Lighthouse wrote:Will we be able to run at least a basic phone infrastructure and very reduced internet? Who will control the content on this net?
Lighthouse wrote:Does anyone know how much energy (kWh) our existing telco infrastructure including attached peripheral systems is using at the moment? I need this information for I book I'm working on, but it seems my research leads me nowhere. Someone, somewhere must have done a thesis on this subject. I know the data is out there, but I can't find it.
For the Internet it's a bit more complicated. How many servers are online? How many routers, modems, wireless base stations etc . I think it does not make sense to add the clients in offices and homes to this number even some of them are also serving content ...
I am absolutely sure this number will blow my socks off ....
Lighthouse wrote:Does anyone know how much energy (kWh) our existing telco infrastructure including attached peripheral systems is using at the moment?
Allan Chen wrote:"The latest analysis shows that the total electricity used by office and network equipment is about 74 TeraWatt-hours (TWh) per year, about two percent of the total electricity use in the U.S. When telephone switching equipment and manufacturing energy for semiconductors and computers is included, the total goes up to about three percent of all electricity use in the U.S."
salon.com wrote:Joseph Romm, a former assistant secretary at the U.S. Department of Energy, notes that from 1992 to 1996 total energy demand grew at about 2.4 percent a year in the U.S., during a period when the gross domestic product was growing at a rate of 3.2 percent a year. But from 1996 to 2000, when the Net boom was really taking off, the gross domestic product grew at an average of 4 percent a year while energy demand grew at a rate of only 1 percent. In other words, the growth in energy demand was far below the growth in the overall economy; as the economy grew hotter and hotter the rate of increase in the demand for energy actually slowed.
Lighthouse wrote:It is not a problem to power the telecom infrastructure, the problem will be in the maintenance of the infrastructure, which consumes more energy that the telecom systems themselves
gg3 wrote:...
Re. the question of who will control content: Hey!, who says anyone has to control content? How'bout the idea that no one "controls" it but the market freely provides whatever content people want to produce and receive (with the obvious exceptions for kiddie porn and snuff movies, which are not "consenting adult" participants)?
gg3 wrote:Telecoms expert here; 20+ years in telephony; PBX engineer.
Local telephone infrastructure existed before petroleum and will exist long after. It will always be possible to build, operate, and maintain a local telephone system for a village, town, or city. Worst case scenario, we would be back to manual cordboards and party lines, but it would still work (in the sense of providing basic communications services), and all components could be manufactured with pre-petroleum methods and materials.
The most sensitive maintenance item is outside plant. Overhead cable is rated for 25 - 35 years. Underground cable is rated for 125 - 135 years. Theft of cable for scrap copper will not be a problem in areas where people care enough to protect it, i.e. neighborhood watch. Copper in telephone cables is recycled indefinitely, so copper shortage will not be an issue.
The next most sensitve item is switching infrastructure. Central office switches are designed with 40-year service life and minimal need to replace components. Component manufacture for CO switches will be a priority as long as any type of electronics industry exists. If civilization ever breaks to the point where there is no electronics industry, then we are back to manual cordboards.
After that, the rest is easy. Cable inside buildings lasts as long as the buildings. Telephone sets can be recycled indefinitely.
Power consumption is minimal considering the number of subscribers served. I don't have the figures for CO switches ready at hand but could go find them; the point is that as long as a source of energy is available, telco COs will be one of the highest priorities for it. CO batteries are typically good for three days at a time, and backup diesel generators for one to three weeks from on-site fuel supply; biodiesel will meet the latter need indefinitely.
Long distance transmission infrastructure is a more complex situation. Here we run into the issues of microwave relay or fiber optic trunking. It may be that certain remote areas lose their connectivity to the outside world and are on local service only. However, even in the USA there were local systems that did not connect to the outside world as recently as the late 1970s into the early 1980s (I even saw one first-hand). It would take a truly spectacular crash for long distance transmission to collapse and become unrepairable. More likely, facilities would degrade to a point where supply and demand would equalize at a higher price point, and that would be sufficient to maintain the infrastructure to carry the traffic at that price point. Think of the old days when a cross-country call cost a dollar for the first three minutes and 25-cents each additional minute.
Presently we are seeing the telcos and the cableTVcos trying to get into each others' businesses, and the result is the costly bastardization of both of their technical architectures. In a sufficient crisis situation, these industries could for the sake of efficiency be re-regulated to each stick to their own core activity (i.e. cable: broadcast; and telco: switched). At the other end of the spectrum, a deregulated market situation would probably settle down to three major providers in large town and city markets, and one provider or at most two in smaller towns.
When my pals & I buy land and establish a community, we will have our own telco infrastructure. I have switching equipment in hand now, with capacity for over 100 lines and redundancy to provide component replacements for an effectively indefinite lifespan. Outside cable will be undergrounded and redundant materials kept on hand to replace spans as needed. Inside cable will be installed by our crew to high spec so it will last as long as the houses and other buildings. Everything we do will be built to last and be repairable with stockpiled materials. We will run our own ISP as well, using the same cable infrastructure and switches & servers on site (this is another member's department, outside my expertise). (I'm also not certain what we'll do for radio and television; probably a combination of satellite feed and common antenna, and some capability for local content origination. Even though some people like to say they never watch TV, it's still a useful utility to have in a community.)
---
R
SILENTTODD wrote:You obviously have never worked in the real Telco environment or you wouldn’t be making such Ignorant statements! Try doing my job sometime when it’s raining!
Doly wrote:SILENTTODD wrote:
Your job may not be easy, but the question is: is it doable with little oil? Maybe I missed something that you said.
oddone wrote: The oil price around 70USD is maybe perfect for that, we can just go on, they can't start...
ClubOfRomeII wrote:oddone wrote: The oil price around 70USD is maybe perfect for that, we can just go on, they can't start...
The current crude price doesn't appear to be stopping many people from doing much of anything.
Fergus wrote:ClubOfRomeII wrote:oddone wrote: The oil price around 70USD is maybe perfect for that, we can just go on, they can't start...
The current crude price doesn't appear to be stopping many people from doing much of anything.
Well the fact a large portion of oil is made to use things, how come my corner gas station keeps raising its prices.
Fergus wrote:
When we cant get to work to make those things, does it matter how much oil is used just to make things.
Fergus wrote:
The important thing to remember is the cost to the average joe (you and me). When we as humans are effected, it effects everything.
Fergus wrote:
Maybe we should quit making things and use more oil for locomotion? Damn, I should call the government, I just solved peak oil. Stop making things. More oil for gas. Course then we would have locomotion to go places, just nothing to make once we got there.
ClubOfRomeII wrote:Do you really assume that the poor and silly consumption choices made by Americans related to their mode of transport isn't going to have to change before this is all said and done?
joewp wrote:ClubOfRomeII wrote:Do you really assume that the poor and silly consumption choices made by Americans related to their mode of transport isn't going to have to change before this is all said and done?
In defense of us American consumers, I have to point out a conversation I heard on CNBC today indicating that a corporation's aim is to invoke irrationality in consumer purchases and uses psychological tricks to accomplish this irrationality in regards to purchasing unneeded goods.
Can you blame us sheep if they're training us to consume endless crap?
Return to Conservation & Efficiency
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 93 guests