Lasted edited by Andrew Munsey, updated on June 15, 2016 at 1:19 am.
Discussion page for Directory:Electrical Grid
(Just click on the "
There was an error working with the wiki: Code.)
On Oct. 15, 2008, Hugh Campbell wrote:
Our real objection to power production should not be limited to whether it is oil based or nuclear. We should object to “Centralized” power production because it is by design expensive, consumes public resources, creates dependency, and is easier to disrupt. Free Energy is all about being self-sustaining and about dismantling useless self-serving parasitic Government Agencies. There is really no reason for power companies or their corresponding Government Agencies to exist. Power production should be at the individual or community level where the production is directly under the control of the people. We need to not fall into the trap of supporting the transition of FE technologies into the hands of the same people that have done so well for the world up to now. The current system and way of doing things needs to be buried once and for all and that is what we are now witnessing with the current Financial Pandemic. Part of our vision should be to not follow in the footsteps which have lead us to where we are now but to realize that building systems and processes which put the knowledge, power and control into the people's hands will limit the growth and power of Corporations and Government. This follows very much in line with the thinking of our Founding Fathers and this is the vision that the Corporations and Government have worked so hard to suppress! We have all seen the proof of this suppression and that is exactly why we need to avoid falling back into this trap! Any system that costs what these touted monstrosities cost should be avoided at every turn because they are designed to be out of the reach of the public, but then again what is a few hundred Billion dollars more at this point!
On Oct. 15, 2008, Robert Pritchett wrote:
1) Economy of scale. It is a lot easier to centralize an electrical power system and maintain it rather than require all households in an area to install and support localized electrical power systems. (At least until the cost of doing business gets out of hand.)
2) Labor intensive solutions. The reason we moved from a horse-drawn cart to motorized transportation was because the systems went further, cost less to maintain over time, and didn't require the extra time associated with feeding, training, grooming and vet-care.
3) Free Energy "Solutions". Currently ,as far as I know, no free energy device exists that has been mass-produced and sold as an off-the-shelf commodity item. Also, the cost for such items would have to be cost-competitive to existing solutions and be essentially "maintenance-free" to be accepted by the general populace.
4) Fee-based services. In my area, we pay the lowest costs for electrical energy perhaps anywhere in the world. We here in the Pacific Northwest are "energy-rich" to the point that one county PUD (Grant County) is buying customers to use their power. They are producing so much from hydro, they are literally giving it away. In fact the Northwest Power Grid is so full of power that it has to shut down wind power systems (still being built), until the distribution system gets fatter.
5) A flat tax rate would cure a lot of the ills. Most of the systems being built today are being done so as tax shelters. God only asked for 10%, so why should government ask for more than 20%? By having an across-the-board flat tax system, we could eliminate much of the current rules, regulations, paper processing and accounting gymnastics as businesses and individuals.
By the way, "PUD" stands for Public Utility District, that is run by the people, for the people.
I agree with the "Centralized Power fallacy" inasmuch as it refers to financial and political control. We now have a King in charge of the US Treasury and the US Congress gave him total dominant control to mismanage the funds allocated to him. Part of the latest "Bailout Bill" authorized the US government to steal $420 out of our mortgage payments without our permission.
Until we can all harness and use magnetic light (ZPE), we will need to participate in the current electrical power grid or use candles, wood stoves and bike generators (or off-grid geothermal, micro-hydro, wind and solar solutions) to light, heat and run our homes and go back to riding horses to work. ^0
October 15, 2008 Sepp Hasslberger wrote:
Subject: Re: [NEC-Forum] The Centralized Power Fallacy
In support of Hugh Campbell's view and vision of de-centralized power generation:
1. Increased resiliency. In the event of catastrophic events (natural or otherwise), a distributed power grid where many points of production can feed in electricity will not go down as easily as a centrally managed grid fed by a few huge electricity producers.
2. Environment. People who live right next to the means that generates their electricity will be much more attentive to make sure that power systems do not degrade the environment they live in.
3. Technological progress. As Robert rightly points out, there is little by way of real solutions for free energy today. But pushing for distributed generation will favor the needed technological breakthroughs. While centralized generation is often just "more of the same", we really need to get smart to allow every family or at least every community to produce their own energy.
4. Politics. Dependency from centralized government, with all its dangers, is lessened when everyone can produce their own energy (and grow their own food, I might add). There is a broad-based movement towards independence in our basic needs, and NEC can both help that movement succeed and gain recognition for having been a driving force for energy independence.
I propose we should keep de-centralization as one of our main targets firmly in mind.