Placeholder Image

字幕列表 影片播放

  • Global Sustainability: Science, Engineering and Technology for Human Concern

  • Welcome everybody and thank you for coming to this lecture by Douglas Mallette.

  • He is the CEO of the Cybernated Farm Systems,

  • LLC,

  • and also a former systems engineer on the

  • NASA Space Shuttle Program.

  • Let's give him a warm welcome.

  • [Applause]

  • All right. Thank you very much.

  • I appreciate all of you who took time out of your day

  • to come here and listen to what I'm going to talk about today.

  • As was mentioned, I am the CEO of Cybernated Farm Systems.

  • It's a company I just recently started.

  • We'll talk a little bit about it later as it has some relevance to the topic.

  • I'm not here really to talk about that so much.

  • I am a former Space Shuttle Systems Engineer.

  • I worked with a Boeing subcontractor in Houston, Texas,

  • and I did that for a little over 3 years

  • before they decided to start systematically shutting everything down

  • (so everybody all got laid off at periodic times)

  • at which point I decided I can go play with missiles, bombs and guns

  • because that's really what aerospace is starting to move towards

  • (in my neck-of-the-woods which I'm not interested in),

  • so I decided to do something a little more humanitarian.

  • I'm the author of 'Turning Point',

  • a book that talks about space exploration and development

  • in a non-technical, user-friendly way.

  • Unfortunately a lot of people have this mindset,

  • not due any fault of their own. The media does not do a very good job

  • of promoting space exploration and what it means to your everyday life,

  • but they don't find a lot of relevance as to what space exploration means

  • for mankind and their day-to-day operations.

  • Throughout the course of today's lecture we're going to touch base on that concept,

  • and what it means on how we operate on this planet.

  • We are going to talk about space exploration and sustainability.

  • What exactly do the two have to do with each other?

  • Sustainability in space increases sustainability on Earth.

  • There's nothing that we've ever invented for the space program

  • that doesn't, in some way, find its way

  • on to everyday Earth-based operations.

  • Whether it's the CAT scan machine or MRI's

  • or advanced materials that go into tires,

  • advanced systems for brakes, for telecommunications.

  • There's a gamut of possibilities

  • of industries that are affected by space exploration.

  • What we're going to do to start off with

  • is called a Gedanken experiment, or a thought experiment,

  • on what would be needed to build a base on Mars

  • and how it would facilitate the needs of the astronauts. How will they live?

  • How are we going to provide everything that they need?

  • On Mars there's no grocery store,

  • and so we have to think about how an astronaut would be able to live.

  • There's no grocery store down the street for them to resupply.

  • You can't just waste and go to the store and pick up a refresh.

  • Logistically that's near impossible to pull off in a sustainable way,

  • so what we look at is: Okay, what can we implement onto a Mars-based system?

  • This is also used on the ISS, so

  • these concepts actually don't just apply to Mars, but they would apply to the Moon

  • or a long duration space craft or the International Space Station, the ISS.

  • All these systems exist, today,

  • but we don't use those derivative technologies down here very well.

  • So, what are some of the things that you would need

  • to maintain a human being's biological requirements,

  • biological necessities of life? Anybody throw anything out.

  • [man from audience] - Water and seeds. - Seeds? You mean food, right?

  • Yes, ok. Food, water, what else? Yes? - Oxygen.

  • Air, yeah. Clean breathable air.

  • - Controlling too high/low temperatures.

  • - Climate control? Right, ok.

  • Waste reclamation and the proper handling of that, ok.

  • Now what about quality of life needs?

  • Things that enhance the quality of life beyond just the biological requirements?

  • A lot of people don't think about those

  • because we're immersed in them all the time. Yes?

  • - Safety?

  • Social needs, people to talk to, to feel like you're a part of something. - Being connected with other people, ok.

  • What kind of technical systems might be a quality of life?

  • - Media. - Media?

  • Oh, yes, ok. Entertainment and stuff like that. Right, and back there?

  • Energy? Absolutely. That's a good one. What else?

  • Transportation? All right! Yes?

  • - Production. - Production, manufacturing,

  • things like that, to get the things that they need on a local level.

  • It's kind of hard to do the resupply so it helps to produce as much as you can.

  • Now you guys kind of get some of the concepts, all right?

  • Basic necessities of life.

  • What are they? In a nutshell: air, food, water,

  • sleep and medical care.

  • Sleep and medical care seem to miss people, if you think about it.

  • You don't think about "You need to sleep!"

  • If sleep deprivation is a serious biological problem

  • for people, it can cause you to go crazy or you can get really sick.

  • In medical care, obviously if you hurt yourself,

  • if you don't take care of that issue, that infection,

  • your biological-ness will go 'prrrrrt' and you're done.

  • So, you've got to make sure those things are covered.

  • Now you've got your necessities for a high quality of life.

  • Here are some of the most pedestrian things: shelter,

  • clothing, education, energy, transportation and communication.

  • If you think about how you interact with the world today

  • you're involved with these on a regular basis,

  • in different ways.

  • Shelter on Mars, is actually more of a biological requirement

  • than it is a quality of life enhancer, because

  • you can't just go for a crisp walk in the Martian air.

  • It doesn't work that way.

  • On Earth you could technically live without shelter.

  • You could exist as a human being; it wouldn't be very comfortable.

  • In fact, you can exist without all of these, but your quality of life isn't very high.

  • If you think back to the nomadic, hunter-gatherers,

  • of 50,000 years ago,

  • they lived but they didn't live that great.

  • They moved around a lot. Nature could mess with them pretty easily,

  • but they survived.

  • When you're looking at a Mars Base, you will think to yourselves

  • (or we in the space industry have given a lot of thought to)

  • "All right, how can we provide those necessities

  • on a level so that the astronauts

  • aren't reduced to being just stewards of their environment?"

  • See, it's one thing to provide these things.

  • It's something else if you have to use a lot of human labor

  • to constantly maintain them all the time,

  • because after all, that's not why we would be sending astronauts to Mars

  • in the first place, right? The point of them going there is to get out,

  • go explore, do their science and do their research.

  • Their job is not to be Farmer John or Farmer Jill.

  • Their job is not supposed to be the manual labor force

  • to create their water supply or to do anything like that.

  • So what you'll want to do is to automate, computerize,

  • and make technical as much of those processes as possible,

  • so that the astronauts have the free time

  • to go do what they're supposed to be doing: to go be astronauts.

  • When you look at this on a level of "Ok, this is what we have to do on Mars,"

  • a lot of these problems have been addressed and are already overcome.

  • The International Space Station operates

  • in a highly automated fashion.

  • That way, the astronauts that are on board

  • don't have to, as much, maintain their environment directly.

  • Another key thing, especially on Mars,

  • would be having more than enough to suit their needs,

  • having an abundance of their requirements.

  • You can't afford to have a shortage in a place like that,

  • because if you run out, people die. Same thing on the space shuttle:

  • you have to make sure that you have more then enough of what you need

  • so that you can complete the mission.

  • And likewise on the ISS, on the space station.

  • If you think about it in terms of Earth,

  • it's by far the most important word

  • with respect to mankind's ability to live peacefully.

  • I draw up the scenario like this: If I took

  • this group of people in this room right now,

  • and I put you on a deserted island with nothing but 1 coconut tree,

  • how long do you think you reasonable people would last

  • before 'it [the shit] really hit the fan',

  • before people started going after each other,

  • started manipulating each other,

  • started fighting each other to get to that food?

  • You don't think of yourselves as aggressive, mean, nasty people,

  • but if you're put in an environment that has that level of scarcity,

  • you will turn into aggressive, mean, nasty people to survive.

  • That's how it works.

  • So conversely, what if we put 500 coconut trees on this island?

  • [It's] way more than enough to cover everybody's needs for food.

  • Do you think you're going to exhibit those negative behaviors?

  • [It's] much less likely. You might quibble over other things,

  • but you're definitely not going to fight over food,

  • or at least over the coconuts.

  • It's an important aspect when people talk about this

  • human nature versus human nurture argument, I mean.

  • It's kind of a quasi-combination of both,

  • but our behaviors are highly modified

  • by the environment that we're stuck in at the moment.

  • You put us in a high stress, high scarcity environment,

  • then we're not going to behave very well.

  • You put us in a more relaxed, low stress,

  • more abundant environment for the things that we need,

  • and we're less likely to exhibit these aberrant behaviors,

  • these negative behaviors.

  • Now we move, as far as Mars is concerned, to technical abundance,

  • being able to create an abundance without the heavy use

  • of human labor as the primary driver.

  • Throughout the course of most of human history,

  • the largest labor force on the planet has been human muscle.

  • Then we started using animals a little more efficiently,

  • but then we got to the point where we started developing technologies

  • and machines to do a lot of the heavy lifting for us.

  • Now we're in the 21st century where we can do a whole lot more

  • with a whole lot less,

  • and we're seeing some of the ramifications of that

  • in our socio-economic 'hiccup' if you will;

  • but on a Mars base it's an absolute necessity,

  • because as we go back to it, there's only so many astronauts

  • that can go there at any given time. They don't have a labor force of 100 people.

  • You're looking at a Martian mission of 5 - 7,

  • and so if they want to live, work and cooperate together,

  • there's a different mental structure to those astronauts

  • as to how to work together. There's also a different environmental structure

  • that allows them to live and work together in such a place.

  • What kind of technology do we have today

  • that can cover biological needs in abundance?

  • Air, looking at the Earth.

  • That's readily abundant, as long as we don't pollute it all.

  • We're not doing a very good job at keeping clean air, but

  • we are trying to get better at setting up regulations to cover that.

  • Water: desalinisation plants,

  • rain collecting systems,

  • an example of which would be NASA's spin-off

  • from 2008, a portable nano mesh.

  • Basically, it's a water bottle with a filter built into it,

  • and you can go to the nastiest mud hole in Africa,

  • push through and you'll get clean drinking water on the other end;

  • and you can drink it right out of the same bottle you just dumped

  • because the technology involved (and when people think technology

  • they're only thinking computers and bells and whistles and Star Trek),

  • it doesn't always have to be that high tech.

  • It can be as simple as a nano mesh material

  • that allows you to get clean drinking water relatively easily.

  • NASA creates these spin-off magazines every single year.

  • They're online, they're free, and they show

  • technological progress that either NASA directly invented

  • to help people out for the consumer market,

  • or they've helped companies

  • develop technologies to a higher level, using NASA know-how.

  • Food.

  • This goes slightly towards what I'm focusing on right now in my life:

  • high tech farming, aquaponic and hydroponic systems.

  • Who here is familiar with aquaponics or hydroponics?

  • Ok, for those who don't know,

  • basically it's the ability to grow plants

  • vegetables, fruits, things like that,

  • without dirt, without soil.

  • It's using a liquid-based platform, and the plants work just fine.

  • It's already a proven existing technology.

  • Imagine having such a robust system

  • in a 3rd world nation where the land is arid and dead.

  • That's effectively what I'm doing,

  • but I'm adding some bells and whistles to it a bit, to make it easier

  • for the population that we're serving.

  • What CFS is doing, my company,

  • is building self-sustaining, fully automated, aquaponic farm buildings,

  • that are about 464m2 in size,

  • solar and wind powered with a battery-bank, backup system.

  • I can feed 1600 people 10 different fruits and vegetables each,

  • in that 1 building;

  • and it's completely self sustaining, collects its own water,

  • maintains its own energy balance.

  • It does not need an infusion of extra nutrients because it's aquaponic,

  • which means it has a small little fish farm built in.

  • What that means

  • is that the fish make the water dirty, through all their waste.

  • Well, guess what? The plants actually like that.

  • So, you take the dirty water. You send it over to the plants.

  • They suck out all the nutrients. That cleans the water.

  • Then you run that water back to the fish tank,

  • closed loop, symbiotic system.

  • And the fish,

  • the food that they eat is another plant that grows in the water,

  • so that is its own closed-loop system.

  • You don't have to add fish food. You don't really need to mess with it.

  • In fact, when the building is all put together, you just turn it on and walk away,

  • and it starts cranking out food: leafy greens, baby tomatoes, baby cucumbers.

  • I affectionately call it a salad factory.

  • It's really what it is, but it's a start.

  • I mean, it will put food in the bellies of people

  • who are literally starving to death by the thousands, every single day.

  • I'm going to work with governments and humanitarian organizations

  • to get these systems in place.

  • Not just drop them on a village and feed and walk away,

  • but teach these people how the system works:

  • get them educated, increase their level of knowledge;

  • work with them on how to be stewards of their own system

  • to the highest degree possible, including 3D printing systems,

  • that will manufacture their own parts from local materials,

  • but we'll get to that in a little bit.

  • Sleep: Well, that comes a lot easier when you're a lot less stressed.

  • If you have a quality life environment where your food,

  • your shelter, your water, your clothing, all of your needs are met,

  • sleep is a lot easier to come by, but it needs to be addressed.

  • You don't want to be stressed and sleepless.

  • Medical Care: This is an amazing machine!

  • It's called the 'Da Vinci' surgical assistant.

  • You can look it up on Youtube and see all kinds of videos on it. In fact,

  • I have a source sheet for all of the technologies that I'm showing you,

  • links to various aspects of these technologies that you can look up.

  • If anybody is interested in getting that source sheet,

  • I don't talk about anything without having sources

  • (that's the engineer scientist in me; I prove everything I say).

  • If anybody is interested I have a sheet. You can give me your email address

  • and I'll send an email to everybody, because I did not print them.

  • I didn't know how many people would be here, so...

  • It's much more ecologically sound if I just

  • write it down and send it to you with electrons.

  • This system allows a surgeon to manipulate a couple of handles

  • and do surgery in a way that

  • increases recovery time by 50 to 75% for the patients.

  • The incisions for various medical terms that I don't even understand...

  • They can do cardiac work, lung work, all kinds of work on the human body

  • using this machine, and it basically is

  • the ultimate assistant for the surgeons themselves.

  • It can be done remotely

  • where this system could be put in a village or a place

  • where it's hard to get doctors to, or unrealistic,

  • but we have telecommunication systems that are pretty amazing.

  • I skype with my wife pretty much every single day on this trip,

  • so if we can do that, we can do this.

  • What about technologies for quality of life?

  • What kind of things can we develop on this world

  • to create an abundance of our quality of life needs?

  • Shelter. I really got involved with contour crafting

  • and got to know the man who developed the technology.

  • He's a professor at the University of Southern California,

  • and it really all started after the Haitian earthquake a couple of years ago.

  • Now many of you, I assume, are familiar with what happened in Haiti,

  • with the earthquake that basically demolished the vast majority of the country.

  • A lot of those people are still living in tents,

  • 2 years later! How dumb is that?

  • We live in the 21st century and we can't

  • swipe and rebuild faster than that?

  • What's wrong with us? This,

  • is a robotic, self-erecting, fully automated system,

  • which can build a 2000 square-foot house,

  • which would be, what? 200 square meters, maybe?

  • I'm terrible at the conversion, in my head.

  • It'd probably be about a 200m2 house in 24 hours,

  • an entire house, including plumbing and electrical,

  • because it has additional side arms that can plumb and do the electrical as it goes.

  • And, it can...

  • It's mobile so it basically plops a house, moves along,

  • plops a house, moves along,

  • does rebar, sets the roof, does it all;

  • and he already has. You can see on the other picture here, on the side

  • where you can see how he can do complex diometries, if necessary.

  • I mean, for a place like Haiti that just got destroyed,

  • it would be really easy to just plop a bunch of square blocks at first

  • and build a quick little village, in what? A couple of days? Maybe a week,

  • especially if you have 3 or 4 of these machines set up to just create that?

  • You can recycle a lot of the materials that are there. Yes?

  • How has this technology been tested out to build full houses?

  • He doesn't have the funding yet to do that. Funding,

  • we'll get to the money-bit later.

  • That's the road block he's running into:

  • getting the funding to build the full scale prototype,

  • but he's already worked out so many of the minute details

  • that it's all about scaling after that,

  • which in and of itself is an engineering challenge, yes,

  • but not something that's insurmountable. If we can build spaceships in space

  • then we can do this.

  • Clothing and other products, textiles, anything that you would need,

  • 3D printing, automated sowing systems.

  • Imagine being your own clothing designer.

  • Instead of going with the latest fashion trend

  • of what somebody else says is popular or just going with the flow,

  • imagine taking 3 or 4 designs on your home computer,

  • merging them together, resizing it to be exactly your size

  • (not everybody is exactly a small, medium or large).

  • Make it your dimensions, your requirements,

  • and have that locally produced down the street so you can go pick it up.

  • Clothing on demand, if you will. We have so many other on-demand things, don't we?

  • Movies on demand, we do phone,

  • we've got all these little things on demand we can do.

  • We can watch a little movie on our iPhone, yay!!

  • "I watched Transformers 2 when I wanted to!"

  • Why can't you print your own clothes? Be your own designer?

  • I mean, yes, you could get stuff from other people if you really like that

  • level of fashion; but if you wanted to be your own designer, you could,

  • or the own creator of your products. Make your own bowls,

  • be a potter, in a way, or you can use a 3D CAD system

  • and design your own textiles.

  • You see this cute little sculpture here

  • was drawn up on a CAD program and completely printed from one block,

  • and it ran through the system and created that.

  • The geometry that 3D printing can create can be quite complex:

  • moving gear systems, a crescent wrench that works

  • and is strong enough to actually tighten bolts

  • and handle sheer stress loads and torque loads just fine.

  • Education. It's hard for us to disagree with the fact that

  • education today in the 21st century is pretty much more accessible now

  • than it has ever been throughout the history of mankind.

  • That ties directly in with communication.

  • The ability to learn is only limited by your access

  • to those technologies that allow you to learn.

  • One that I am highly in favor of more than anything else

  • is an on-line free platform called KhanAcademy.org.

  • How many people here are familiar with Khan Academy?

  • All right! That's the biggest group of hands I have seen yet!

  • It's an amazing software package that allows you to learn on your own.

  • You get to watch a 10-minute video on a subject of your choice

  • and then you do a couple of questions and if you pass it,

  • congratulations, you graduate to the next level on the tree.

  • I'm going to give you an example of how this works in a really fun way.

  • I have an 8-year-old daughter.

  • When she was 6 we put her on Khan Academy,

  • so it really wasn't too long [ago]; she just turned 8.

  • This really wasn't too long now; she was about 6.5 at the time.

  • We got her on there to do some math, starting with the 1+1 is 2,

  • and going through single digit math, double digit math,

  • all on her own, self-directed.

  • Daddy's orders were "30 minutes, go to Khan Academy, start there and just...

  • go for 30 minutes and I'll come and get you when you're done."

  • "Ok!" Do dido dido and goes and does it.

  • About 20 minutes into it, she comes up to me and says: "Daddy, I don't know a word."

  • And I go "What's the word? " And she goes "obtusé"

  • "Obtusé? Obtuse!?

  • As in acute, obtuse, right angle, trigonometric identities, really?"

  • "Yeah." That's exactly what she was doing.

  • She had brought herself all the way down to the intro

  • to trigonometric identities, angles, right angles;

  • she had already passed the lessons on degrees and gradients, and she had moved...

  • Did I have anything to do with that? No.

  • It's amazing what kids will teach themselves if given the freedom to do so,

  • and now the Khan Academy is being used

  • in California with the school system (they partner together),

  • so that the students are kind of quasi-teachers of themselves.

  • The teacher is more like a referee. They just kind of walk around the room

  • and all these computers and these kids are talking to each other,

  • and they're helping each other and collaborating, and they're cooperating.

  • The kids that get it are helping the kids that don't get it

  • and things like that, in a very open source, 'Linux' kind of way

  • (we'll get to that analogy in a second)

  • and it has shown amazing results!

  • There are 8th graders doing differential calculus.

  • They're in 8th grade!! They don't know they're not supposed to be doing it

  • because the teachers are not giving them limits.

  • They're not telling them "No, you're not suppose to learn that until high school."

  • They're like "Go, whatever! Learn whatever you want. As long as you pass it,

  • and you can explain it, and you can help your fellow class mates,

  • do it!" And they are.

  • There's a lot of social studies out there indicating that

  • the current methods of education, this industrial

  • factory- line kind of model that we have,

  • is actually counter-productive to how the human brain works

  • and how we process information and truly learn.

  • There's a difference between rote memorization

  • and actually learning the foundations of a subject

  • so that you can then repeat it over and over again.

  • Now we get to Clean Energy Systems.

  • An absolute necessity on Mars, they can be achieved in a lot of different ways,

  • but here on Earth, we actually have a little bit easier time of it

  • because we have more dimensions to our clean energy access.

  • You have solar, which most people are aware of.

  • Then you have wind. Now when most people think wind power

  • they think big giant turbine fans that take up hundreds of acres of land,

  • spinning around this way.

  • Vertical farms, vertical wind farms (Verfs)

  • would be much more efficient. They take much less footprint,

  • and if you put magnetic bearings in the bottom,

  • that wind vein actually floats, with much less friction

  • than using straight-up gears,

  • which means you could blow on it and it will spin.

  • The cut-in wind speed is drastically lower

  • with magnetically-levitating, vertical wind systems.

  • So, you can then install all over the place

  • things like you see on the right picture

  • these vertical wind farms built into the lights,

  • so when a car drives by, what does it create?

  • A nice, good gust of wind. So, that makes the fan turn,

  • which then charges the battery, which then runs the lights.

  • Every car that goes by basically keeps the system going.

  • If we have a high volume traffic area or just a breeze during the day,

  • it'll charge up the battery so it will last all night long.

  • The only thing you've got to change is a battery once every decade,

  • if you have a good battery. So there you go, great independence,

  • or at least one option of it.

  • Bloom energy, with fuel cell systems:

  • It's an amazing technology that he just came out with recently.

  • You can look this up (I have links to it anyway).

  • Basically it's a fuel cell system derived out of sand.

  • I think we have got enough sand on this planet,

  • so there shouldn't be too much of a shortage of being able to build these things.

  • That's what makes it so brilliant, is what it's made out of,

  • and it's highly efficient.

  • Now we get to transportation systems, clean transportation systems

  • that are powered by the clean energy that we just reviewed.

  • There's more energy systems then just what I've showed. There's geothermal,

  • wind, wave and tidal.

  • There are different clean energy sources.

  • It's not about one holy grail energy,

  • cold fusion or something like that

  • to power the entire planet with one thing.

  • Realistically you would want a more dynamic energy grid anyway

  • that's not so centralized and dependent on just one source.

  • You would have every building in the city with a little bit of wind

  • a little bit of solar, geothermal if you can tap it,

  • a kind of marriage of these different systems

  • so that you are more robust in your capabilities for power generation.

  • This is what we do on the ISS or the space shuttle.

  • The space station doesn't just do solar.

  • It has fuel cells built into it as well.

  • Solar is the primary force because it's up in space

  • and solar access is a lot easier,

  • but it's not just one thing. You don't single source.

  • When it comes to transportation there are things like 'ULTRA'

  • which is a little automated vehicle that doesn't have a driver.

  • You just hop in and punch where you want to go

  • and it pulls out. It has GPS and

  • it has the whole path programmed into it, and it goes.

  • This exists right now at Heathrow Airport.

  • They're already running tests on it right now

  • and it's doing quite well.

  • Electric cars: I've picked the fancier version to show.

  • Of course, they don't have to be sports cars like Tesla.

  • You've got the Nissan Leaf, which has recently come out,

  • and I'm sure more of the car industry

  • is going to jump on the electric vehicle bandwagon,

  • and as the push for that starts to become more serious,

  • one of the biggest detriments that we have right now

  • is the infrastructure to recharge the electric cars.

  • But in the same way that we ended up putting gas stations

  • all over the planet, you can put recharge centers all over the planet.

  • You can convert gas stations to recharge centers,

  • or instead of that, why not battery swap centers,

  • which is also another technological option that's out there.

  • You don't recharge your battery while you're sitting there

  • because that takes several hours. You just pull up,

  • a machine goes underneath, pulls your battery out the bottom,

  • takes it off to go to a recharge station built into the center

  • and it puts a brand new freshly charged one in.

  • (They're all inter-compatible) and you just take off.

  • That takes five minutes. By the time you go in, get a soda,

  • go to the bathroom, grab a candy bar, you come back out

  • and your car has been switched out, just like at the gas station.

  • Other transportation options will be fully automated cars

  • that drive themselves. Stanford University

  • is working on a vehicle that drives itself.

  • [It] learns and studies traffic patterns and knows what a red light means,

  • how 4-way traffic would work at a stop sign,

  • things that you can program in, test, and fine tune.

  • Google car is also another one that they're working on.

  • There are many projects involved with automated vehicles

  • that can take themselves around.

  • Imagine you have to go somewhere

  • and you just hop on your iPhone or smartphone,

  • and you start punching in the request for a vehicle

  • and it pulls up on its own. You hop in,

  • and it takes you where you want to go, and then you hop out.

  • Transport on demand,

  • Maglev train systems:

  • They're well-known. They're just not out there enough.

  • Asia is really big on them, and they work rather well.

  • You can clean-energy power these.

  • Imagine putting mini-vertical wind turbine systems on the train itself,

  • so as it sped by at 200 mph, you have these wind veins on the top going ballistic

  • that will basically power all the internal systems of the train as it went,

  • so then the only thing you really have to power is the Maglev system itself,

  • which also could be solar, wind and clean-energy powered

  • in stations along the track.

  • Communication: It'd be hard pressed for anybody to disagree

  • with how robust our communication systems are these days.

  • I don't really have to hammer that point too much.

  • I'm actually surprised nobody is texting now. [Laughter]

  • This guy is annoying. [Laughter]

  • Let's go hypothetical a little bit, but

  • the technologies are real. We just covered all the biological

  • and the quality of life needs that could be met with technical abundance

  • so that everybody has access to the things

  • that would make their lives great.

  • After such abundant solution sets are implemented,

  • can the current system that we live in handle that?

  • Does our current socio-economic model take into account

  • our ability to advance to an abundance paradigm?

  • - Technology contracted towards the system economy, I would say.

  • Sustainability...

  • - I would venture to say no.

  • Our current socio-economic model can't handle this,

  • and the reason why is because the current socio-economic model

  • could not have predicted the world that we're in now.

  • People don't seem to realize that

  • what we use as our modern form of economics

  • is basically 200 - 300 years old

  • and has been twisted and manipulated here and there over time,

  • but it was designed, the root foundations of it were designed

  • during a time and age where scarcity and deprivation

  • and haves and have nots were pretty much the dominant force on the planet.

  • The only way you can create anything was by people serving people;

  • other people had to do it.

  • We can go back thousands of years for the basic root systems

  • of what markets were, what economics had been turned into.

  • Even though, by definition, economics is supposed to be household management:

  • the most efficient, sustainable way to handle

  • the resources that you have at hand.

  • It's pretty obvious we are not doing a very good job

  • of managing our economics when you see the planet start to stress;

  • you see people start to stress.

  • There are a lot of issues built into what we have now

  • versus what we are capable of accomplishing.

  • We can do a 'now in need' comparison

  • and just think about these topics in that way.

  • Right now we have a system based on scarcity, haves versus have nots.

  • Whether that scarcity is natural or artificial pretty much doesn't matter.

  • Some people can manufacture scarcity

  • by limiting the amount of a product in the market

  • thereby driving its value up artificially;

  • or a natural disaster could mess with the orange crop,

  • so the orange value goes up, something like that.

  • What we need is a system based on technical abundance

  • that can mitigate a lot of those negatives,

  • prevent natural disasters from affecting crops

  • by doing more climate controlled systems.

  • Things like I'm doing with my buildings where it doesn't matter

  • if its -10 degrees outside or a 105.

  • The building will still produce quality food

  • at a nice temperature of about 72.

  • What we have is a system based on inefficient human labor

  • as the main driver of how we get things done:

  • how people are paid, labor for income, things like that.

  • What we need is a system based on efficient technical labor

  • as the main driver,

  • because it's pretty obvious that the machines we've invented

  • are way better than us at a lot of things.

  • People don't put cars together by hand anymore.

  • Why would you do that? It's not as efficient

  • and you can be a lot more safe, a lot more accurate with technical systems.

  • Now, we're talking about dummy systems, we're not talking about

  • AI, robot, computer, you know cyborg stuff here.

  • That's a completely different topic.

  • We're talking about systems that don't think; they just do

  • a particular assigned task.

  • What we have now is a system based on cyclical consumption

  • for constant growth.

  • What we need is a system based on sustainability and balance.

  • How many planet Earths do we have?

  • How can you cyclically consume

  • and expect constant growth on a finite world?

  • Either better find another planet

  • and better find a way to get there really soon, that you can live on,

  • or you have to change what you're doing

  • on the one-and-only world you've got at the moment, anyway;

  • and if we don't, the planet's going to be fine.

  • It will continue on for another couple of billion years till the sun expands,

  • sucks in the inner solar system and then goes nova and

  • blows us all out in a big beautiful explosion of particles.

  • It's going to happen anyway.

  • The planet doesn't care, but as George Carlin would say

  • "We're screwed

  • if we don't fix it."

  • We have a system based on ownership and control.

  • What we need is a system based on usership (I made that one up;

  • and it's difficult to say, too. I going to change the word. I'll figure it out later.)

  • and open access. OK?

  • Where did ownership come from?

  • It makes sense if you go back several hundred years

  • to the notion of agriculture.

  • If you go back even further in time, we didn't have that hiccup.

  • We didn't have ownership as a primary requirement.

  • Nomadic hunter-gatherers didn't care about owning anything.

  • They moved too much. They were in smaller groups that just

  • went down the river. They didn't stay anywhere. They kind of

  • did what they had to in that zone when the plants and the foliage...

  • couldn't eat anything any more. The hunting was gone.

  • They would move down into a different location,

  • so they didn't really own the land. They used the land.

  • They were usership. They just got what they needed.

  • That was natural abundance: not a whole lot of people, big old giant planet.

  • It worked out well, in that paradigm,

  • but as we got more advanced and population began to grow,

  • and it really grew a lot when we had the agricultural revolution;

  • now you had land that you had to cultivate.

  • So, I must put a fence around that land

  • so I can protect it from somebody else coming in and taking control,

  • or trying to mess with all the hard work that I put into it.

  • So, now I've got this land that I've got to protect.

  • I can't always do it myself, so maybe I should hire a couple of guys

  • to do it for me, and I'll pay them with food, but I'll get them some clubs.

  • So, now we have the police and military coming into effect.

  • If you start looking at how all these systems propagate themselves,

  • that's where you get the kind of world we have today.

  • Mine, I own it, I'm going to protect it,

  • and if you try to take it I'm going to whack you over the head with a club,

  • or shoot a missile at you, or whatever. Right?

  • 21st century version of club.

  • Think about this in terms of usership:

  • Do you want to own a car, do you need to own a car,

  • or do you just need on-demand access to transportation

  • to go where you want, when you want?

  • Anybody who lives in a city that has a good public transportation system,

  • like Oslo or Stockholm

  • (where I just recently was a couple of days ago)

  • there are a lot of people (or Manhattan in New York)

  • who don't own cars at all, and they haven't owned cars for years.

  • I've got a friend who lives in New York. He hasn't had a car for over 5 years.

  • Why? Don't need one! Go anywhere you want, whenever you want,

  • the mass transit system is pretty good.

  • It's not as clean or efficient as it could be

  • if you'd put in Maglev systems, automated vehicles

  • shared cars, things like that,

  • but it's not bad. So, people don't need cars.

  • What you would need a car for is if you're going to a remote area,

  • but could you not maybe check out a car

  • like you would check out a book at a library?

  • Check out a vehicle, use it for when you need it, bring it back.

  • Have the respect and understanding, the proper educational foundation

  • to understand that that vehicle is

  • everybody's to use; just like the library book would be.

  • Do you grab the library book, go home, and use it in the fireplace?

  • No! Because you've been taught to respect the book

  • and other people can read it and enjoy it.

  • Same idea with the vehicles or other commodities

  • that we think we need to own.

  • Statistical fact: A car sits and does nothing for 80% of its life.

  • It's parked.

  • If you look at how many hours a day you actually drive

  • versus how many hours a day it sits,

  • it's about 20 to 25% of the time that you actually use it.

  • Yet you spend how much money on a car?

  • Like in America you are averaging $20,000 - $30,000

  • for a big complex piece of machinery

  • that you drive 25% of the time.

  • Don't you think that's kind of a waste of resources,

  • a waste of potential for that vehicle?

  • It's something to think about.

  • What we have now is a system based on outdated

  • multi, century-old ideologies and institutions.

  • What we need is a system based on forward-thinking

  • adaptation and emergence.

  • We're always getting more data, more knowledge.

  • Let's see:

  • First, the Earth is flat. Yes, it is.

  • I can see that it's flat. It's flat! You're going to fall off.

  • You do a little scientific analysis, OK, maybe not so flat.

  • New data, new way of thinking about how we work in the world,

  • different behavioral, adjustment shift.

  • No way we're ever going to go into space. Are you kidding me?

  • First of all, that looks flat too.

  • I mean, you just see stuff move around a little bit; but no,

  • that's never going to happen. Forget it!

  • And... touchdown,

  • Tranquillity Base. Now we are on the Moon.

  • Now we're in space on a regular basis.

  • OK. Forget that old data point, absorb the new data point,

  • change our way of thinking, and move forward.

  • You could probably go through 100 different scenarios like that

  • of we thought was one thing and we behaved a certain way,

  • and then we got new data, we adjusted and we moved on.

  • But you notice how there's one thing that never seems to change

  • and that's how we socio-economically operate on this planet,

  • at least for the past 5000 years or so.

  • It's almost as if money, market, economics

  • and that methodology of governing resources

  • has and always will be.

  • In the beginning God created Heaven, the Earth, banks and the markets.

  • Right?

  • Not exactly.

  • So, if all these other things can adjust and shift,

  • why can't we develop a better operating system

  • to adjust and shift to the new capabilities that we have?

  • A system based on hostile competition, secrecy and differential advantage,

  • versus a system of cooperation and collaboration of ideas

  • and information for mutual benefit.

  • One of the leading examples of what we need

  • kind of exists today with Linux,

  • and how that is an open source, interactive platform

  • that everyone can contribute to as an operating system for your computer,

  • up to and including inventing software packages that mimic Windows.

  • So if you really think about it in a way,

  • the Earth is currently still running Windows 1.0

  • and we need to upgrade to Linux.

  • Hostile competition.

  • I'm OK with competition. I like sports.

  • I'm still keeping track of the NFL play-offs, (Go Patriots!)

  • things like that,

  • but that doesn't kill anybody.

  • Economic competition can kill people,

  • and if that isn't very obvious in how

  • people are starving that shouldn't be starving,

  • how people are impoverished that shouldn't be impoverished,

  • how people don't have access to education or energy

  • or anything to live in a decent quality of life,

  • I don't know what other indicator you need.

  • Economic competition can kill people.

  • Friendly competition, two scientists going after each other:

  • "I'm going to solve this problem before you. "No you're not! "All right, fine!"

  • Go against each other, somebody wins.

  • All right. One: problem solved.

  • That's a bonus for mankind whatever that technical problem might have been,

  • and at the end of the day, they'll probably go have a beer together anyway,

  • right?

  • So, that's fine,

  • but when you live in a world where differential advantage:

  • having control over somebody else by hoarding resources

  • or monopolizing their extraction or monopolizing their use

  • or creating a whole bunch of products,

  • that is a gigantic waste of resources as a way to manipulate the system.

  • That's not good for us in the long run.

  • We live now in a system where political opinion

  • influenced by financial contributions

  • dictate the ebb and flow of global operations to benefit a select few,

  • which has kind of been the case throughout the dawn of mankind.

  • Well, not the dawn of mankind, not the hunter-gatherers, but

  • if you look at monarchies or any kind of top-down system,

  • it's a scarcity driven environment.

  • What we need is a scientific method

  • used in conjunction with human experience and technical foundations

  • to enhance the lives of all people.

  • There should be no reason why everybody on the planet

  • can't start off having a pretty good way of life

  • which enables them to acquire the educations on what they're passionate about,

  • whatever that may be, whatever influences them over the course of their life,

  • to be able to do whatever they want,

  • positively, to share with other people,

  • make the world a better place for themselves and those around them,

  • and never have to worry about the roof over their head

  • or the food in their stomach.

  • Mankind needs to move to a new and upgraded global operating system

  • typically refered to as the Resource-Based Economy,

  • which is where we use our technical foundations in a way

  • to better the life of all people.

  • This includes an educational shift, a value shift,

  • going from materialistic: "I am special if I own the most stuff",

  • or "I have the fanciest car" or "the most jewelry",

  • to a more sustainable platform of value system that says:

  • "I know that the technical systems that we've invented can benefit everyone.

  • I can contribute to that or I can benefit from it,

  • and in the meantime I can create something that somebody else might enjoy,

  • even if I'm an artist."

  • If I'm a painter or a musician,

  • and I'm not so good with technology (I understand how it works,

  • but I can't really contribute that way), that's OK

  • because what is going to happen is that scientist

  • who has a really stressful day trying to solve a problem and doesn't get it

  • is going to end up going to an art show with his wife, in a couple of days,

  • and he's going to see a piece of abstract, funky art that the artist created,

  • and they're going to accidentally see something weird in it

  • that's going to make them think about work,

  • and they'll go "Oh crap, why didn't I think about that?"

  • and the next day they're going to go back to work and end up solving the problem.

  • Accidental successes:

  • seeing things in the arts that you might not have otherwise seen;

  • hearing a piece of music that relaxes you.

  • All those things add up as a community, as a society,

  • that work together, where everybody ends up benefiting

  • out of everybody else's

  • contributions;

  • but it is not a direct contribution like...

  • What's that good old Marxian term?

  • Forget it.

  • What? Each to their labor, to their need, or whatever the case may be.

  • Going back to good old fashion socialism and communism,

  • failed experiments that couldn't work anyway,

  • because they were enforced. They weren't evolved.

  • You see, we're living in a world now where we can,

  • if we came together in the right kind of way, we could make this stuff happen

  • because we have technical capabilities to do so. Before, we didn't.

  • Now we can let the technology do the vast majority of the labor for us,

  • so that we can actually hang out with each other,

  • so we can get to know each other better as a species,

  • and so that we can advance ourselves even beyond just living on this planet.

  • But remember,

  • there are no Utopias. This isn't about making everything perfect.

  • There's no such thing as perfect anyway.

  • There are always going to be new challenges and new problems

  • to tackle and to overcome.

  • There are going to be new tools and capabilities that are required

  • for new ways of thinking.

  • For example, try to explain

  • to a hunter-gatherer from 50,000 years ago, indoor plumbing.

  • Come on!

  • You take it for granted today,

  • but try to explain to them how the plumbing works.

  • They're going to look at you like "OK, wait.

  • I can use this thing called a tap,

  • and I can turn it any time I want and get hot or cold water?

  • I don't have to get a bucket and go down.. .It's in one place.

  • What's a building? What's a home? " OK, well now I have to explain what a home is.

  • "OK, so you've got this home that you live in and it is climate controlled."

  • "What's climate control? It's cold outside. I have to deal with it."

  • "No, actually you can regulate the temperature."

  • You start adding these things up and that

  • hunter-gatherer is going to call you a Utopianist.

  • "Are you crazy? That's nuts! There is no way we can live in a world like that!

  • I'm a hunter-gatherer. That's what I do. It's what I've always done.

  • It's what my granddad did and their granddad did, and all the way down the line.

  • We just nomadically go everywhere, and that's what we do."

  • But we didn't stay that way.

  • It just so happens that in the 21st century our jumps are coming a lot faster.

  • We don't have to wait 50,000 years to go to the next level.

  • The next level is right in front of us,

  • but we have to make it happen.

  • So, how do we get there from here?

  • That is a very complicated question,

  • but it's actually not so bad.

  • Do what you love to do

  • with the notion in your head that whatever you are passionate about

  • is going to help better the lives of all mankind.

  • Sounds like a big task,

  • but if you're really passionate about what you're doing,

  • you will find ways to use your energy and use your knowledge to that end;

  • and there are a lot of ways you can do it.

  • You can join groups and organizations like Open Source Ecology,

  • which is doing amazing work on

  • how to build a civilization from the ground up,

  • using very crude, rudimentary technologies;

  • but it is still an amazing thought concept.

  • The Zeitgeist Movement, which were the people that allowed me to be here today.

  • I'm also a member of The Zeitgeist Movement,

  • but I also advocate any organization that is thinking

  • towards the betterment of mankind, The Venus Project.

  • The Venus Project is a technical-oriented group

  • that talks about a lot of the specific design systems

  • that might go into hub-cities,

  • that would be your production hubs around the planet,

  • robust transport systems, things like that.

  • The Atlas Initiative Group, which is actually trying to

  • build a resource-based economic city,

  • small scale,

  • that you could visit almost like a theme park or a vacation resort.

  • They're in early development,

  • so they're trying to figure out where. They're trying to figure out resources

  • and funding and where all that is going to come from. They need help,

  • so if anybody has knowledge they could assist, they could do that;

  • or you could start or work for CSR companies,

  • which are corporate social responsibility companies,

  • social entrepreneurs, people who understand

  • that we're stuck in the existing model that we're in, yes,

  • and I'll use what I've got with the intent

  • of making things better sustainably for mankind.

  • Not the old 'profit at all cost' mentality;

  • OK profit, but help people and do good ecologically-sound things

  • with the company that you create or become a part of.

  • Igenius.org is an institution in the United Kingdom

  • that does micro-financing for CSR companies, for social-entrepreneurs.

  • So, if you don't know what companies out there exist

  • that's a good place to start to find a whole list

  • of companies that they've supported, that are in work or in development,

  • and there are many more options that you can choose from.

  • It all boils down to doing what you are passionate about

  • in a way that can affect positive change.

  • Whining and complaining about this system from the comfort of your couch

  • or from your computer is not going to help the world become a better place.

  • We need to get offline and get in the real world,

  • because that's how you're going to affect people's lives.

  • Even people who are so married to the system

  • that they can't possibly see a future without it,

  • the moment you start improving their living conditions

  • through technical systems that makes their life a little bit easier,

  • that erodes their dependency on money to survive,

  • that's when people are going to start seeing the world in a different way,

  • and it is going to take time, but I'm not doing this for me.

  • I have an 8-year girl that I'm doing this for.

  • Global Sustainability is about us getting out there and doing something.

  • Science, engineering and technology can be used for human concern.

  • It can be done in a way where the technology doesn't rule us,

  • it enhances us;

  • and that's the future that I'm pushing towards.

  • Thank you! [Applause]

  • - Thank you! - Thank you! I'll do some questions.

  • All right! Who wants to party tonight? [Laughter]

  • I've partied in every city... I've tried to experience the night life

  • in every city I've had the pleasure of visiting, so...

  • Maybe we could make something of this bottle.

  • All right. Questions?

  • I'm sure probably a few of you have got some. Yes Sir?

  • - Is the Sulou Foundation, is that a part of this CRS?

  • - Is what? - Sulou? Soulos? Foundation.

  • - I don't know what that is. -The Solus Foundation?

  • - I have no... - The Saurus Foundation! - Oh Saurus!

  • Is that what you mean, Saurus? - Yeah, Saulos.

  • I don't know. That's kind of a slippery slope.

  • You've got people who think "New World Order, crazy rich people

  • trying to take over everyone" and then you've got, you know,

  • "actually is doing some pretty good stuff in the world" people, so...

  • - What it is talking about is those who rule the world. - Yeah, well...

  • - Manipulate it. - Manipulate the world, yes.

  • I think those are the people that have played the game the best,

  • by the rules that are put in front of them.

  • I don't necessarily consider the wealthy elite to be some nefarious,

  • evil organization; I don't believe in conspiracy theories and all that stuff.

  • I believe any and all organizations can be put to good use,

  • if the right people get involved to make things happen in the right way.

  • What it basically...

  • It's kind of a negative word but 'infiltration',

  • getting in there and changing the way people think

  • and using those resources and that influence

  • for the betterment of all mankind, is a direction we should be heading,

  • and not ostracizing.

  • - But he is considered as a philanthropist...

  • - Yes. - but he is still doing the opposite.

  • - Yes, I know. So that's OK.

  • Use the philanthropic aspect to our greatest advance

  • to do whatever can be done to use that for the betterment of mankind.

  • Eventually we are going to run to a crossroad:

  • We either fix what we're doing and become more sustainable

  • on this planet, or we snuff it. [It's] one or the other.

  • It's not going to be pretty if we continue doing what we're doing.

  • - This is just an example. - Right! I agree.

  • You!? After class! [Laughter]

  • Yes? - By way of transformation of society,

  • what type of work would still remain?

  • - What would people do with themselves? Yes, OK.

  • Try to get out of the box of thinking of the limits of current employment

  • and think about what future employments might exist

  • that aren't even there yet. I mean,

  • go back 50 years and try to explain what IT is.

  • Information Technology, right?

  • New jobs will manifest, but think about this:

  • When you don't have restrictions of a lot of money or political influence

  • restricting advancements of certain sectors,

  • you could have underwater cities where you can do all kinds of oceanographic research.

  • You could have floating cities that go around in the oceans

  • and do all kinds of research there.

  • You could have a much more robust space platform: space stations,

  • moon bases, so you could go up and literally live on the moon.

  • When you start removing a lot of those restrictions

  • the potentials out there are vast,

  • but it's also about not having to work 40 hours a week.

  • Maybe you work 20 hours a week. Maybe you work 10.

  • However, if you think about it this way:

  • What would you do with yourself all day?

  • How many people do you know go to a job that they probably don't like so much,

  • but they go anyway because they have bills to pay;

  • and then they start doing their hobby,

  • which takes 15-20 hours of their day. They're just at it all the time.

  • They just love their hobby, and they're doing their thing.

  • It might not have anything to do with their normal job.

  • That hobby is what they would do all day.

  • You would do your personal passion, whatever that happens to be.

  • If that means you work with a group of people

  • because you are a hydroponics expert and that's what you love,

  • and you are interested in that, you'll find groups in your local area

  • that are basically the same thing, and you'll work on all the hydroponics systems

  • that are in your town or in your local area;

  • or you'll work with research and development groups that are trying to

  • come up with better ways to do things and invent new ways to do things,

  • or if you're an artist or something that's actually really easy.

  • I could imagine the arts just going berserk-oid

  • in a world where you don't have to worry about

  • the roof over your head or the food in your belly.

  • No more starving artist, that term will kind of go away.

  • But, not so bad, I mean, I'm sure an artist can voluntarily try to starve

  • to get the experience. " I'm gonna go live in the woods for 2 weeks

  • so I can get dragged down to the depth and find my soul and all of that."

  • That's what very accepted artists do! My wife's an artist

  • so its a running joke that we have.

  • What about all the restaurants, the waiters, the service industry?

  • Like waiters? Well yes, I mean there are people who enjoy

  • the social interaction of being a waiter or waitress,

  • so those jobs, they would be there for them.

  • There would be kind of a hybrid system. Some of it could be automated

  • like a couple of droids running around for lack of a better term

  • in a Star Wars way. I was highly influenced by Star Wars

  • as a kid. That's what got me into space exploration,

  • this path in the first place, was that film when I was 8 years old.

  • So, you could have a hybrid system of some technical help

  • and some real people.

  • Chefs could, instead of Emeril or whoever, for example

  • they would still do their culinary art thing and invent these great practices,

  • then you can go into a high tech stage system,

  • record how Emeril's cooking everything,

  • a computer can record all those movements

  • and translate that to a robot, so then a robot halfway around the planet

  • could literally make a dish exactly like Emeril does, using the same moves,

  • literally carbon copying the entire system.

  • So, you can have Emerils all over the place, have that food style.

  • You go to the Emeril restaurants. Well, that's not Emeril cooking the food

  • in all those restaurants, but in the RBE system, in a way,

  • you kind of do have Emerils all over the planet,

  • or at least likenesses thereof.

  • So, that allows things to be a little more robust

  • but people can still pursue their passions, whatever they happen to be.

  • - So, what is the biggest obstacle you think

  • for making these sketches that you have shown into reality?

  • - Getting past the self-imposed roadblocks of what we can and can't do.

  • A lot of people just don't think certain advancements

  • like this are possible.

  • It's also a value set change.

  • There's no way you could drop the entire world population

  • into a world like this, into the RBE system,

  • the Resource-Based Economic system and expect them to function.

  • They wouldn't know what to do with themselves.

  • That level of automation, that level of freedom

  • that thinking of "No, I have to go to work. I have to pay the bills.

  • That's what I got to do," although they say they are free.

  • There are these rote things that we do all the time;

  • you must break through those barriers.

  • You don't tell people how to change.

  • You make it easier for them to change on their own.

  • That's why I'm doing the food system, what I'm doing with my company.

  • I'm going to improve the lives of people throughout the world as best I can

  • by providing an abundant access to food at a one time cost.

  • Because see, I'm not selling food. I'm selling food factories,

  • and that's a one-time cost. You buy into it once,

  • and now you have access to that building for the rest of your life.

  • So, it's a constant food supply, and now you've eroded the need for money for that.

  • Then you do that for energy. You do that for transportation.

  • You start going down the line.

  • People will be like "All right, I've got all this free money to go on a cruise or go on this,

  • because now my house is off the grid so I don't have an electric bill anymore.

  • Some organization helped me do that."

  • You start doing this all over the place, and then people are going to have

  • really fat wallets with a whole lot of money, and not a whole lot of bills;

  • and eventually a light bulb is going to go off and be like

  • "What do I need all this paper for?"

  • I mean "I've got all these technical systems that improved my life,

  • so that now I have all this money, and I can do what I like,

  • but I don't have all these bills. Then, after that it's just 'whoosh',

  • do the rest and it will follow.

  • - What about the economic system?

  • Because a lot of these things that you're talking about

  • today, they are not profitable.

  • Nobody wants to invest in it, because

  • you don't get profit.

  • - You play the game by the rules that exist, for the sake of profit,

  • but you do it in a way so that your product is sustainable.

  • It might have short term rewards, sure,

  • but in the long run, you know what the end goal is.

  • That's where the erosion of the system,

  • the changing of the thinking of people comes into play.

  • Yes, your investors are going to get their 7-year ROI,

  • their 'Return on Investment', and they're going to be happy and done,

  • and you're still going to have your company,

  • and doing good and improving the world.

  • You're still going to be creating sustainable systems.

  • You start getting organizations

  • and entities and companies like that all over the place,

  • and that's going to start manifesting a serious change within the existing system.

  • You have got to use what you're stuck in.

  • - But then the economic system today?

  • - What about it?

  • - Well, it doesn't allow investing in things like sustainable.

  • - Yes, it does! There are institutions out there; there are philanthropists

  • like you talked about, not necessarily Sauros, but there are others out there.

  • There are avenues that you can go through.

  • I mean, I wouldn't have been able to start my company

  • if there weren't people out there to invest in what I'm doing.

  • They exist. You just have to find them. Now the footwork's a little bit harder,

  • but nobody ever said this was going to be easy.

  • - Back to the economic system,

  • the interest system. That's the key.

  • - It's a broken idea too. An interest manufactured out of nothing

  • from a finite money supply is kind of an interesting concept.

  • You don't print the interest money. You only print the base of the principal.

  • - Making money out of nothing...

  • - Yes, that's one of the inherent problems of the system

  • but there's nothing you can do about that. It's not about...

  • You can't erode the economic model as it sits

  • by trying to attack the economic model.

  • You make the current system obsolete

  • by bringing about a better, more improved system,

  • and so you just bypass. Yes, those are issues we're going to have to deal with,

  • but if you're creating sustainable systems that help people,

  • you end up mitigating that anyway,

  • because their dependency on money in the first place goes down.

  • Yes? - Don't you... oh, sorry.

  • Don't you think that

  • this part that you're describing sounds a little bit like

  • c... commu... - Communism?

  • - Yes, communism, because everybody is provided for.

  • Nobody should be able to live in a wasteful way;

  • if I want to have like a really wasteful car, I shouldn't be able to do that.

  • - Well, the first question is: Why do you think you need

  • a big wasteful car in the first place? - No, I don't think I need one.

  • - I know you don't, but why do people think that?

  • There's this marketing and propaganda machine

  • that says to have the biggest, the baddest and the best,

  • and that's quite wasteful. That's the system that we're in.

  • It's not communism though, in a lot of respects.

  • First of all, communism was enforced on people.

  • This is an organic, bottom-up evolution of people's thinking.

  • This is... We have all these technical capabilities.

  • That's also something we didn't have back then.

  • Communism was very much a military dictatorship

  • forced upon the people to say "Everybody's going to have

  • a great life."

  • You don't tell everyone they're going to have a great life and then

  • force everyone to work for each other in that way.

  • Obviously it didn't work.

  • What you do is you organically, from the bottom-up, say:

  • "Here are all of our technical capabilities,

  • so many things that never existed to relieve the human labor burden."

  • Communism and all those 'isms' still require humans serving humans

  • in the most basic of ways.

  • We're bypassing all that together with the technical systems

  • that we have today in the 21st century.

  • You have to remember that a of of these progresses have really only been

  • sustainable like that or robust, in the past 30 to 40 years; about 30,

  • when you've got dexterous robots that can do fine tune picking

  • for harvesting plants or what not.

  • When you've got much better work... We've gone from Atari

  • to XBoxConnect in how long of a period of time?

  • So, it's that quantum leap in technical capability that has given us

  • a new paradigm that transcends the old 'isms',

  • because there's no way they could have envisioned a world

  • like what we live in today.

  • Who knows what we're going to have 50 years from now?

  • What we do have now are sustainable systems in place

  • that we could implement if we really wanted to.

  • That's why it's different than communism and socialism.

  • It's a ground swell up

  • of implementing these systems to better the lives of people

  • and naturally society will, on its own,

  • move towards a better thought process, a more sustainable way of living.

  • It's already seen in a lot of the younger generations,

  • of the green movements and the ecological thinking, and

  • there's something wrong with the way we do things

  • and The Occupy Movement and all these different...

  • People know something's wrong; a lot of people know something's wrong.

  • Not a lot of them have the courage to stand up and yell about it

  • because they've got a family to protect or some kind of vested interest,

  • but a lot of the younger generations are saying

  • "Time out, this is screwed up"

  • and so this is the moment in human history where we can

  • take all of our bells and whistles and start using them for mutual advantage

  • without subjugating somebody else to work for us,

  • which is where the old 'isms' fell apart.

  • You still had to subjugate somebody else to work for you.

  • The only thing you're subjugating in this system is a machine,

  • a dumb machine; and

  • for example, my hydroponic and my aquaponic system

  • doesn't care what you do all day.

  • It doesn't care if you play XBox all day long,

  • or if you're a rocket scientist.

  • It's still going to make food, all the time, every day, no matter what.

  • That's different than a person laboring for a product or food,

  • and now you've got the person with an emotional attachment to that labor

  • saying "I don't want all my work to go to some lazy guy!

  • I want it to go to someone who is deserving."

  • The paradigm shifts when it's

  • a tech doing the work that doesn't have that emotional baggage,

  • and that actually frees people to be

  • a little more interactive with each other in the process.

  • Yes? - Do you have any recommendations in terms of

  • how you should bring up children

  • to understand these predicaments and problems?

  • I am a strong advocate of home schooling

  • because that's what I do with my child.

  • Because I think the industrial model of

  • children being a cog in the wheel that are just supposed to obey the teacher,

  • obey authority and don't question me,

  • and when you're done, graduate and go get a job,

  • that's really the process that we have today.

  • Home schooling and there are other schooling institutions

  • that are more organic than that industrial method

  • and those can be researched and found out.

  • That would be a way to bring up children:

  • to think about the world in a more critical way,

  • to question authority, to question things,

  • does E = mc2 still hold true?

  • We do that in the sciences all the time.

  • Nothing always just stays exactly the same;

  • we revisit these all the time

  • and try to see if we can break them,

  • and if it still holds true, OK, cool, and then we move forward.

  • Does Newtonian Mechanics still work? No, not on the quantum level.

  • OK, now we have to come up with Quantum Mechanics.

  • So, we have to challenge ourselves to invent a new paradigm.

  • It's that critical thinking process that I think a lot of people have lost,

  • because they're regimented into this little kind of like 'robot of the system' way.

  • The people have become the robots, in some respects.

  • So, if you can educate children to be more dynamic,

  • to have better critical thinking skills,

  • to question things, to learn how to research

  • and don't just take for granted what somebody says.

  • I'll tell my daughter something that I know is wrong,

  • and then she'll be like "OK" and I go "Wait!

  • You just think because I said it, that it's true?"

  • And she's like "Yeah, you're my dad! " I go "That doesn't matter.

  • Just because I'm the authority figure doesn't necessarily mean

  • that I'm giving you the right information. Go look it up.

  • Go to Google, go to a library. " Well,

  • kind of hard for an 8-year-old to go to the library, but ...

  • "Go research it. Am I right?

  • Tell me if I'm right, and if I'm wrong, tell me I'm wrong!

  • And show me!" "No dad, this..."

  • She's getting a lot better at that now, by the way [laughing],

  • which is good! It gets her in a different state of mind.

  • And then, of course, there's the obvious ones of recycle,

  • reuse, reduce waste; how you live your life at home is how your children

  • are going to end up living their lives in the future, anyway.

  • You get a lot of those base practices built in

  • right off the get-go, and that's how it will happen.

  • Yes? - So you have this term, this 'getting off the grid' term,

  • is that something that you've thought about? It wasn't on the list of 'to do's' but...

  • Right, yes,

  • I'm going to get off the grid, absolutely.

  • I'm going to do everything I can to build my own home,

  • get it solar, wind, water collector,

  • artificial aquifer 10-feet under the ground

  • to maintain a stable temperature for the water and

  • yatayatayata, I'm going to do everything I can.

  • The problem in today's world is that it costs a lot of money to do it

  • and I know that,

  • so I'm going to use my company and what I'm doing to get myself off the grid,

  • and then I'm going to start an institution

  • that's going to be designed to help other people get off the grid, and

  • I'm going to use the profits from my company to help others get off the grid;

  • and hopefully, I can work with other groups to do the same thing:

  • to get them solar and winded and get their electric bill squared away,

  • whatever I can legally do because, unfortunately,

  • a lot of governments are starting to put heavy restrictions

  • on how 'off the grid' somebody can get.

  • [sarcastically] Thank you power companies with big budgets and lobbying firms

  • that get into the back pockets of the politicians. The system is broken,

  • but we can get around that.

  • - Why is it broken?

  • - For what I just said. The influences of power of money can affect the politicians

  • that are supposed to be making the rules for our betterment.

  • - Money, and what's money, today?

  • - It's an amorphous blob of nonsense.

  • [laughter]

  • - No, it's influence, interests.

  • That's a key thing here. It's a key thing, the interests.

  • - True. - That's making money out of nothing.

  • That's a very old tradition and it's outdated.

  • - Agree. The whole system does.

  • But if you abandon the interest in the money system,

  • it would be much easier to implement these ideas,

  • today! To start today,

  • because this might take 50 years.

  • - As soon as you write up a paper on exactly how we can do that, I'll read it.

  • - Yes you can do it, if you abandon the interest from the money system.

  • - Right. Any other questions? Yes?

  • - ...but this is important!

  • - ... start this model for aquaponics, hydroponics

  • - Say again, I'm sorry, I missed the beginning.

  • - How long did it take you to arrive at this final model?

  • - And energy efficiency and... - Oh...

  • I'm still in phase 1 operations right now.

  • I literally just put everything together and got all the parts 3 days before

  • I left on this trip. The company's brand new. I've just started it.

  • I've already done a year's worth of research

  • and writing up, doing schematics and drawings and things like that,

  • as far as blue printing is concerned, the engineering side of it.

  • Now it's the proof and development phase, the research and development phase.

  • Right now I'm developing a low power, grow light system,

  • because you can't be off the grid. You can't be solar and wind powered

  • if you have 200 growth chambers at 250 watt bulbs a piece.

  • That would be highly energy intensive. You can't do it very well,

  • so I've developed a low-powered lighting system that I'm testing,

  • and then that should be done in about a month or 2, and I'll know its viability.

  • Then I go to phase 2 which is prototype development.

  • That's actually not that difficult since all these technical systems exist,

  • we're just systems engineering. We are putting them together in a way,

  • setting up the programs and getting all the bells and whistles squared away.

  • Then when that's done, we can be off and running on production scale,

  • so I'm looking at 12 months or less to have these systems ready to go,.

  • and then we construct it on demand. It's not like I'm going to have a warehouse

  • of a bunch of parts. When a country wants something

  • I'll order it, then we'll ship it there and build it on the sight.

  • Things like that, that's how it's going to work.

  • I don't think this thing likes me. [laughter]

  • Off. Now that will turn off the lights. Forget it. Anyway...

  • Yes? - I am curious about the 3D printing machine.

  • - OK. - What kind of materials would the machine be using

  • in order to create items and buildings and so on?

  • - The most recent thing that I have seen (I'm not a 3D printing expert),

  • recently as in a couple of days ago,

  • was a news video on YouTube (I think you can look it up, actually)

  • where they use a powder resin; it's a powder,

  • and they literally... It's almost... think of it like ink jet.

  • They use this powder resin to create a crescent wrench.

  • They scan the crescent wrench into the computer,

  • and then it goes and prints it with the working wheel and everything,

  • and he uses it and turns a bolt, but it's made out of powder resin.

  • I don't know exactly what that's made of, or how that works, but

  • you could also carve stuff, using a 3D lathe,

  • that will move the objects around and can create a part,

  • or something to that effect out of a smaller system.

  • Then there's the RepRap. That's another [3D printer]. You can look it up,

  • and that's a system that you can actually

  • use a RepRap to build another RepRap,

  • and then it can build other parts, so it's like a self-replicating device

  • where you can build other parts, and they're small

  • and they can go in your house, and you can make simple things out of that.

  • I am not a 3D printing expert but I know it's a technology

  • that is advancing tremendously fast.

  • Yes? - I think it's actually just a regular plaster

  • and they just coat it with a hardened glue.

  • - It's something to research.

  • [imperceptible speech]

  • ...most 3D printers use the same substance that you have labeled once.

  • [imperceptible speech]

  • But I have a question, as well,

  • going back to the idea of how to get there from here,

  • how do you deal with the issue of land ownership?

  • I mean just the concept of it. I mean I see how you can

  • take a few steps right now and sort of make a city,

  • and then just, in a way, compete, and then say:

  • "Well, do you want to live in that city with pollution and the way it is,

  • or you want to live in a super modern city

  • of the future where everybody is happy?"

  • I think that would certainly expand the project,

  • but at one point you shouldn't have to say:

  • "OK, private ownership or state ownership of land

  • ...needs to stop."

  • - And that will happen. I can't predict the future, but I think

  • the public will be the driver of that one.

  • When they start seeing how life can be better,

  • with a less-ownership model where

  • they've got to control and own everything,

  • then you're going to look at a scenario where people might say "You know what?

  • Go ahead and let's use my land for that.

  • Let's put some aquaponic farms here, or

  • let's put a little solar collector facility over there

  • because I know that's going to feed me. That's going to help me."

  • It's a mindset change.

  • You can't force that on people

  • because they're going to resist being told what to do,

  • but if you can get those cities built, and you can start helping people

  • live a different way, you will change the way they think about themselves

  • and the world, and how they interact with others;

  • but "Rome wasn't built in a day".

  • It's really going to take the public to swell up and say "You know what?

  • We need to change how we do things."

  • Private property might be the last thing to go.

  • It might go really early. I have no idea. I can't predict that.

  • What I do know is we have the technical systems today to save a lot of lives,

  • and to make life better for a lot of people.

  • That should be our initial focus,

  • and then as we proceed further, we'll tackle other hurdles as they come;

  • but if we try to think about the big picture too much,

  • it can seem rather daunting to try and figure out

  • how you're going to change the entire planet and every human being:

  • the wealthy elites down to the corrupt politicians,

  • down to the drug war lords, down to the poor person in the street.

  • That becomes daunting. Try not to do that. You'll drive yourself nuts.

  • [laughing]

  • OK. I think we've been here a while. [laughters]

  • I really want to thank everybody for your time. Thank you for coming out.

  • If you want the source sheet for some of the information here

  • come down to the front, and you can fill out a pad

  • with your email address, and I will send it to everybody. Thank you.

  • [Applause]

Global Sustainability: Science, Engineering and Technology for Human Concern

字幕與單字

單字即點即查 點擊單字可以查詢單字解釋

B1 中級 美國腔

Douglas Mallette -- -- 科學、工程和技術促進人類關注 -- -- Blindern,在挪威奧斯陸。 (Douglas Mallette - Science, Engineering and Technology for Human Concern - Blindern, in Oslo, Norway)

  • 7 1
    王惟惟 發佈於 2021 年 01 月 14 日
影片單字