Risky Business
Many times when we as a society consider infrastructure we think of roads, electrical lines, bridges and other structures that we all share in common that are important in maintaining our societal needs. How much each of us depends on our common infrastructure depends on how our household infrastructure is developed. Mary and I have worked to develop a personal household infrastructure that is less dependent on the greater societal infrastructure with the goal of decreasing our resource usage. The reason for going in this direction had to do with both environmental issues and the possibility of meeting the needs of the low income segment of the population. However, there is another consideration and that is vulnerability. If one is less dependent on the societal infrastructure then one is less susceptible to all of the pitfalls that can occur throughout the system.
So, how does one go about developing such a household infrastructure? First of all, we found the resources needed for such an endeavor are all around us. Our nation is the richest in the world and continually discards the resources that can be used; however, it takes a certain skill to recognize them. Today’s educational system prepares its students to earn the high wages needed to pay for the high throughput incurred to run our personal and common infrastructure and not to recognize what is needed to become less dependent. The outcome of this independence from the traditional system often does not look the same as a conventional home and there is usually no incentive for developing the skills needed, and, some of the people who have developed the needed skills continue to struggle economically. The paradigm of what the household infrastructure should look like is well in place and we need to think beyond it.
A key component of our collective infrastructure is the electrical grid. Most of household needs depend on the constant flow of electricity. Years ago I knew a woman who heated her home with oil heat and during a cold snap the electricity went out and the electrical part of the system was not functioning to fire her furnace and she ended up freezing to death. I’ve often thought of this and wonder if this is the true march of progress. Climate change is happening and the pace is increasing beyond what most scientists thought even several years ago. Due to this and other variants the electrical grid is becoming more and more vulnerable. In the recent years instead of decreasing our need for this constant flow of electricity by figuring out ways to eliminate electrical devices we have added devices to reduce the electricity needed to run our appliances. One example is the refrigerator that uses less electricity. We live in the northeast where it is cold outside much of the year so we could eliminate much of the need for refrigeration. I remember when the Northeast had a huge ice storm in January of 1998 (also called the Great Ice Storm of 1998-millions were without electricity, some for months) and all of the power lines throughout northern VT, NH and southern Quebec failed. The CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Company) turned all of its radio programing over to emergency information and I listened in as Montreal started to run out of food because without electricity refrigeration had failed and trucks could not get into the city to replace the needed food supply because of ice on the roads.
Throughout my 30 years of living off the grid I have never had an unplanned disruption of electricity, but I have observed an increase of grid failure throughout our country. Two of the most important components in a household infrastructure are the heat and water systems, both of which are many times electricity dependent in some way. The solution I hear the most regarding power failures is to install a back-up generator in case the electricity goes out. Yet, is it rational to believe that everyone should get a spare generator ‘just in case’. And what about those who cannot afford to purchase one?
We have a well that requires an electrical pump and we also collect water providing us with a buffer in case our electricity does go out. Our independent system has never let us down, and having a low cost, low impact backup provides security. Since our water, hot water, and heating systems use a minimal amount of electricity, our electrical system is relatively small, less complex, costs less and is less apt to go wrong, giving us more security in meeting the world’s increasing complex future. During heavy rainstorms we collect water, lessening the increase of flooding which is directly related to the complex drainage systems now in use. Collectively we have become a society dependent on the shipping of resources and this includes our electricity. When solar panels became a viable energy source many were encouraged to fill their roof with photovoltaics, one incentive being the homeowner could sell the excess electricity back to the company through net metering perhaps even giving the homeowner free electricity, or in some cases even money back. So instead of working towards ways to eliminate or greatly reduce electrical devices, we were sold more efficient devices and appliances. Extra electricity is shipped outward into the electrical grid then passed on to other houses through electrical lines. All of this technology will forever need upgrades in the world of obsolescence. Growing up I don’t remember the electricity ever going out, however, as we have progressed down this road I have been noticing outages across our nation on a regular basis and it seems to be increasing. As far as the net metering is concerned there is growing contention between people with net metering and those without because the people without believe they are paying for the cost of the increasing maintenance of the grid. Many of our contentions stem from the same issue, one which causes disruption in society and causing more vulnerability. Who gets the more and who gets the less?
A household’s infrastructure also extends out into the surrounding landscape. The soil surrounding a house can be made to retain water and nutrients, perennial food and diverse vegetation can be planted, all working on reducing vulnerability. The cost of this lifestyle is then greatly reduced, requiring less borrowing of money, which in good economic times leaves more disposable income and in economic downturns more security. In other words, the home owner is less vulnerable to economic swings. Low income populations may not have the skills, education or resources to travel such a path and have little in terms of a safety net, as their interests lie in basic survival. The affluent have the opportunity to gain the skills needed and to impart their knowledge to ensure the whole population becomes less vulnerable instead of investing in extravagant backup systems for the few.
So, how does one go about developing such a household infrastructure? First of all, we found the resources needed for such an endeavor are all around us. Our nation is the richest in the world and continually discards the resources that can be used; however, it takes a certain skill to recognize them. Today’s educational system prepares its students to earn the high wages needed to pay for the high throughput incurred to run our personal and common infrastructure and not to recognize what is needed to become less dependent. The outcome of this independence from the traditional system often does not look the same as a conventional home and there is usually no incentive for developing the skills needed, and, some of the people who have developed the needed skills continue to struggle economically. The paradigm of what the household infrastructure should look like is well in place and we need to think beyond it.
A key component of our collective infrastructure is the electrical grid. Most of household needs depend on the constant flow of electricity. Years ago I knew a woman who heated her home with oil heat and during a cold snap the electricity went out and the electrical part of the system was not functioning to fire her furnace and she ended up freezing to death. I’ve often thought of this and wonder if this is the true march of progress. Climate change is happening and the pace is increasing beyond what most scientists thought even several years ago. Due to this and other variants the electrical grid is becoming more and more vulnerable. In the recent years instead of decreasing our need for this constant flow of electricity by figuring out ways to eliminate electrical devices we have added devices to reduce the electricity needed to run our appliances. One example is the refrigerator that uses less electricity. We live in the northeast where it is cold outside much of the year so we could eliminate much of the need for refrigeration. I remember when the Northeast had a huge ice storm in January of 1998 (also called the Great Ice Storm of 1998-millions were without electricity, some for months) and all of the power lines throughout northern VT, NH and southern Quebec failed. The CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Company) turned all of its radio programing over to emergency information and I listened in as Montreal started to run out of food because without electricity refrigeration had failed and trucks could not get into the city to replace the needed food supply because of ice on the roads.
Throughout my 30 years of living off the grid I have never had an unplanned disruption of electricity, but I have observed an increase of grid failure throughout our country. Two of the most important components in a household infrastructure are the heat and water systems, both of which are many times electricity dependent in some way. The solution I hear the most regarding power failures is to install a back-up generator in case the electricity goes out. Yet, is it rational to believe that everyone should get a spare generator ‘just in case’. And what about those who cannot afford to purchase one?
We have a well that requires an electrical pump and we also collect water providing us with a buffer in case our electricity does go out. Our independent system has never let us down, and having a low cost, low impact backup provides security. Since our water, hot water, and heating systems use a minimal amount of electricity, our electrical system is relatively small, less complex, costs less and is less apt to go wrong, giving us more security in meeting the world’s increasing complex future. During heavy rainstorms we collect water, lessening the increase of flooding which is directly related to the complex drainage systems now in use. Collectively we have become a society dependent on the shipping of resources and this includes our electricity. When solar panels became a viable energy source many were encouraged to fill their roof with photovoltaics, one incentive being the homeowner could sell the excess electricity back to the company through net metering perhaps even giving the homeowner free electricity, or in some cases even money back. So instead of working towards ways to eliminate or greatly reduce electrical devices, we were sold more efficient devices and appliances. Extra electricity is shipped outward into the electrical grid then passed on to other houses through electrical lines. All of this technology will forever need upgrades in the world of obsolescence. Growing up I don’t remember the electricity ever going out, however, as we have progressed down this road I have been noticing outages across our nation on a regular basis and it seems to be increasing. As far as the net metering is concerned there is growing contention between people with net metering and those without because the people without believe they are paying for the cost of the increasing maintenance of the grid. Many of our contentions stem from the same issue, one which causes disruption in society and causing more vulnerability. Who gets the more and who gets the less?
A household’s infrastructure also extends out into the surrounding landscape. The soil surrounding a house can be made to retain water and nutrients, perennial food and diverse vegetation can be planted, all working on reducing vulnerability. The cost of this lifestyle is then greatly reduced, requiring less borrowing of money, which in good economic times leaves more disposable income and in economic downturns more security. In other words, the home owner is less vulnerable to economic swings. Low income populations may not have the skills, education or resources to travel such a path and have little in terms of a safety net, as their interests lie in basic survival. The affluent have the opportunity to gain the skills needed and to impart their knowledge to ensure the whole population becomes less vulnerable instead of investing in extravagant backup systems for the few.
