> Brian Siano wrote:
>
>>> One of the biggest canards about technology is that it is neutral.
>>> Technology implies a system of social and economic relations. A nuclear
>>> power plant implies a system of economic exploitation, mass
>>> consumption, colonization, and everything else required to make a
>>> nuclear plant and justify its existence.
>
>> So how is a nuclear power plant different in this respect from, say, a
>> coal plant or a hydroelectric dam?
>
> The analogy remains the same with these other types of plants. A coal
> plant implies a system of industrial capitalism. It requires laws to
> force workers to mine coal, a state to enforce property rights for coal
> owners, and a command and control economy to move coal to the plant and
> deliver electricity. Coal plants also imply environmental destruction and
> health problems for the human population.
I'm having trouble digesting this point. You say that power plants (nuclear, coal, etc,) "imply" a system of "industrial capitalism." Seems to me that _any_ kind of industrial system (capitalist, communist, socialist) would require power plants. Industry requires power.
Frankly, I don't see why the economic system is such a crucial point. Nearly all of the points you raise that point to "capitalism" arise from the logistics of the plant itself. Obviously, it needs fuel, so some kind of social/industrial system must exist to ensure that it's supplied-- even a non-capitalist system. Obviously, it requires the labor of workers to run- - _how_ those workers are motivated (cash, force, communal spirit, whatever) isn't an issue on this particular question. In other words, one could easily imagine a power plant running in a non-capitalist economic structure.
But, you insist that the existence of power plants is dependent upon capitalism. (You talk about what a power plant "implies" is saying as much.) If you wish to give that degree of credit to capitalism, that's certainly fine (and Marxian, actually), but I must ask. If coal and nuclear power plants require capitalism to exist, then what sort of power grid system would exist under other economic systems?
But I should warn you. In your answer, you _should_ be able to answer how an international power grid would be developed, and how the technologies would be developed. You should be able to explain why researchers in a hypothetically non-capitalist system of 1900 or so would forgo the use of fossil fuels in favor of other sources of energy-- and why their political beliefs would determine their decision.