The age of Low-Tech - Philippe Bihouix

[eclectron]

@ABC This little chatterbox game and I don't want to be wrong and therefore at best I am intellectually dishonest, at worst I am really stupid, get tired. (idem thermal agitation episode ... )

However, for those who are interested, a wooden building of around 900 years.
Did you say sustainable?
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stavkirke_d%27Urnes

Samples of wood taken from the base of the building indicate that the trees used were felled between 1129 and 1131

yeah at the same time if you read there are more than 28, and i think the construction is more solid than what the two zozos show us.

And we don't cook in a church in general.

I'm not talking to you about money, I'm talking about making steel, copper, glass, plastics, machining, ball bearings, valves, alternators, etc .... Think ...

well yes, precisely, think about it, doing all this with renewable energies is not impossible but today simply overpriced, given that the entire profitable society is structured around low-cost fossil fuels.
You are not talking about money but this time, it is wrong to omit this determining factor on the choices of society. Let us say rather the non-choice of society ... (due to the determinisms imposed by the profitability of money)

if it's overpriced, it's because it takes a lot of human work to do it, because in fact in the end you only pay humans.

Can't you see the problem with using techniques that require a lot of human work per person?

Again and again this cartoonish binarism, not to say primary. And why not comfort precisely thanks to durability?

oh yes it's true why not like?

Standard attitude, standard response

@ABC This little chatterbox game and I don't want to be wrong and therefore at best I am intellectually dishonest, at worst I am really stupid, get tired. (idem thermal agitation episode ... )

- Bad faith on wood, I never claimed that we should design the link identically ... but the intelligent man will understand that wood can be durable under certain conditions
- Bad faith in the current means of production since they are not focused on renewable energies. and the global labor shortage is well known
What is more, labor misused / profitable in the current flow economy. We are agitated to stay put.
-Total void on the link between durability and comfort ....

[ABC2019]

[color = # FF0000] - Bad faith on wood, I never claimed that we should design the link exactly ... but the intelligent man will understand that wood can be durable under certain conditions

I just said that Breton houses don't look like that, it's not bad faith, it's the truth.

- Bad faith in the current means of production since they are not focused on renewable energies. and the global labor shortage is well known

there is just no country whose "means of production are focused on renewable energies", again this is the truth, not bad faith.

you can have the opinion you want on worlds that do not exist, but not to share your opinion, it is not bad faith. Bad faith is to deny existing facts, and I am only reminding you of existing facts.

[eclectron]

[color = # FF0000] - Bad faith on wood, I never claimed that we should design the link exactly ... but the intelligent man will understand that wood can be durable under certain conditions

I just said that Breton houses don't look like that, it's not bad faith, it's the truth.

- Bad faith in the current means of production since they are not focused on renewable energies. and the global labor shortage is well known

there is just no country whose "means of production are focused on renewable energies", again this is the truth, not bad faith.

you can have the opinion you want on worlds that do not exist, but not to share your opinion, it is not bad faith. Bad faith is to deny existing facts, and I am only reminding you of existing facts.

You have just demonstrated your hypocrisy and your bad faith.
You don't share my opinion, it's your right and it doesn't bother me at all, if only you were fair in the exchange with a real constructed argument.
Instead, you offer us dirty kid's contradiction, all that is most basic, without thought behind it, for the simple purpose of destroying a discourse constructed opposite.
The only motivation on your part that I see there is malice and jealousy of not being able yourself to build an alternative to the current system which is leading us to disaster.
What bothers me is this hypocrisy of false ass when you say: I just say "blah" as if you were making a neutral point whereas on the contrary there is only implication in your words, to try to discredit a speech much more constructed than yours.
Apart from the rather simplistic / primary criticism you add absolutely nothing.

The proof that your "I'm just saying" is absolutely not neutral, since you say you don't agree with me (it's not a scoop! ), it's good that your "I'm just saying" fake ass are there to counter my point and are absolutely not neutral comments.

[eclectron]

PS @ABC: we are two opposing belief systems.
You on the one hand who see no globally favorable outcome for the current world.
Consequently you attract to yourself a whole bundle of arguments that comfort you in your initial opinion.

Opposite, I see and know your type of opinion very well since I shared it for a while but now I perceive favorable outcomes.
Favorable outcomes to which you remain deaf, since that would call into question your initial opinion that you think is rational but which is not, because you look at life from a restricted angle, that of your initial opinion ... the circle is closed and it turns endlessly. (I could write your remarks in advance ...)

In short, opening yourself up to other possibilities would call into question the foundations of your person.
Only you have the power and the right to do this.
It's your life, it's your problem but don't come regularly to destroy a patch of germinating flowers with your blockages please.

[ABC2019]

It's your life, it's your problem but don't come regularly to destroy a patch of germinating flowers with your blockages please.

I have already pointed out to you that if you could not bear to be contradicted, the best was not to post on forums open. Instead, make a blog where you express yourself quietly by blocking comments, so you will be quiet.

Indeed I do not believe that we will save the world with Norwegian pots surrounded by cork to keep the rice warm. Even worse: working hard to "save energy" (gas, electricity) is implicitly recognizing that we have no solution to replace them quantitatively, because if we had any, we wouldn't care. save it! we do not save the water in a stream or the oxygen in the air, except in critical situations where there is a risk of running out (for example, in the event of drought if the stream supplies a watering hole, or to oxygen during the Apollo 13 accident or when you are in a submarine that sank). But that only makes sense because we have NO alternatives.

But it's not bad faith, it's just my opinion, which is different from yours.

[eclectron]

I have already pointed out to you that if you cannot bear to be contradicted,

It's false, it's a certain type of contradiction that I dislike: the dishonest and repetitive contradiction where the interlocutor integrates strictly nothing that the other can say.
He mills in his brain with these preconceived ideas and no exchange is possible.
Your sequel is a fine example of intellectual dishonesty on your part, no one, at least not me, has claimed to save the world with the Norwegian pots etc ...

So yes you're honest with your own preconceptions.
What I blame you for is the lack of openness, it is being stubborn.
Cf episode on thermal agitation ... you can see that "your opinion of which you are certain" may be different from mine and turn out to be a monumental error as far as you are concerned.

[ABC2019]

I have already pointed out to you that if you cannot bear to be contradicted,

It's false, it's a certain type of contradiction that I dislike: the dishonest and repetitive contradiction where the interlocutor integrates strictly nothing that the other can say.
He mills in his brain with these preconceived ideas and no exchange is possible.
Your sequel is a fine example of intellectual dishonesty on your part, no one, at least not me, has claimed to save the world with the Norwegian pots etc ...

ah good sorry so that's the message I thought I understood from the video, but if nobody claims it, then we agree and why are you accusing me of being stubborn and having preconceived ideas if you have the same?

So yes you're honest with your own preconceptions.
What I blame you for is the lack of openness, it is being stubborn.
Cf episode on thermal agitation ... you can see that "your opinion of which you are certain" may be different from mine and turn out to be a monumental error as far as you are concerned.

sorry but I have the exact opposite conclusions to yours, and we still cannot generate electricity with thermal fluctuations at room temperature, believe it or not . I stand by my conclusion that the problem simply boils down to what you can't stand to be contradicted.

[eclectron]

I have already pointed out to you that if you cannot bear to be contradicted,

It's false, it's a certain type of contradiction that I dislike: the dishonest and repetitive contradiction where the interlocutor integrates strictly nothing that the other can say.
He mills in his brain with these preconceived ideas and no exchange is possible.
Your sequel is a fine example of intellectual dishonesty on your part, no one, at least not me, has claimed to save the world with the Norwegian pots etc ...

ah good sorry so that's the message I thought I understood from the video, but if nobody claims it, then we agree and why are you accusing me of being stubborn and having preconceived ideas if you have the same?

So yes you're honest with your own preconceptions.
What I blame you for is the lack of openness, it is being stubborn.
Cf episode on thermal agitation ... you can see that "your opinion of which you are certain" may be different from mine and turn out to be a monumental error as far as you are concerned.

sorry but I have the exact opposite conclusions to yours, and we still cannot generate electricity with thermal fluctuations at room temperature, believe it or not . I stand by my conclusion that the problem simply boils down to what you can't stand to be contradicted.

, too strong !

[thibr]

As part of the first Low-tech Lab survey, we present the Nantes association APALA - Aux Petits Acteurs l'Avenir - and in particular one of the “small players”: Enerlog.

These low-tech pioneers in France have been working for several years on research, experimentation, popularization and dissemination of solutions for the energy and food transition of their territory. After rethinking their modes of action in 2020, they set up their workshops at the Agronaute in early 2021 and embark on production, sales or training around low-tech;
In particular, they wish to be able to support individuals who so wish in the self-construction of “rocket” mass stoves, inertial walls in mud bricks or hot air sensors in slates, which allow heating more. thrifty, efficient and sustainable.
The business models explored by APALA and Enerlog are promising and consistent; they let us imagine a whole economy favoring a greater diffusion and appropriation of this type of low technology!

to return to the low-tech topic

[humus]

4 months on my biosphere | ARTE

"according to my calculations ..."
Nice experience

Available until 27/12/2021
Engineer Corentin de Chatelperron delivers the logbook of his experience in autonomy on a raft in the bay of Phang Nga, in Thailand, thanks to low-tech. An inspiring testimony.

After having traveled the globe to highlight low-tech in the two seasons of the documentary series Nomade des mers, the stopovers of innovation, broadcast by ARTE, Corentin de Chatelperron is launching a new challenge: living independently, alone for four months, on a bamboo raft floating in Phang Nga Bay, Thailand. On his 70 square meter platform, the engineer passionate about ecology and system D puts into practice what he has learned in order to feed himself and produce his own energy. Four months during which he will cultivate spirulina (a freshwater microalgae), raise crickets and harvest the eggs of a mini barnyard for his protein contributions, grow leafy vegetables thanks to a system of hydroponics for its vitamin needs, but also to install solar panels, collect rainwater and desalinate that from the sea ...

Preserve resources
Can low-tech meet most of our needs and replace our energy-hungry and not very durable equipment? Setting up an original ecosystem combining practices with low environmental impact, Corentin de Chatelperron shares, in the form of a filmed logbook, the highlights of the one hundred and twenty-two days of his solo experience. From disappointments to moments of grace, an inspiring testimony.