Friday, June 28, 2013

Sommerlektyre om tanker for en ny tid

Vi går til en ny sommer og late sommerdager, muliggjort gjennom de rundt regnet 200 energislavene hver og en av oss har til disposisjon. Så mens vi nyter vårt optimum, for de mer opplyste muligens med en tanke dårlig samvittighet, da ingen form for slaveri er uten konsekvenser, kan vi nytte muligheten til litt sjelelig oppbyggelse.

Forhåpentligvis kan et påfyll av sårt tiltrengte nye tanker for en verden som sakte men sikkert kollapser for øynene våre, dessverre så sakte at de fleste knapt reagerer, med tiden spre seg og fylle oss med en ny bevissthet. For selv om vårt ubegrensede sinnelag grunnleggende sett stammer fra Riftdalen i Øst-Afrika, har vi også en tung ideologisk ballast å dra på.

Dr. Andreas Weber
Det var med stor glede jeg kom over det nyeste essayet av Dr. Andreas Weber, med tittelen "Enlivenment", en videreføring av "Enlightenment", eller opplysningstiden. Foreslå gjerne en norsk oversettelse for dette nye begrepet i kommentarfeltet. Her følger et utdrag fra David Bolliers utmerkede introduksjon til Webers viktige essay:
The “bioeconomic worldview” that conjoins Darwinism and free market economics claims that nature is all about individuals, competition, efficiency and growth. But Weber argues that these basic assumptions are flat-out wrong. As he notes: “The biosphere is not efficient. Warm-blooded animals consumer over 97 percent of their energy only to maintain their metabolism. Photosynthesis achieves a ridiculously low efficiency rate of 7 perent. Fish, amphibians and insects have to lay millions of eggs only to allow for the survival of very few offspring.”

Nor does the biosphere grow constantly; the quantity of biomass is fairly constant. Nor has competition been shown to spur the rise of new species, Weber writes: “Species are born by chance:  they develop through unexpected mutations and the isolation of a group from the remainder of the population through new symbioses and cooperation….” Scarcity of resources does not lead to a creative diversification of species, as bioeconomics holds, but to an impoverishment of diversity and freedom.

But if the standard Darwinian narrative is incomplete and skewed in misleading directions, how do we begin to explain evolution and life itself more accurately? Weber calls his alternative account “Enlivenment,” by which he means an “upgrade” of the deeply embedded metaphysics of the Enlightenment. We must augment the story of individual rationality and competition with a new story that he calls “life-as-meaning,” or “biopoetics.” In the emerging new picture of biology, as confirmed by a growing body of empirical research, “organisms are no longer viewed as genetic machines, but basically as materially embodied processes that bring forth themselves. Each single cell is ‘a process of creation of an identity.’ The simplest organism must be understood as a material system displaying the intention to maintain itself intact, to grow, to unfold, and to make a fuller scope of life for itself.” - David Bollier
 Dr. Andreas Weber sitt essay "Enlivenment" kan kjøpes eller fritt lastes ned her.

En annen essayserie som garantert vil virke forfriskende i sommervarmen, eller oppmuntrende i regnværet, er "The Wealth of the Commons: A World Beyond Market & State." Dette er en samling av 73 essay som beskriver det enorme potensialet til allmenningen (en blodfattig oversettelse av det energiske engelske ordet "the commons") for å konseptualisere og bygge en bedre framtid. Redigert av David Bollier og Silke Helfrich.

Weber har også her et essay, som kan være en god innledning til hans lengre essay omtalt ovenfor. Særlig interessant synes jeg det er når han viser hvordan Darwins syntese var direkte influert av samtidens ideologi:
In this context it is important to notice that a political economist, Thomas Robert Malthus, delivered the crucial cornerstone for the modern concept of biology as evolution. Malthus was obsessed by the idea of scarcity as explanation for social change – there would never be enough resources to feed a population which steadily multiplies. Charles Darwin, the biologist, adapted that piece of theory which had clearly derived from the observation of Victorian industrial society and applied it to a comprehensive theory of natural change and development. In its wake such concepts as “struggle for existence,” “competition,” “growth” and “optimization” tacitly became centerpieces of our self-understanding: biological, technological, and social progress is brought forth by the sum of individual egoisms. In perennial competition, fit species (powerful corporations) exploit niches (markets) and multiply their survival rate (return margins), whereas weaker (less efficient) ones go extinct (bankrupt). The resulting metaphysics of economy and nature, however, are less an objective picture of the world than society’s opinion about its own premises. Dr. Andreas Weber
Som Alexandriner (disippel av Christopher Alexander, altså ikke en person fra Alexandria), startet jeg naturligvis lesingen med essayet The Commoning of Patterns and the Patterns of Commoning, av Franz Nahrada, grunnleggeren av GIVE (Globally Integrated Village Environments).

Håper flere vil få opp øynene for hvor revolusjonerende "pattern"-teknologien til Christopher Alexander er, og hvordan vi kan nytte denne til å optimalisere menneskelig trivsel fundamentert i allmenngyldige og tidløse mønstre eller "pattern". Selv definerer jeg Amotz Zahavi sin oppdagelse av handikapprinsippet som et "metapattern", som vi kan nyttiggjøre gjennom en mengde underliggende mønstre som bygger opp under dette. Vi har allerede flere Alexandrine mønstre som underbygger de gode kreftene som ligger latent i handikapprinsippet.

"The Wealth of the Commons: A World Beyond Market & State", kan kjøpes eller fritt lastes ned her.

Ei siste bok jeg må anbefale, selv om den ikke fritt kan lastes ned fra internettet, er Unified Architectural Theory: Form, Language, Complexity, av Nikos A. Salingaros. Denne har nettopp gått i trykken, og er å regne som ei støttebok til Christopher Alexanders The Phenomenon of Life - The Nature of Order, bok 1. Men den kan utmerket godt også leses for seg selv.

The Phenomenon of Life var den første boka jeg leste av Alexander, og har sammen med hans andre bøker fullstendig endret mitt perspektiv på verden. Derfor gleder jeg meg spesielt til å lese boka til Salingaros.
Unified Architectural Theory’ is not theory at all. It is evidence. It lets us see how until recently we have always designed and built. We’ve built buildings and spaces and towns that reflect the order in our genes, in the biological world we’re part of. We’ve felt at home in them because their order makes space for our body and our soul. Now we rediscover how to build a world that does not alienate us from who we are, a world that gives us joy, a world that brings us home. - Dr. Ir. Jaap Dawson, Technical University Delft
Unified Architectural Theory: Form, Language, Complexity. A Companion to Christopher Alexander's "The Phenomenon of Life -- The Nature of Order, Book 1", Sustasis Foundation, 2013, kan kjøpes her. En lengre introduksjon til boka (pdf) kan lastes ned her.

Etter å ha lest boka til Salingaros vil du forstå hvor tragisk det er for vår nasjon at Lambda nå ser ut til å skulle huse Munchs kunst. Her søker man å forene det beste av kunst med en kultisk kvasikultur, som modernistisk arkitektur jo er. For meg blir det å skulle nyte Munchs skatter i Lambda, som hva det ville vært for en israelitt å tilbe Jahve i et Baal-tempel. Selv vil jeg derfor prioritere å besøke Munch-museet på Tøyen denne sommeren, og oppfordrer Kulturverks lesere til å vurdere det samme.
I happen to be an architectural theorist as well as a scientist. My new book, “Unified Architectural Theory” (just being proofread), was written because I am convinced that humanity’s salvation lies in the correct application of scientific theory to architecture. Furthermore, I argue that the so-called “theory” used up until now is just cult doctrine and ideology, which is what has destroyed our culture. - Nikos A. Salingaros
Håper flest mulig vil ta til seg de tankene som presenteres i disse viktige bøkene og essayene, for så å spre dem videre som løvetannfrø for vinden. God sommer!


Publisert hos Kulturverk torsdag 4. juli 2013.

Thursday, June 27, 2013

Under Kastanjen

Under Kastanjen er et særlig velsignet sted i Gamla Stan, Stockholm. Dessverre fikk jeg ikke ikke tid til å sitte ned og nyte min "fika" her ved denne kafeen, men jeg satt en stund på en av benkene og innåndet atmosfæren under kastanjetreet. Dette er medisin! Hadde vi alle tilgang til en slik atmosfære i hverdagen ville angst og depresjoner hatt magre kår.

Den legende biofile effekten fra disse omgivelsene, både fra de organiske bygningene, det vidunderlig filtrerte lyset fra kastanjen, dennes beroligende gravitasjons-implementasjon, og en helhetlig fraktal ladning som kjentes ut til å ligge på den savanniske D=1.4, var påtagbar.

Under Kastanjen må være den absolutte motpol til Sergels Torg på andre siden av brua. Et modernistisk ødeland. Et vitnesbyrd om sivilisasjonens forfall. For ikke å ødelegge stemningen velger jeg å ikke publisere bilde av dette grusomme stedet her, men følg denne lenken.

Monday, June 24, 2013

Stockholm Old Town (Gamla Stan). Photographed on Two Evening Walks in June 2013.

Sweden doesn't have wild mountains and fjords, but they have Stockholm Old Town (Gamla Stan), which is just as much nature and as refreshing as any natural landscape. This is because of it's fractal properties and its unfolding through Alexander's 15 transformations of wholeness. Even it only constitutes of a small island in central Stockholm, it feels large because of its organic street pattern.

Click on any image for a magnification or to start a slideshow.


I choose to republish my other images from "Gamla Stan" here as well, so they can all be gathered. Publishing the above photos I found that some of them are quite good too, and may need their own postings as well. Hope my pictures here, made during two small afternoon walks, can inspire you to visit "Gamla Stan" if you go to Scandinavia.





Kommentar ang. trehus og massivtre

Les artikkelen her.

19682010  for 3 timer siden
Meget positivt med satsingen på tre! Trist at Holz100 som produserte massivtre med tredybler og Moelven som produserte massivtre med lim, begge har måttet trekke inn årene. Ironisk at massivtreprodusentene i mellomeuropa samtidig produserer alt hva remmer og tøy kan klare, og enda ikke klarer å møte etterspørselen. En utfordring for trelandet Norge.
Designerne tenker nytt med materialbruk, men dette er ikke nok for å kunne utnytte de fulle biofile effektene til naturmaterialer. De henger fast i gamle dogmer, som Le Corbusiers "the plan is the generator": http://www.permaculture.org.au...
Dette er en absurd designide som truer med å ødelegge ethvert trehøyhus. Den går på tvers av den universelle skaleringsloven, som var gyldig for all arkitektur gjennom alle tider og for alle sivilisasjoner, fram til modernismen fikk gjennomslag på begynnelsen/midten av forrige århundre:http://www.permaculture.org.au...
I tillegg er det stadig mer data som tyder på at menneskesinnet trives best med husfasader og omgivelser som har en fraktal ladning på D=1,4. Dette er eksakt den fraktalverdien man finner i savannelandskap, hvor mennesket utviklet seg.
Modernismen forlot ikke kun skaleringsloven og fraktaliteten, de forlot også de 15 egenskapene for utfoldelse av helhet, som både evolusjonen og universet utfolder seg selv gjennom. Salingaros spekulerer i om dette skyldes at universer som forsøker å utfolde seg på annet vis, simpelten vil selvdestruere. Sett i dette lyset blir det meget skummelt når dagens designregime bevisst forsøker å unngå disse 15 transformasjonene.
De 15 fundamentale egenskapene for helhet:http://www.tkwa.com/fifteen-pr...
Å bygge med naturmaterialer er ikke nok for å oppnå tilfredsstillende biofilisk arkitektur, man må også respondere på naturens iboende skapelsesprosesser og de omgivelsene menneskehjernen utviklet seg under.

Sunday, June 23, 2013

Stortorget i Gamla Stan

Stortorget i Gamla Stan i Stockholm er et sted til å drømme seg bort, omgitt av bygninger like vakre som de vakreste norske fjell. En lise for sjelen nå i disse Barcode-tider. Trykk på bildet for en forstørrelse.

Den runde plaza i Gamla Stan, Stockholm

Hønsetraktor

Hønsetraktorer skal være ypperlig mot ugress og annet utyske, noe å tenke på i disse rounduptider

Med Mummitrollet på "akslom"

Veslejenta bærer sitt nyvunne mummitroll på "akslom", slik jeg har for vane å bære henne

Velkommen til Gåsgränd

Velkommen til Gåsgränd i Gamla Stan, Stockholm

Cooperative Transitions for a Resilient Economy: Community Land Trusts

The Story of More: Richard Heinberg at TEDxSonomaCounty

Saturday, June 22, 2013

Tunnel of Love

It's crazy, I payed Grøna Lund 69 S.Kr. to advertise for them!

A Street of Child Freedom

Car free streets for our children, to make them free! From Stockholm old town.

A Narrow Street of Stockholm Old Town

One of lots of narrow streets of the old town of Stockholm, a gem of Scandinavia. I've seen most of Scandinavia, but nothing can be compared with Stockholm old town in charm and joy. There are even narrower streets than this, and amazingly well preserved, something that cannot be said about the rest of Stockholm.

Saturday, June 15, 2013

Popular Grandfather

Hydromimicry: Water as a Model for Technology and Management

Watersheds can be considered a type of real-world network that is characterized by self-repeating or fractal-like patterns. Fractals are geometric patterns that possess the same proportions on different scales. Rivers and glaciers cut through the planet’s surface, leaving behind landscapes that may appear random or haphazard, but are actually quite precise. Whereas such patterns have been frequently ignored in designing or altering man-made landscapes, there is now interest in emulating them to create more sustainable and eco-compatible designs. - D.L. Marrin, Ph.D
Photo: Prokofiev

Sunday, June 9, 2013

LÉON KRIER: How Industrial Society Destroys Culture

Like William Morris, Léon Krier is dedicated to the cause of beauty: that gives his work an edge and an individuality which many people would rather be without. If his polemic seems at times simplistic, it is I believe his concern for the loss of beauty that has reached a level close to despair, and if his words at times sound shrill it is because his ideas have been met so often by indifference or complacency. -- Robert Maxwell, from the introduction to Léon Krier's talk.
This essay is even more important today than when it was written in 1982:

How Industrial Society Destroys Culture

Our Anxiety of Beauty and God

Interior wall and ceiling of the Sheikh-Lotf-Allah mosque in Isfahan, Iran. Photo: Phillip Maiwald
Later, Katalin Bende, also working on the project in our office, asked me to explain what I meant by this true liking and about people's fear of it, and why anyone could be afraid of true beauty. "What kind of beauty could go so deep that a person would be afraid of creating it?" she asked.

I told her that, in my view, a difficulty we modern people encounter can sometimes go something like this: When centers are properly distributed in a truly beautiful structure, one cannot avoid seeing the I (what a religious person might also call God). In the 20th century there has been something almost like a taboo, against seeing the I, or true beauty, or God. Hence the discomfort. This discomfort that modern people feel with real beauty – especially that architects and designers feel – is almost legendary. Working with architects, I have experienced it again and again. Many traditional shapes, especially the most profound shapes with deep and serious centers in them, for some reason trouble modern architects profoundly. Even when an architect does want to borrow a traditional shape for a building (as postmodernists sometimes do), he often feels he has to make the shape "modern" in order to feel comfortable with it. So, for many decades, architects of the 20th century felt that they had to take a traditional form and distort it, so that they could demonstrate that they had possessed it, and so that their colleagues would not laugh at them for being archaic.

Let me put it another way. The history of the 20th century has been one in which people do not want to see God nor, therefore, true beauty either. The role religion has, for many become uncomfortable. Many people want no part of it. They do not want, even, to get near it. And for that reason, they also do not (cannot) want, in their lives, any kind of true beauty. True beauty is the quality of being in touch with the I. A structure with true beauty – the beauty which brings something in touch with the I – is, in effect, something we cannot avoid, in some part, seeing God. For this reason, the underlying design vocabulary of the 20th century, almost throughout the century, asserted that designers should create structures which are "interesting", "pleasing", "fantastic", "exhilarating", "with elan", and so on – anything but beautiful – indeed never truly beautiful. That word has unalterable meaning, cannot be contaminated, and during the temporary insanity of the 20th century, struck a nerve which people could not tolerate. – Christopher Alexander, The Luminous Ground, page 295-296

Saturday, June 8, 2013

The Breakdown of Style and Form Most Clearly Marks the Transition from Culture to Civilization

Indeed, the breakdown of style and form most clearly marks the transition from culture to civilization.

WE PAUSE over this thinking to ponder its implications. Recall that Spengler wrote nearly a century ago, when the Western avant-garde movement was merely a tiny knot of artists bent on assaulting the conventional sensibilities of the prevailing culture. As author and critic Lionel Trilling once explained, in Spengler’s time these people weren’t interested in talking to the masses. Their art was rarefied and special, designed exclusively for the avant-garde itself, those inclined to look down on the masses and on conventional thought and culture. Few at that time predicted that this avant-garde cynicism and cultural nihilism eventually would be absorbed into the popular culture itself and be accepted, even embraced, by large numbers of people within the so-called masses—the same masses under assault by the avant-garde. But Spengler saw it coming, as merely the inevitable consequence of any civilization’s transition from its cultural to its civilizational phase. Robert W. Merry

Thursday, June 6, 2013

Vakre Fredevika

Aldri har det vel vært vakrere i Fredevika enn i disse dager. Skikkelig langgrunt er det også, og derfor ypperlig for barnefamilier. Måtte det forbli slik.

God tur!

Wednesday, June 5, 2013

A Sad Day for Edvard Munch

I'm sorry to tell that yesterday it was set that Lambda will become the new Munch Museum.

Lambda. Was it this Munch saw when he painted his famous Scream?

Good Group Tip: What's the problem?

In principle, more often than not, a group will develop a great solution to the wrong problem. Before proceeding with a solution we need to see that it is aimed at the problem, and to do that we need to bring the problem into focus. Taking time to define the problem may seem annoying and unnecessary in the short term, but can save huge amounts of time and energy over the long run.

Defining the problem as a group also checks our shared expectations. It helps me decide, "Is this something that I want to participate in?"

Practical Tip: 
Before discussing solutions, discuss the problem. What are we trying to fix? What is the specific scope of the problem that we are willing to take on? How would we know if the problem were fixed? Are we the right group to fix it?

On paper, write something like, "The problem is that _____________." It could be a sentence or it could be a paragraph. Refrain from discussing solutions until you have agreement on the problem statement. Make sure that all those working on the problem are aware of the written problem statement and agree with it.

Before firing off solutions, make sure the problem is squarely in your sights. - Craig Freshley

Tuesday, June 4, 2013

It’s Time to Get Apocalyptic, or Get Out of the Way

From PCN:

Get Apocalyptic: Why Radical is the New Normal

Feeling anxious about life in a broken economy on a strained planet? Turn despair into action.
apocalypse-the beginning
In December 2008, Tim DeChristopher attended a protest at a federal auction of drilling rights to Utah wilderness lands. He found a better way to disrupt the auction when he picked up a paddle and began bidding on the leases as “Bidder 70.” He won $1.8 million worth of parcels and inflated the price of many others. When it was discovered that he had no money to back his bids, the auction had to be shut down.
Tim DeChristopher was sentenced to two years in prison for his actions, but his boldness stopped the sale of 22,000 acres of scenic wilderness and highlighted government misconduct. Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar scrapped a rescheduled auction because the Bureau of Land Management had skimped on its environmental analysis and inadequately consulted with the National Park Service. In January 2013, a federal court denied an energy industry appeal to reinstate the leases. DeChristopher was released from prison in April. Photos by David Newkirk
feeling-anxious
Feeling anxious about life in a broken-down society on a stressed-out planet? That’s hardly surprising: Life as we know it is almost over. While the dominant culture encourages dysfunctional denial—pop a pill, go shopping, find your bliss—there’s a more sensible approach: Accept the anxiety, embrace the deeper anguish—and then get apocalyptic.

Ecological Crisis

We are staring down multiple cascading ecological crises, struggling with political and economic institutions that are unable even to acknowledge, let alone cope with, the threats to the human family and the larger living world. We are intensifying an assault on the ecosystems in which we live, undermining the ability of that living world to sustain a large-scale human presence into the future. When all the world darkens, looking on the bright side is not a virtue but a sign of irrationality.

Anxiety is rational

In these circumstances, anxiety is rational and anguish is healthy, signs not of weakness but of courage. A deep grief over what we are losing—and have already lost, perhaps never to be recovered—is appropriate. Instead of repressing these emotions we can confront them, not as isolated individuals but collectively, not only for our own mental health but to increase the effectiveness of our organizing for the social justice and ecological sustainability still within our grasp. Once we’ve sorted through those reactions, we can get apocalyptic and get down to our real work.

Dave Pollard: What If Everything Ran Like the Internet?

Excerpted from a recommended article by Dave Pollard: “What If Everything Ran Like the Internet?


“It is because business and government systems are wedded to the orthodoxy of hierarchy that as they become larger and larger (which such systems tend to do) they become more and more dysfunctional. Simply put, complicated hierarchical systems don’t scale. That is why we have runaway bureaucracy, governments that everyone hates, and the massive, bloated and inept Department of Homeland Security.

But, you say, what about “economies of scale”? Why are we constantly merging municipalities and countries and corporations together into larger and ever-more-efficient megaliths? Why is the mantra of business “bigger is better”?

The simple answer is that there are no economies of scale. In fact, there are inherent diseconomies of scale in complicated systems. When you double the number of nodes (people, departments, companies, locations or whatever) in a complicated system you quadruple the number of connections between them that have to be managed. And each “connection” between people in an organization has a number of ‘costly’ attributes: information exchange (“know-what”), training (“know-how”), relationships (“know-who”), collaboration/coordination, and decision-making. That is why large corporations have to establish command-and-control structures that discourage or prohibit connection between people working at the same level of the hierarchy, and between people working in different departments.

Why do we continue to believe such economies of scale exist? The illustration above shows what appears to happen when an organization becomes a hierarchy. In the top drawing, two 5-person organizations with 10 people between them have a total of 20 connections between them. But if they go hierarchical, the total number of connections to be ‘managed’ drops from 20 to 8. Similarly, a 10-person co-op has a total of 45 connections to ‘manage’, but if it goes hierarchical, this number drops to just 9.

This is clearly ‘efficient’, but it is highly ineffective. The drop in connections means less exchange of useful information peer-to-peer and cross-department, less peer and cross-functional learning, less knowledge of who does what well, less trust, less collaboration, less informed decision-making, less creative improvisation, and, as the number of layers in the hierarchy increases, more chance of communication errors and gaps.

Nevertheless, this is considered a fair and necessary trade-off. The 10-person co-op organization in this illustration is already starting to look unwieldy, so imagine what it would look like with 100 people (thousands of connections) or 10,000 people (millions of connections). By contrast, the hierarchical organization that combines 2 five-person companies only increases its number of connections from 8 to 9 (and perhaps even fewer if some ‘redundant’ employees are let go after consolidation). With similar control spans a hierarchical organization of 100 or 10,000 people only needs an average of one or two connections per employee, a fraction of what the non-hierarchical organization would seem to need. Isn’t this apparent efficiency advantage a worthwhile ‘economy of scale’?

It isn’t, and for the same reasons noted above: as the hierarchy gets larger, the loss in exchange of useful information peer-to-peer and cross-department, the loss in peer and cross-functional learning, the loss of knowledge of who does what well, the loss of trust, the loss of capacity for collaboration, improvisation and innovation, the inability to make informed decisions, and the volume of communication errors and gaps increases exponentially. Beyond about 50 people, the hierarchy begins to get dysfunctional, and much above that (as in most large corporations, government departments, agencies and other organizations) it becomes totally dysfunctional and sclerotic — incapable of change or innovation.

Why do these large organizations seem to be so effective then, at least in the private sector and when measured by market dominance and profitability? There are a number of reasons:

As they get larger, their political power rises proportionally, so they can effectively lobby governments worldwide for subsidies, legal protections, preferential treatment, and tax and regulatory changes that give them a huge competitive advantage.

As they get larger, they qualify for large volume discounts from suppliers.

As they get larger, their power in negotiating with unions and employees grows — they can always threaten to hire new, cheaper employees, contract out, outsource or offshore work (and usually do so)

As they get larger, their market presence gets larger, so they don’t have to work so hard to attract new customers or experienced employees

As they get larger, they can afford to buy up, intimidate and crush smaller innovative competitors, and by eliminating competition easily increase market share and reduce downward pressure on product prices.

So these so-called “economies of scale” have absolutely nothing to do with efficiency or effectiveness and everything to do with abuse of power. These abuses of power are all “win-lose” — and the losers are taxpayers, ripped-off customers, domestic and third-world citizens and workers, innovation, so-called ‘free’ markets, and our massively-degraded natural environment (which they shrug off as “externalized costs”).”

Saturday, June 1, 2013

Hurdal økolandsby realiseres

Tenker å skrive litt mer om denne saken etter hvert, men her er foreløpig en artikkel i Aftenposten:

Her blir det bilfrie tun og drivhus i hver hage

What is the German Energiewende?

Exurbia

Click on the image for a magnification
The practical result of government promotion of monoculture development is that for most of us there are two communities: a community in which we work and shop, and a bedroom community in which we are stored. – Kevin Carson

Featured Post

Hovdetoppen - Mjøslandets største øyensår

Da vi forlot Gjøvik i 2018, var planen å flytte tilbake så raskt råd var, men så oppdaget jeg plutselig store skogsmaskiner oppe på det unik...