About opensource fablabs (a plug on openfarmtech.org)

A bit of interproject advertising. I think there are people reading this forum that aren't aware of the work done at openfarmtech.org. I hope this isn't too OT...

Official advert:

We're building the world's first, replicable, open source Global Village. What's so unique? We are using a bootstrapping approach, so we can make it replicable. We're questioning each technology choice, and selecting that which is appropriate for modern off-grid living. To do this, we select, simplify, optimize, reduce cost - to create high performance, open source, replicable infrastructures for living. Can this lead to unprecedented quality of life? We are convinced that it can, if we apply ancient wisdom with modern technology. If we seize the power of effective production - an essential part fo this Global Village Construction Set - then we remove ourselves from global geopolitical compromise. The best part is - if we have an open source fab lab for production and an agroecology base, then the entire package is not only replicable - but self-replicating! Fantasy? No, it's just the destiny of a world cracking at the seams, in the computer age. We know we can all do better, and the world is ready to do it. Welcome to viral village - and world transformation.

My take on it (reused from my post on Forrest's blog):

Regarding your interest in automatic building construction: [openfarmtech.org] They are creating and testing open source equipment for creating replicable sustainable villages/communities (with fullblown fablabs) from local materials. See the end of the page for the CEB press, which creates structural elements (walls) from dirt. It still needs labour, but is a practical step towards automation. See also the CNC torch cutting table on the wiki! They also have ideas about metal extrusion from scrap etc. Please consider becoming a donating member (a True Fan) with 10$/month

...

I'm not sure about their technical background, what's important is that they are really producing results. They only need money and a few more developers. And they are really doing just what many of you (and Reprap) are after: local automated fabrication for the masses, and in the same peer to peer spirit that drives the reprap community. ... Can you at least appreciate the open source tractor they have prototyped, which costs about one tenth of of the closest commercial competitor? The same for a sawmill for local timber from local forests. All the equipment you need to create susteinable villages from scratch for some 10 000$, including labour. With that (plus a small group of teachers) you could jumpstart an African country after a war by teaching the poor to make the tools for themselves and others around them. That would cost a fraction of the amounts of money that is dumped in the developing countries. I won't bother you anymore, but see the video presentations on their frontpage at least.

Most importantly, they emphasize opennes, collaboration and real work (as opposed to just theorising).

From a proud supporter of both projects, cheers

Well,
this may not be the perfect place to ask

If the plastic that builds the cars (and houses and almost anything else) and the fuel to drive the cars is made from the local weed...
what does the people who drive the cars actually EAT?

Please, don't get me wrong biofuel sounds pretty good...
but corn-fuel (brasil) for example produces 480% more CO² than ordinary (oil) fuel (mostly because of the production process)
I'm unsure if you can call that "bio" at all.


Nevermind, go ahead

'sid

Biofuel is just a part of their solution, and I'm sure that they rather eat what is edible and make biofuel from non-edible stuff as efficiently as possible. Besides, lcal sourcing reduces the need to use fuel for transpotation, and uses a bit more non transportable energy, from the sun, wind etc. available as heat and electricity.

sid Wrote:
> Please, don't get me wrong biofuel sounds pretty
> good...
> but corn-fuel (brasil) for example produces 480%
> more CO² than ordinary (oil) fuel (mostly because
> of the production process)
> I'm unsure if you can call that "bio" at all.

There's one thing you did not take into account (in fact, most opponents of biodiesel don't, especially the more fanatic ones who probably do this on purpose to spread FUD using big, scary numbers). When you pump the crude oil out of the ground, refine it and burn it, you do, in fact, introduce more carbon (as CO2) into the atmosphere - it was kept underground for millions of years before. But when you produce biodiesel from the plants you grow yourself (as opposed to plants that grew there millions of years ago), guess where does the carbon they contain come from? That's right, from the atmosphere. It's a closed cycle and the net CO2 increase in the system is zero.

Sure, there are some real disadvantages of biodiesel and they have to be taken care of before we deploy it at a global scale, but this is not one of them.

If you assume that all "fossil fuels" have been part of the biosphere at one time or another, then at some point the crude and coal that you extract WERE in the biosphere, so their status prior to extraction was "sequestered".

Ask yourself, did the earth burn itself up from "global warming" back when the fossil fuels we are extracting and burning were part of the biosphere? If it did, then why are we alive and living in hope, at least some of us, now?

Could it be that the divine plan for mankind is to restore to the biosphere the carbon which heretofore supported much more life on this planet than we presently enjoy? Wouldn't that be ironic?

AGW is merely the precautionary principle (don't jiggle anything for fear the world will end) run amok.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/27/2009 12:05PM by Forrest Higgs.

---

-------------------------------------------------------

Hell, there are no rules here - we're trying to accomplish something.

Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work.

Thomas A. Edison

Forrest:
As this is not a RepRap compatible topic, send me a private message if you would like to discuss the suitability of Cambrian and Pre-Cambrian environments for human civilization. The short answer is not good.

Brian D

Brian. I don't recall it ever being agreed that you dictate policy about what may and may not be discussed in reprap. Further, my comments don't relate directly to either the Cambrian or the Precambrian.

---

-------------------------------------------------------

Hell, there are no rules here - we're trying to accomplish something.

Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work.

Thomas A. Edison

Perhaps this video may clear up some of our work - [vimeo.com] - hot off the press from our application to the Buckminster Fuller Challenge.

On biofuel, our presentation on Reaching Post-Scarcity Escape Velocity has one figure on Energy 101 discussing feasibility of biomass pellets as fuel.

lol - I think this is the closest to a flame war I have ever seen on the Reprap forums...

Shows what a nice and friendly group the reprap crowd actually is.

The topic itself is rather interesting, but I don't want either Forest to thump me when I disagree with his viewpoint (I need his technical help way too often ) nor do I want BDolg to thump me for non-reprap related discussions - but I do like his point about the Cambrian or the Precambrian era's...

Well the Link from the Creator is broken, so I just wanted to point to their new page.

Their projects are hosted here: http://opensourceecology.dozuki.com/c/Root

They quite make some progress with their construction kit. I like the idea.