Happens to me all the time, As for Keith's comments, It seems to me that we are facing a whole new era of projects based less on using up things and more on developing sustainable things. The problem is capitalism. The most efficient use of capitalism is war where things are blown up and have to be replaced. The least efficient are computers and computer programs where information whether words or graphics require durability while the need to continue to make money through new and more novel devices messes with the information and makes the computer unreliable for information making a hard copy backup the only solution.
Three years ago a computer technician erased my hard drive with 15 years of work on it. My backups were not up to date and even they had problems. A technician who worked for the company came and spent weeks recovering what he could (he couldn't get it all) but what he got was all anonymous. No titles on the files so I have for the past three years been slogging through and redoing the information. Today, this computer is wearing out and the new programs don't quite accommodate my art graphics or the ceremonials from my community that were first downloaded onto the computer in "wordstar". Yes there are translators but remember I am an artist with a net worth of $2,000 and I live at 70 on what I make teaching. Unfortunately the Cherokee Priest chose me to be the keeper of this knowledge instead of some rich guy. Actually, there was no rich guy available, just a poor, struggling artist and teacher. Anyway, the computer has been a disaster because of the needs of capitalism not to build a quality product but a product that would need to be replaced in order to stimulate sales. Green is coming because capitalism, and it's western evil twin socialism, are neither interested in quality and long term durability. I call it the "Western Evil Twin" because our forms of socialism are about doing things that last down to the seventh generation including decisions about experiments on such things as bird flu. The first time someone dies from that mutant bird flu and that someone is from a traditional culture, some leader of that traditional culture will gather funds to fly wherever across the world to kill the same number of members of that scientist's family as he caused by so carelessly ignoring the seventh generation rule. It's little rules like that that cause proselytizing Religions with their apostasy capital punishment have to make us evil since we hold them responsible for seven generations for what they've done in the name of their deity. If you are from a traditional people living within your history, the only way to escape that responsibility is to leave your history and join the enemy. That's why we have so many Baptist Cherokees. REH -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of pete Sent: Monday, December 26, 2011 1:09 PM To: RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION Subject: Re: [Futurework] The failed invention of Brunel Most curious, the resender seems to have applied a random rearrangement to my line lengths. Let's see if I can straighten them out... On Mon, 26 Dec 2011, pete wrote: > > > An odd synchronicity, I stumbled upon this story just this summer, and > had an entertaining time reading about the whole adventure. The > invention was not initially Brunel's, but rather had been proposed as > early as 1799, and developed by a group of engineers who built the > first example in Dublin. It is thought Brunel's attention was drawn to > this example after an unintended incident during an early > demonstration of the new line, when the steam pump built up the > pressure to drive a full line of cars up the hill on which the line > was constructed, but only one car had been placed on the line, with a > single passenger, a young worker who volunteered. The over-pressure > drove the car up the hill at something over 65 mph, an unheard of > speed for 1844, and I expect that the young man held the land speed > record for a couple of decades, though no one was keeping track of > such things in those days. > > The main advantage of the remote pressure driven line is that you > don't have to move the engine nor the fuel, so the cars can be much > lighter, and everything is much more efficient. That was a big concern > in the 19th century, when power came from heavy cast iron steam > engines burning mountains of coal. The development of the electric > locomotive engine freed the vehicles from the need to transport fuel, > though some still do (all locomotives are electric driven - the > diesels are diesel-electric, with the diesel engine powering an > electric generator which then powers an electric motor which drives > the wheels, for the same reasons of efficiency that hybrid cars use a > gasoline engine to drive an electric motor), so the strong impetus for > the use of remote power is considerably reduced. In north america, the > distances make electric power lines less economical than carrying the > diesel fuel, but tht is not the case in europe, so electric lines are > common there. > > Another problem with the remote power pneumatic system is the > limitations on the power which can be delivered, being constrained by > the strength of the pneumatic pipe. The problem is also present with > electric rail lines, though not in such severe form, as you can put a > large amount of electric power down a fairly inexpensive line by just > using a higher voltage. With diesel electrics, more power is just a > matter of inserting more engines in the line of cars. Typical freight > trains in western Canada can have many engines, and an immense load, > being as much as 4km long and weighing 18kt, with seven or more > engines distributed along the length. > > -Pete > > On Mon, 26 Dec 2011, Keith Hudson wrote: > >> One of the greatest inventions of the 19th century, and of all man's time, >> has yet to be developed. It failed initially for a trivial reason which, >> today, could be easily overcome. When it is finally embarked upon, it will >> change the physical infrastructure of many countries to such an enormous >> extent that we can't possibly imagine all its ramifications. Its >> development may still lie a century in the future, though there's no reason >> why a particularly enterprising culture such as Singapore or Switzerland or >> Israel shouldn't start planning it tomorrow. >> >> I'm reminded of the invention every day as I sit at my keyboard and look >> out of the window. Yet, to my complete surprise this morning, I realize >> that I have never written about it before now. A group of trees about 100 >> yards ahead of me is the prompt. This at is the beginning of one of the >> first tunnels of the Great Western Railway built by the engineering genius, >> Isambard Kingdom Brunel in 1833. It's still in use today. If I listen >> carefully at various times in the day I can hear the low rumble of a >> London-destined train approaching along a deep tree-lined cutting. The >> sound then vanishes. If I walk to my back garden quickly I can hear the >> sound again as the train emerges from the tunnel about 200 yards away to >> the east. (My house doesn't actually sit over the tunnel, thank goodness!) >> >> Brunel's first idea was that his Great Western Railway should be pneumatic >> -- that is, driven by air pressure. It would be so much more efficient than >> the locomotive system than was then being used to pull carriages and >> freight trucks along. Instead, in Brunel's experimental version, the >> leading carriage or truck had a short downward extension on which there was >> a circular piston which snugly fitted inside a 12 inch wide tube with a >> slit along the top to allow forward motion. A steam-driven pumping engine a >> mile or two ahead pumped out the air ahead of the train. The air pressure >> behind the train would then push the piston forward -- and at very high >> speed, too. The slit in the tube was was covered by a continuous leather >> strap which slid aside briefly as the piston-arm moved along the tube and >> then sealed over again when the train was past. Brunel tried it out. He >> demonstrated conclusively that a pneumatic railway was, indeed, much more >> efficient than a locomotive driven railway (in which heavy steam engines) >> have to travel almong as well as the freight. >> >> The problem with this experimental model -- which Brunel hadn't foreseen -- >> emerged within weeks. This was that countryside rats took a liking to the >> leather valve, nibbled away at it and thus rendered the tube less than >> air-tight. This dashed the whole project. There were no rubber-like or >> plastic materials available in those days which were rat-proof and could >> have been used instead of leather. Thus, Brunel had to revert to the >> conventional method of mobile steam-engines pulling the train for his Great >> Western Railway. Another way of overcoming the problem was theoretically >> possible. This was to construct a much larger tube so that it fitted snugly >> around the whole front of the leading carriage or truck. This would be even >> more efficient. But the cost of building a tunnel for the whole distance of >> 110 miles between Bristol and London was far beyond the pockets of the GWR >> Board of Directors. >> >> However, to show that this method was feasible, a full-tunnel short-length >> fun version was built in the grounds of Crystal Palace in 1864 to the >> delight of hundreds of people who tried it. Also a short-length passenger >> railway (with serious intent this time!) was constructed under Broadway in >> New York. Once again, however, this proved to be unfeasible because of lack >> of suitable sealing materials. In the 1960s, some Lockheed engineers >> designed a pneumatic system for a Boston-Washington commuter route. At the >> same time, the Swiss were considering a pneumatic metro system between >> their major cities. But in both cases it was cost, not method, that stopped >> further consideration. >> >> However, the cost could be much further reduced by a cut-and-cover method >> of construction whereby, for most of its length, the top soil is replaced >> over the top of the tube and the normal amenity or agricultural value of >> the countryside is resumed. The overall cost would also be reduced >> substantially if large factories and warehouses (both increasingly >> automated with smaller numbers of personnel) were integrated with pneumatic >> railways with countryside above them all. Freight containers could be >> rolled on and off vessels at the ports and imports delivered at regional >> warehouses within an hour or two even in large countries. The cost of >> land-freight could be reduced to levels scarcely more than those of sea >> transport today. Countries without coastlines would not be as disbenefited >> as they are now. As for commuters, the time spent every day could be >> reduced to a fraction of that by car or existing railways. >> >> I gave a talk about this to the Bath Royal Literary and Scientific Society >> about 20 years ago. A friend told me afterwards that I'd given the talk in >> a flat, unexciting way. That surprised me but perhaps I did. If so, the >> reason was probably due to the fact that I then still considered Brunel's >> invention to be premature. If the Swiss had decided against it for cost >> reasons in the 1960s then it was still probably not the time for it to be >> taken up in the 1990s. But there is a difference today which is beginning >> to be discernible as part of our credit-crunch problem and forthcoming >> recession. This is that there is no great chain of new consumer products >> ahead of us which existed all through the past 300 years and served stimuli >> for economic growth. If there is to be economic development (measure in >> conventional terms) then it's going to come via new efficiencies on the >> production side and not new consumer gew-gaws. Also, if we add in the >> desirable restoration of a great deal of our countryside, then Brunel's >> invention is surely going to be one of the answers one day. >> >> Keith >> >> Keith Hudson, Saltford, England http://allisstatus.wordpress.com >> > _______________________________________________ > Futurework mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework > > _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [email protected] https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [email protected] https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
