| |
DevinMcDougallFirstPaper 8 - 15 Jan 2012 - Main.EbenMoglen
|
|
META TOPICPARENT | name="FirstPaper" |
The Distributed Generation: Technology, Politics, Law | | -- DevinMcDougall - 27 Oct 2011 | |
< < | As it turns out, just to
take the last point first, electrical markets show pipes and switches
elements pretty closely. Deregulating switching into the "free
market" in electricity allocation was the big theme of the 90s among
a subgroup of deregulationists. Enron then transpired. We lost the
lesson in the larger signals generated by a more catastrophic
deregulatory nightmare late last decade, but you might want to
rethink your way through it. Maybe you need to see "The Smartest
Guys in the Room" again?
On the larger scale, I think this is an interesting beginning. You spend
too much time on the initial definitions, it seems to me; they're not
self-evident, and a reader might think herself required to decide how
precise they are, in view of their apparent precision. Either way,
that process in the reader is not what you want, because the terms
don't need to be precise the way you wind up using them. This is
supposed to be practical, after all.
The fact that "energy" is not a category harms you somewhat here. If
you were discussing "electricity" there would be, as I say, more
direct relationships in network theory of various sorts between the
metaphor you've chosen and the comparand. Maybe that's actually
undesirable, and what you want is solely a metaphor rather than
liminal ground. So maybe the path forward is to begin by answering
that question, and then we'll see how the argument should be further
developed. | > > | These are useful
revisions. I don't see a way to improve the argument within the
space available; you are necessarily hampered, at this point, by the
inability to be specific. I still think some narrowing of focus
would have facilitated that strengthening, but that's not the essay
you've written, and within the scope chosen, I don't see how you can
proceed further.
In another context, however, I would suggest again that you write out
some of the ideas that follow from this with respect to electricity.
The technical meaning of "liberalization" in this market has been the
separation of generation from distribution. If you had said a
twenty-five years ago that Con Ed was going to remain the dominant
electric utility here, but that it would altogether stop generating
power, no one would have believed you. Now, it's not even a
remarkable fact. Some rumination on that point will bring you to a
useful insight or two, I still believe. | | |
|
|
|
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors. All material marked as authored by Eben Moglen is available under the license terms CC-BY-SA version 4.
|
|
| |