building the road to renaissance.”
The interview also raised the same question I have discussed in the Musings and blog: What lies beyond the current failing, unsustainable versions of Capitalism and Socialism? I think the basic answer is coming into focus: since the current iterations of Capitalism and Socialism are both systems of increasing centralization (and thus of systemic fragility), the future belongs to the Web-enabled, localized but globally networked models of decentralized capital, currencies, ownership, production and distribution.
As I have noted before: Central planning perfects the power of threats to bypass the system’s defenses.
Charles Hugh-Smith of OfTwoMinds blog
27 Comments on "“The “Impossible” But Inevitable Solution: Decentralization"
Davy, Hermann, MO on Sun, 2nd Feb 2014 3:45 pm
Just ask Kunstler about decentralization and he will mention that everything organized in a big way will begin to fail. Inevitably we will default to a lower level of complexity and organization. I imagine the web will begin to be intermittent and unreliable at a point. This will make the grass roots effort to bypass centralized control difficult.
Northwest Resident on Sun, 2nd Feb 2014 4:06 pm
“…the form of capitalism that’s evolved in the last few decades is basically suicidally dysfunctional.”
Obviously.
Davy — I read somewhere that keeping the world wide internet going consumes about 10% of our daily energy production. All those thousands and thousands of servers sucking energy, along with all the many thousands of industrial scale air conditioners required to keep all those servers cooled down — that takes a lot of coal and other fossil fuels. And what is about 90% of the internet used for — porn — at least that’s what I read somewhere else, and it seems very likely to me. Social media takes up almost all of the rest. Point is, if we kicked pornography and all other commercial activity off of the internet and scaled down to just education, news and discussion forums then in my opinion the internet would still be maintainable — especially if everybody everywhere goes to wireless satellite connectivity. I can actually imagine a point in time “post-collapse” where children get a major part of their education off of the internet, and the local governments use the internet to teach their citizens how to grow food and do other necessary things (compost, collect water, make yarn, shoe a horse, etc…), as well as make public service announcements to keep the “local community” all on the same page. It probably won’t be a situation where everybody has their own computer as it currently is, but there will locally established “neighborhood hook-ups” where people congregate to get online. Being a web development software guy, that would be my idea of “utopia” — !!
ghung on Sun, 2nd Feb 2014 4:42 pm
NR – Our local school system has gone to ‘cloud based’, bookless education this year, as are many other school systems. One could envision that the internet’s demise will occur shortly after all of the textbook producers are out of business. Seems we keep burning bridges on our road to the future. Perhaps we preppers should be collecting old textbooks.
As for ‘…there will [be] locally established “neighborhood hook-ups”…”, our internet connection is through a small, local provider via a system of long-range wifi; essentially a local WAN. The owner is having a hard time competing with the big telecom, and focuses on servicing more remote customers who don’t have DSL or cable available. He puts small repeaters on mountain tops and the customer has a small dish pointed at the nearest LOS repeater.
When the big corporations begin to withdraw from less profitable markets, and their systems fall into disrepair, this will be a more local solution to connectivity. Of course, there are also the problems of connecting to the WWW, and equipment availability. Not sure how that will play out. At some point we may go back to the holler system, yodelling from holler to holler 😉
rollin on Sun, 2nd Feb 2014 5:36 pm
Yes, I agree that we are moving to a volatile system of knowledge. Wtihout getting into how useful the knowledge is, electronic media and storage is delicate at best and can disappear very quickly at worst.
Luckily we still have libraries that contain real books, periodicals, scientific papers, etc. Combine that with private holdings and it would not be a hugely difficult task to access previous knowledge. All you need is sunlight to read a book, not specialized electronics and software.
GregT on Sun, 2nd Feb 2014 6:10 pm
Modern technologies used in food production, pharmaceuticals, electric power generation, transportation, computers, consumer electronics, etc., are all reliant on fossil fuels. When fossil fuels are no longer a viable option, all of these technologies will disappear.
Of course fossil fuels could be around for another generation or so, but it would appear that the implications of that, would be far worse than the loss of technologies.
Northwest Resident on Sun, 2nd Feb 2014 6:27 pm
Early Sunday morning, still dreaming… I like to think that TPTB (military, political elite, “intelligence” agency heads, industry moguls, etc…) collectively have a “plan” to reboot civilization after the inevitable collapse. That “new world” will require energy of course, but if we collapse soon enough rather than dragging BAU out until the last bitter drop of accessible oil is sucked out of the ground, then there could still be plenty of fossil fuel left to run a new world order on (still lots of untapped “easy to get” oil in Iraq, for example). Well, that’s MY dream.
Everybody else seems to think that the we will just drag BAU out until the bitter end, and I admit that it could very well end up going that way. But if I was a multi-billionaire industry mogul and I was sitting around sipping cognac and smoking Cuban cigars with my equals and my small but trusted group of henchmen (generals, CIA/NSA heads, president, etc…), then I would be talking about the need to bring the curtain down before we waste the planet and doom our species to eating bugs and living in the mud — before its too late.
Well, coffee needs a refresh. Gotta get in the Super Bowl mood — GO SEATTLE!
Davy, Hermann, MO on Sun, 2nd Feb 2014 7:55 pm
Northwest Resident on Sun, 2nd Feb 2014 4:06 pm
90% of the internet used for — porn
Yea, the reality of porn is a huge amount of fossil fuel burning. So if we all abstain we will be able to solve the climate change problem. If it was only so easy
I think the instability of the grid and the net will be a major issue at some point. The issue of spam, porn, social media, movies, and other so called non essentials may need to be rationed. The issue though is economies of scale. The net has become affordable because of all these extras. It is similar with electronic devises. We have affordability of many essential electronic devises because of all the Nintendo’s and Xboxes. We further see this on the grid with the financial instability caused by renewables destroying a once stable market. You now have very large systems with huge sunk costs struggling to cope with market share loss. While we are at it there have been studies on fuel restrictions. It seems that a 10% reduction in fuel supply will lead to a 50% reduction in discretionary transport so all the essential services can function. The loss of use in so many areas is awaiting us. It is far from clear how this will play out. I doubt completely rationally especially if it means messing with porn or football.
Northwest Resident on Sun, 2nd Feb 2014 8:19 pm
Davy, I agree with your assessments. And I’ll add, that when people can no longer get their porn over the internet (especially those “red” states that account for the vast majority of internet porn usage, with Utah ranked #1 in porn downloads), then the world as we know it will have truly come to an end.
We should keep in mind that the internet in its infancy was essentially a tool for educators and military — a way for those individuals to create a repository of research, and to provide a method for communication and collaboration between individuals and groups separated by great distances. At that point, the internet consumed about 0.000001 percent of world energy production, and it can do so again.
Theoretically, if collapse occurred tomorrow and then after a couple of months or so those who survived woke up one day to find the world population around a few million or so (give or take), there would be literally millions of unused computers and spare computer parts laying around. The satellites are already up there. There would be nearly a “forever” supply of spare components to keep a relative few web servers and client computers going. And with the worldwide energy consumption cut by about 99.999%, there would be more than enough oil/fossil fuels to keep the survivors and their descendants going for a long, long, long time — assuming strict controls were put in place to limit population growth.
But hey, I’m an optimist. That no doubt contributes to my thinking the way I do.
Hey ghung — no need to yodel and holler. What about smoke signals?? I have a lot of American Indian blood in me from both sides of my family, so if I survive collapse, I’m sure that smoke signaling will be “in my genes” — should come easy… 🙂
J-Gav on Sun, 2nd Feb 2014 8:28 pm
Ghung – Good idea! I think I’ll bone up on my yodeling.
Interview: “We can learn that’s it’s possible to renewably power a modern economy like Germany 100% with renewables …” That’s an utter absurdity! We have learned nothing of the sort. Germany is to be lauded for its efforts but they are now in the process of increasing coal consumption to make up for the shortfall (in terms of both cost and reliability) from renewables. On the other hand, I’m pretty much on board regarding the decentralization theme. Not that it will be easy to pull off – there will be lots of obstacles tossed in the way by TPTB, call them ‘elite IEDs’ if you like, in order to maintain their low-wage prerogatives over the unwashed masses crazy for a job, any job,even if it doesn’t yield a living wage, much less benefits …
J-Gav on Sun, 2nd Feb 2014 8:31 pm
NW – Now you’ve got me confused. I was going for yodeling and then you suggest smoke signals … I’ve got some Cherokee blood in me myself so maybe I’ll have to look into that too.
GregT on Sun, 2nd Feb 2014 9:10 pm
” The satellites are already up there.”
And everyone should know, what goes up, must come down. Which is precisely what they have been doing, and will continue to do. I wonder how much fossil fuel energy is required to put one satellite into orbit? Energy that will be needed for other more mundane things, like food production.
I would like to believe that some form of tech is in our future, but at the moment, I’m more focused on other stuff, like clothing, food preservatives, hand tools, seeds, books, batteries, and light bulbs. I’m not expecting others to take care of me, I’m sure everyone will be busy enough trying to take care of themselves.
DC on Sun, 2nd Feb 2014 9:15 pm
IoW, simplify. Now there are basically 2 routes to simplification for a complex society.
One, is the INvoluntary simplification, AKA collapse. The details, length and circumstances of the INvoluntary simplification may vary, but collapses themselves have repeated themselves over and over though history.
Second, is the voluntary simplification*. Joseph Tainter was asked a few years back if from his research if he knew of any societies from his research that had taken that route and voluntarily simplified when given a choice to do so, His reply was instructive.
He said, “No, he wasnt aware of any”.
So there you have it.
*It is far easier for individuals to simplify than society itself. But I think its important to remember, even when individuals DO simplify, they often remain dependant in many ways on the larger, complex society remaining intact itself. Its a dilemma for which no ‘easy’ solution exists.
Davy, Hermann, MO on Mon, 3rd Feb 2014 1:10 am
DC on Sun, 2nd Feb 2014 9:15 pm
My thoughts exactly. Ant idea on managed de-growth except around the edges is unlikely. Collapse or revolution is the only route to simplification.
Communities and individuals can and should simplify to the extent practical. One could also pitch the idea of live life to the fullest now. I would advocate a mix of the two.
Makati1 on Mon, 3rd Feb 2014 1:11 am
GregT touched on the weak link in the internet chain, satellites. When the SHTF, or long before, those satellites will begin to disappear. If they are not all shot down in a war. Remember China is able to do that and, I am sure Russia and the US.
And, even if they do not, it takes literally thousands of actual people to man/repair the many thousands of pieces of hardware around the world. Those people are all supported by the excess energy we still have. And there may be many unused computers around, but they will be useless anyway.
Keep believing, techies, but your church is slowly crumbling and will come tumbling down in the next few decades.
As for books, I am building my own library for my neighbors kids and theirs. I have school books from 1st grade on and add to it reference books on practical things Biology, chemistry, etc. when I can. I get a lot of books in the used book bins at a small fraction of their original cost and they are just as good as a new one. I hope to have a library that can take someone through science and math to at least college level. What’s in YOUR library? Town libraries may not survive the chaos years.
Makati1 on Mon, 3rd Feb 2014 1:14 am
BTW: If you are expecting sanity/compassion from the elite, you are smoking something really good. Most of them are way past midlife and headed for the bone pile in a few years. They don’t give a damn about the future. Many are over 70 and living on borrowed time. Look at the Fortune 400 if you don’t beleive me. Most will be gone in 20 years.
Simon on Mon, 3rd Feb 2014 1:26 pm
The internet will be one of the last things to go.
Remove the internet and computers, now tell me what major advances we have in the last 30 years.
Can we fly passengers supersonic ?
Do we send people to the moon ?
We need to keep the illusion of major advances, not just tinkering (wasnt the internal combustion engine invented > 100 years ago)
Davy, Hermann, MO on Mon, 3rd Feb 2014 1:38 pm
Makati1 on Mon, 3rd Feb 2014 1:14 am
Yea, I talk to my parents about these things. I think I have persuaded them through rationality. Their alternative news is FOX puke. They say they are almost done. They believe they earned it. I am a 1960’s baby so I am closing in on those years. I care though. Why are these people that are the product of the so called great generation not show more caring? Their parents went through the depression so you would think they may have listened to the old stories. This generation now in their late 50’s to 80’s had the best life could offer generally. They are also the ones that shit in the nest and knew it! In the 70’s and 80’s the fact of life where being discovered i.e. climate change, limits of growth, and pollution. They chose to pursue the good life and pursue Ponzi scheme economics. I am generalizing but a vast majority of the so called well to do in this age group don’t give a damn. They blame the poor for being poor. They blame the rest of the world for anti-Americanism. Climate change is a conspiracy to many of this group. I might mention I see so many of the millennial generation lost. I am going to step out on a limb here but I am seeing a dumbing down of the population. The new generation is more worried about gaming or buying stuff to care? That leaves the in between to make a difference and there is not enough to make a voice heard
Makati1 on Mon, 3rd Feb 2014 2:57 pm
Davy, you seem to see the true picture, unlike Simon who believes that the internet is going to out last most everything else. Perhaps he should read this:
http://22billionenergyslaves.blogspot.com/search?updated-min=2011-12-31T15:00:00-08:00&updated-max=2012-03-13T22:24:00%2B01:00&max-results=18&start=7&by-date=false
… then think about the current world situation. The more complex a system, the more likely it will fail and fail spectacularly. Look at the world financial system for example. Or globalization where a Fukushima incident shuts down factories in many countries for months. We live in a fragile world, and it is teetering on the edge of the abyss.
Davy, Hermann, MO on Mon, 3rd Feb 2014 3:14 pm
Makati1 on Mon, 3rd Feb 2014 2:57 pm
Davy, you seem to see the true picture, unlike Simon who believes that the internet is going to out last
I am with you on the internet. It’s days of reliability and increasing speed and power are number. The pressure is on several fronts with one being the resources needed. The other important consideration is freedom barriers. We see what the smucks at the NSA are doing to the freedoms the net offers. There are the traditional restrictions from China to Iran. I imagine as the world starts to come apart we will see crisis after crisis with the internet. This will not be limited to the net. The same will be true of the cell phone system and satellite tv. Like Makati says: “We live in a fragile world, and it is teetering on the edge of the abyss.” “complex a system, the more likely it will fail and fail spectacularly”
Simon on Mon, 3rd Feb 2014 4:14 pm
Hi
I said ‘one of the last things’ not ‘the last thing’ .
Its bread and circuses, as Peak Oil contracts peoples lives, they will need more distraction, to prevent civil unrest.
The internet carries TV/Radio/Games
entertainment for the masses.
There may come a time when its uses are scaled way down, but by then … there will not be a forum to say ‘told you so’
GregT on Mon, 3rd Feb 2014 4:52 pm
The internet is very energy intensive, and relies on great complexity. It will be one of the first things to go, as energy and complexity are exactly what our societies are about to lose. Bread and circus (well at least circus) can be supported for a very long time, at very little expense, with a very small energy input. OTA ( over the air ) TV is available in most urban areas already, it is free, and is even broadcast in full 1080P HD. I know, because it is the only TV that I ‘subscribe’ to.
Bread, not so much, with dwindling energy resources, and the associated continued downturn in economic activity, food is going to be the biggest issue going forward. Learn how to provide for yourself, or face the consequences of relying on others to take care of you. Not a good plan, or perhaps even more appropriate, no plan at all.
Simon on Mon, 3rd Feb 2014 5:04 pm
Hi Greg
Good point about the complexity, but the internet does not necessarily need wires, and can be broadcast.
to lose the internet, you will also lose the phone system, they are now synonymous, and your phone line even uses internet trunking (you could say vice versa though)
I live in france, and here there are plans to essentially turn the entire department (state/county) into one big WiFi zone.
I also have the ability to push/pull via satellite, or pull from satellite and push over wire.
Whilst satellite does require REM and complexity, we will be able to organize for a long time.
Sending a single satellite into orbit to service the whole of europe (pushing entertainment/internet signal) seems a lot cheaper (man power/ resources) than trying to maintain N Kilometres of line and stations.
Whilst in general you are correct about complexity and resources, the biggest limiter will be the client.
Meaning the experience will degrade as the client necessarily either gets thinner or at least does not get fatter.
Yes, I am in IT, and a Geek 🙂
Northwest Resident on Mon, 3rd Feb 2014 5:49 pm
That’s pretty much the point I was trying to make, Simon. I’m like you, “in IT”, actually I’m a web developer (currently working with C#.NET, AJAX, REST, JavaScript, ASP.NET, Bootstrap, etc…). I’ve spent the last 20 or so years working with or on the internet, and I’m here to boldly predict that some scaled-down version of the internet WILL continue to exist post-collapse. Governments and military will use it to spread information and propaganda — guaranteed. When none of us have gas or cars or cell phones anymore, there will still be a web server somewhere in the vicinity that has some information for us, all we have to do is go down to the local “internet café” to log in and connect to whatever they want us to know.
Simon on Mon, 3rd Feb 2014 6:09 pm
Hi NR
I concur, I guess, I was positing a slow slide to poverty rather than a quick jump.
I can program internet based stuff, but mainly honking great iSeries IBM stuff.
Either way, I have two horses and we are now learning to plough and haul wood etc. Good fun, and if there is a problem I can always put bread on the table and haul timber
GregT on Mon, 3rd Feb 2014 8:00 pm
“the biggest limiter will be the client”
And when the ‘client’ can no longer afford to pay for the maintenance, or the infrastructure, I doubt very much that people all over will be going to work to deliver the internet for free. Military perhaps, but even that will fall off as the tax base subsides.
I also ‘used’ to be in IT. More hardware, and networking oriented. I have been on the net since FTP, pre colour monitors, and graphics. I would also consider myself a techno-geek, believe it or not. I have more hardware at home at the moment, than I am sure most people have owned in their lives, and I love tinkering with it.
I would have a difficult time with giving up the net, that said, I still believe that it’s days are numbered. IMHO, we are heading back in time, way back.
Good for you Simon, horses are awesome. We used to breed and race them years back. I miss them.
Simon on Tue, 4th Feb 2014 9:10 am
Hi Greg
I meant the PC or device that you use to access the web, as this gets more and more expensive I reckon you will see a level of ‘convergence’ so less devices are needed, then only one, at that point I would imagine a raspberry pi deal super cheap super small allowing access to the internet and streaming, but limited ‘experience’
We shall see.
Yep, the girls are pretty cool, although muddy and bored (we havent been out in 3 weeks), we have a couple of haflingers, built solid 🙂
platinumshore on Sun, 15th May 2016 3:02 am
German energy model is a success if you mean taxpayers are allowed to bail it out… it’s like saying peak oil was nonsense while energy speculators keep the funding going despite net energy realities, speculators bail out the reality, now we have taxpayers bailing out the failure of the german model.