X-VMS-To: SAIT$INET::"biosph-l@ubvm.cc.buffalo.edu"
Note: Mail transport via Digital Equipment of Canada Ltd. Calgary gateway.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.biosph-l
Date:         Fri, 24 Jul 1992 16:02:00 MST
Reply-To:     JALOVE@ADMN.SAIT.AB.CA
From:         JALOVE@ADMN.SAIT.AB.CA
Subject:      Electricity and Capitalism
X-To:         biosph-l@ubvm.cc.buffalo.edu

Marianne Dugan writes:
  > Isn't necessity the mother of invention?  Isn't that more than an
  > empty cliche?  If I want to take a shower and I also want to do
  > my laundry, I know that (given my old home's quirky plumbing) I
  > must wait a bit between each function, or -- not enough water.

Jeremy writes
>>If your washer or toilet didn't work because the water pressure was too low,
>>you wouldn't waste much time asking your civic leaders to install another
>>water tower or bigger pumps.  If this were a continuing problem, you'd
>>probably consider moving to a different municipality.

Actally I think I'd get a different washer or a new toilet, but the general
public, who are "convienence junkies" would scream to city hall for a new
water tower (with no increase in taxes to pay for it, of course).

The city of Vernon BC, which had water flow problems, dealt with it in this
manner.  They made water metres maditory (A lot of cities in Canada still have
a flat rate all you can use system) .

When the city worker comes to put in the
metre he installs one of those partial flush devices in all the toilets,
installs low flow heads on all taps and showers, for free.

They believe they can drop water usage by 1/3 and eventually save money.

>>Electricity is not a luxury; it's a means of economic life.  The more stable a
>>region's electricity supply is, the more stable its economy is.

If the region is based upon large-scale manufacturing. ie. Hamilton?

A company can also stabalize it's energy supplies by using less.  The smaller
a companies energy needs are, the easier it is to fill those needs.

>>Conservation is necessary, but it must be pursued in other ways.  The fact
>>that this is very difficult, and hence very expensive, is exactly what I've
>>been saying on this list for a long time now.  You can't compute the cost of
>>conservation just by adding up the cost of, for example, replacment
>>energy-efficient bulbs.  You must also add in the cost of the campaign to
>>convince the user to buy those bulbs.

This may be true but it may point out a faultly way of implementing
conservation, not that conservation is faulty.

What should be do is set in motion the forces that will bring about the
changes be desire.  A small example follows.
Why don't we just tax the heck out of the old bulbs and use the money to
subsidize the efficient ones.  Economics would take care of rest.

>>This is what Ontario Hydro has done
>>with its 25-year plan, in which they plan to conserve about 9000 MW by 2014,
>>and this is why this part of the plan is the most expensive.

So the Ontario government is going about it the wrong way, if they hired
you to run a conservation plan what would you do.  I know that you are not
keen on conservation and see nuclear plants a solution to the problem, but
if conservation is the selected solution how would you go about reducing
demand.

>>When I see them making new plans to reduce supply voltage, I am not suprised,
>>but very disappointed.

I think your cynisism maybe stifling your creativity Jeremy.

***************
TO ANOTHER ITEM
***************
From: altman@AMETHYST.BUCKNELL.EDU
Subject: electric power

Ken Meinken writes:
>such hysterics remind me of the assertions back in the 1970s that said the
 world would run out of oil >within 5-10 years.  For a >comodity that is heavily
 influecnced by supply/demand, it's interesting that before tax cost of gasoline
 is cheaper now that it was >in 1978! (sic)

Ken, Ken, Keeeen ... hysterical? I think not.

It is a fact that the oil industry, at least in western Canada, is winding
down.  A few thousand former oil industry workers will back me up on that
one.

I think the cheap oil reserves will only last for about 30 years.
They is enough oil in Alberta to last about 300 years but it is expensive to
get at. The cheap reserves of natural gas are expected to last about 45 years.

This is an accepted indutry belief in Alberta.  I know this because living in
Calgary, which is an oil and gas town, you get to know a lot about the oil&gas
industry. I also worked for Amoco for a while.  I quit there after Suzuki's
"It's a Matter of Survival" environmental radio series convinced me that I was
part of something ugly.

I also think that people are starting the realize that dangers of oils
biggest by-product; car exhaust.  It British Columbia exhaust emmission tests
are manditory.  Alberta is going to have a voluntary program.

I also think that a lot of men are going to be shocked to hear that
car exhaust is suspected to be causing massive amounts of sterility in men.
I also suspect that car exhaust is causing a heck of a lot more disease than
many people would care to admit.

I think the people who wish to maintain existing fossil fuel use and the
internal combustion engines are the hystrical ones.  Try suggesting to the
average person that we should eliminate the automobile and you'll see
real hysteria.

BTW, what does (sic) mean.

altman@AMETHYST.BUCKNELL.EDU Writes
>>Maybe if we had run out of oil the earth would be a cleaner place.  In the
>>seventies when this was a possibility we were searching for alternatives.
>>Then the price of oil dropped and we stopped.  This was both lazzy and
>>cheap.  If you want to talk supply and demand, the populace should have
>>demanded a safe, efficant and clean energy source.

A big problem is convenience.  The public is addicted to it.
Convenience is a disease.  I think people are starting to realize this.

>>I am not a radical even if I may sound like one.  Reasonable people realize
>>real problems.

This position is far from radical, some may take it as being radical but
I think that change always comes from the fringes and moves inward.  I have
heard some vary mainstream conservative people start to say things very
similar to what you have said.  Change is coming far faster than we realize.
I think in about 10 years your current position will be considered a
very conservative one.

If you think current positions are radical ...
		 			 	just wait a few years.

James (Jim) Arthur Love, B.Comm
Calgary, Alberta, *CANADA*     		"Convenience is a social disease."

E-mail: JALOVE@ADMN.SAIT.AB.CA
Voice : (403)-282-3020
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU