THE ENERGY TO SWITCH OFF THE POWER

(I wrote this text in face of G8-summit in St.Petersburg. It was distributed first time during Libertarian Forum in Moscow 9-12 July 2006, and than during Social Forum in St.Petersburg in 12-15 July 2006)

***

THE ENERGY TO SWITCH OFF THE POWER

ANARCHIST / FREE SOCIETY AND THE ISSUE OF ENERGY


Oil or rather first coal and then oil and electricity has allowed human society to go from basically an existence limited by animal power to almost unlimited power. This in the context of capitalism or rather society with hierarchical dominating power structures has allowed a cancer to occur on Earth which threatens the very existence of the abundant diversity of Earth

Terry S. / anarchist

A key to the revolutionary changes within the global energy system is the question of control. This we have firstly together take away away from the leaders and spread amongst us all. It means that revolutionary energy is needed in order to change the system of energy and to switch off the power relations. In this sense everyone is an energy transformer, and as a multitude, people are the most powerful power plant of the most sustainable and renewable energy which we already have under control

Veronika Sinewali / anarchist

***

An anarcho-complementarist view on the energy issue

Nobody, no movement which aims for serious social changes, can today avoid the issue of energy. Its role in society has become so crucial that a change to its model might be a key to radically change social relations on both a local and global scale in general. The fact is that contemporary oil-society is technologically and mentally based on the assumption that the oil resources will never run short. At the same time many scientists and the entire capitalist elite are definitely aware of the fact that fossils fuels, as the basis for energy systems, will end soon – or to be more exact: the end of the use of oil because of its retrieval from the ground costing more in energy than its eventual output would be. The future of gas resources is just a bit longer (... while nearly all homes in the US are heated by gas). So they consciously remain silent on this issue in order to get enough time to prepare the monopoly- and control mechanisms over the new energy-systems.

We must be aware of this fact and head towards replacement of this transformation within capitalism with revolutionary alternative.

Anarchists seem to deal with the problematic from very different perspectives. However, while going through the anarchist approaches towards the issue of energy one arrives pretty quick at the point where these different visions clash together: the anarcho-syndicalist one, anarcho-communist and the one of eco-anarchists / green-anarchists and anarcho-primitivists.

For all those which never had an opportunity to check the anarchist proposals and practices, the shortest overview of the tendencies I mean here:

- anarcho-syndicalism focuses on the labour movement, where labour unions are the potential force for revolutionary social change to replace capitalism and the State with a new society democratically self-managed by workers, where the wage system and private ownership of the means of production are to be abolished; of course the workers self-management embraces attaining energy, production and supply;

- anarcho-communism advocates the abolition of the State and capitalism in favour of a horizontal network of voluntary associations through which everyone will be free to satisfy his or her needs; it advocates the abolition of private property through the "expropriation of the whole of social wealth" by the people themselves, and for the economy to be co-ordinated through already mentioned horizontal network of voluntary associations; individuals and groups would use and control whatever resources they needed as the aim of anarchist-communism was to place "the product reaped or manufactured at the disposal of all, leaving to each the liberty to consume them as he/she pleases in his/her own home." (of course incl. energy);

- anarcho-primitivism / eco-anarchism are close anarchist concepts focusing on anarchist critiques of the origins and progress of civilization; primitivists advocate a return to non-"civilized" ways of life through de-industrialisation, abolition of division of labour or specialization, and abandonment of technology; eco-anarchists assert that social organizations must be designed to work with natural forces, rather than against; all these assumptions shape their approach toward the peoples deal with the energy issue;

Between these positions we would find for sure other anarchist approaches with more social- or more green/environmentalist tendencies. All these concepts bring interesting social-revolutionary analyses and concepts towards the achievement of a free society. Therefore, the further development of most of these theories is very welcome in the whole their diversity.

At the same time, none of these concepts seem to deal with the problem of energy globally. Globally, in the sense of the complexity which this issue requires. It would mean dealing simultaneously with issues of control over the energy resources, with the economic concepts of its transformation, distribution and consumption, with environmental issues of pollution, sustainability and ability for renewal, or with the technocratic civilisation issue. Each of them is rather focusing on only some of these aspects, stressing and developing them very intensively. It leads to the situation that various aspects, e.g. workers or popular control over the energy stations or the development of sustainable energy or the struggle against technology are developed into details, but at the same time no complex and realistic visions exist. A concept that could help to overcome peoples’ fear of revolutionary changes, a vision that they could consider as an attainable alternative. And if we consider that marginal popularity of anarchist concepts today is not only a result of the existence of the objective obstacles, like state-, power- and capitalist- relations paradigm, but as well of the very prosaic but essential subjective fact that most of the people are just afraid to force radical changes when the revolutionary vision does not show at least a certain level of compactness (do not mistake here compactness with the program). And even if many anarchists may agree that creative chaos is far more human and promising than controlled exploitation and oppression, the very fact remains unchanged: in contemporary oil-society the access to energy is a question of life or death, starting from the water supply being based on the oil supply and an ending of the oil-wars. It is just hard to encourage people to approach the (anarchist) ideas which don’t deal in a compact way with the issue. That is why attempt to set such a vision is more than worth the effort.

Therefore this short text should be seen as an anarcho-complementarist approach towards the issue of the energy - an approach in which the most relevant elements, arguments and proposals of various anarchist perspectives are brought together.

***

Subjects, challenges and guidelines

3 subjects

What are then the subjects of such a complementary anarchist approach towards the energy issue? Understanding anarchism as a social movement struggling for the liberation of the individual and of society from the existence and domination of the state and capital, as a movement for the creation of social relations that enable the existence of a society without these forms of oppressive economic and structural oppressions, and as a movement to bring people back in symbiosis with our environment – anarchist concepts towards the complex energy issue should be based on the mutual respect and welfare of the individual, society and environment. I will call it here the welfare-balance. The mutual respect and balance between these three subjects has to be found both in all communities as well as globally, to become a permanent determinant of social discourses, agreements and regulations... not only around the issue of energy.

6 challenges

When the main subjects are clear, let’s name the main challenges that humanity has to face in solving its energy problems (its relation towards energy usage) including electricity as well as heating- and power energy. The anarcho-complementarist approach groups these challenges into 6 issues:
- the question of control over the energy sources (thinking of stateless collectivisation and socialisation in the first line);
- the question of the selection and organisation of the system of energy (concepts of decentralisation);
- the question of the selection of sources of energy (ecological issues of sustainability, renewability, climate change, regular pollution and nuclear waste, as well as including social and traditional issues);
- the question of the efficient production and consumption of the energy (facing the technology-civilisation issues);
- the question of distribution of the energy (issue of decentralisation and cooperation);
- the question of the appropriate transformation of the energy;

Worth mentioning is the fact that the issues appearing above in succession suggest some sort of priority: none of the following challenges can be solved in the sense of the welfare-balance of the individual, society and the environment, if the issue of CONTROL will not be solved! This fact will be stressed quite often in here. And, as we will see later, the issue of control in the context of energy is strongly inter-connected with the one of the selection of the sources of energy; while the one of the selection of the sources is inter-connected with the question of efficiency and consumption, and this with distribution, etc. Therefore all these issues have to be dealt with simultaneously along with the elements of the same complex approach.

5 guidelines

And in this way we arrive at the very core of our approach – we try to sketch some guidelines (frameworks) on which the anarchist/free society can replace existing society and build up its alternative energy system(s). Some of the guidelines have already appeared next to the challenges above. These interconnected guidelines are:
- collectivisation/socialisation of control over the energy;
- decentralisation of the energy;
- economy of the energy;
- ecology of the energy;
- inter-regional and global responsibility, cooperation and support;
So these 5 guidelines form the essence of the various anarchist concepts and, as a framework, are meant to serve to put an end to the energy system we are living in today: a system centralised in all means, ecologically devastating, socially alienating, pauperising and oppressing, and creating wars. Shortly: the energy system controlled by states and the capitalist elites i.e. by power and profit.

***

So here are the guidelines


POPULAR CONTROL and DECENTRALISATION of ENERGY


ENERGY CONTROL

Each system of energy depends on its sources. Choosing these source(s) determines the social, political, economic and technological processes connected with gaining, transforming, distributing and transportation of these sources and the energy itself. So the whole economic, political and technological paradigms can be reloaded by a proper choice of energy sources. Yet, how can people make this choice if:
- firstly, they have no access to the decision-making processes which are held by the state structures;
- and secondly, they have no access to the resources making it possible to think about the usage of alternative energy sources – these resources are held by the capitalist elite;

Reclaiming access to decision-making processes and the resources means taking popular control over both.

Speaking about popular participation in decision-making processes, we mean the true social debate on the energy-issues instead of debate between some US government departments, some EU-politicians, Russian oligarchs, Arabic oil-magnates, leaders of westerns concerns and … lets say - Hugo Chavez. We mean horizontal and federative self-management and self-organisation of the entire population to regulate this issue as well as many other issues.

Speaking on reclaiming the resources, anarchists speak of popular regulation of the processes of production, distribution, trade and consumption of the goods. Among other goods, in the first line, is popular control over energy resources, its exploitation, transformation and distribution (not only is access to resources dominated by the US, EU, Chinese, Japanese or Indian elites but the means of its transportation as well).

Anarchists assume that no radical social and environmental changes are possible as long as energy systems are determined and controlled by state elites and capitalist concerns. Only energy systems organised from below, by cooperative communities, can provide such changes – which means that property ownership of energy resources must be abolished - socialised.

At the same time there are many examples that the society in which the means of production (along with the energy resources needed for it) become collectivised, the sustainability in social and environmental contexts becomes the norm - especially in the sector of acquisition, distribution and consumption of energy.

The real character of reclaiming the decision-making processes and control over energy (from the hands of the concerns and the bureaucrats into the hand of society and communities) was proven by Spanish anarchists and revolutionary socialists during the Spanish revolution of 1936. Among other branches of industry, agriculture and services, workers organised in autonomous groups, anarchist-syndicates, federations and worker councils took control over the gas, water and electricity supply. The most successful processes took place in Catalonia. The initiative to regulate in an anarchist way the question of property and continue under the new structure of production was actually taken, not by the syndicates themselves, but by individual workers which in these revolutionary days understood, before the syndicates did, the necessity and possibility of taking collective responsibility. They started on the 19 of July, which means on the day when the fascist offensive started. One month later the final re-appropriation took place and the production was organised by syndicates. Following are some facts:
- the collectivisation spread to the whole electricity system in Catalonia, gas and water supply (electricity supply was based at this time mostly on water-plants with slight tendency to get electricity from warm-energy); all three sectors were in the private hands until the revolution;
- the collectivisation started without a specific-plan and clear goals (except of the continuation of popular supply) and organised in cooperation of ad-hoc organised workers of the CNT and the syndicates;
- the collectively organised workers of power plants immediately started to cooperate with similarly organised collectives responsible for the supply of energy resources; in both branches during the transition process nobody lost a job;
- the debts towards the capitalist credit-givers were immediately abolished which allowed investment in the collective methods and energetically estimated the wishes of the population;
- because of this, for example the prices of water and electricity decreased very quick;
- all processes were initiated from below, while the reformist leadership of some syndicates, e.g. the UGT, were trying to prevent these dynamic process while many rank and file workers, especially these organised in anarchist structures, were forcing a radicalisation of the changes, seeing for example collectivisation as just a step towards the full socialisation of the energy system;
- technical improvements where implemented, but not in order to make more profits – they helped increase efficiency and at the same time the working conditions;
- the coordination and cooperation took place between the three industries (responsible for gas, electricity and water supply); one of the ideas was to save on the transport of energy resources (local energy production); the coordination allowed a saving of labour energy which could then be invested in innovative tasks;
- 22 of the 27 biggest factories immediately synchronised its output and distribution of raw materials – it was not only a sign of cooperation, it was a necessity in terms of blockades from abroad;
- water supply was never stopped even during the intensive bombardments of the cities;
- collectivisation of the transportation sector led to development of public transport and growth of its capacities which automatically meant a decrease of the energy spent on the transport; the trams were as well built from more economic materials;

So we can see that even if the process of socialisation of the energy circulation took place in a war situation, was haphazardly planned or prepared and could be conducted only for several months, already in such circumstances incredible progress was achieved. As we know very well, the further developments were tragically stopped by various state interventions: the offensive of the fascists under Franco, intervention of the Bolshevist state of Stalin (and its Spanish allies subverted the true uprising) and the local republican state which extinguished the ongoing revolution (dynamic of socialisation was legalized and so it turned into collectivisation under state management).

Another historical fact which has to be mentioned: the ecological consciousness was not an issue during these years, especially not in Spain which was actually just entering the stage of transformation from an agricultural into an industrial society. However, the studies towards solar- and wind energy were encouraged and were planned for use to gain electricity as well as to provide energy for water-pumps used in agricultural production. The revolutionary situation, the war and the non-existence of ecological consciousness are the main reasons why the energy supply changes had a more economic than ecological character.

Another interesting example on a smaller scale is the contemporary situation in the region of Polish Silesia where, as result of neo-liberal processes of manipulation of the energy sector (whole local mine-industry was shut down in just a few years which led to 60% unemployment and extreme poverty and degradation of local population), unemployed miners and their families started to open self-managed primitive mine-coals called BIEDASZYBY (pauper-shifts). In the period 2002-2005 at least 3000 persons took part in this output which was enough to bring warm energy to their neighbourhoods and provide raw materials to the people from outside the region at very low prices. The first collective structures of work as well as distribution of the raw materials had just been set, when the polish state started with massive criminalisation of the communities and smashed its capacities by about 90% so that there was not even time to establish any form of stable collective consciousness. However even in this short period local communities set a program of self-managed output combined with self-managed ecological re-cultivation of the region which had been largely destroyed by over 100 years of intensive output under state-management which never considered environmental and social issues as priorities (only political, personal and economic profits!). Of course this process was ignored by the local authorities while the criminalisation of the communities did the rest.

So here as well we can observe the situation in which the community takes the local energy resources under their control but is prevented from going further. The very first months have shown how deep changes in local social relations can be achieved when state control over the energy resources is replaced by popular control.

Popular also means decentralised.

DECENTRALISED ENERGY

Anarchists mean decentralised social relations in general. It means, among the other processes, the decentralisation of the global, continental or national, and even regional energy systems. Decentralisation of energy is here understood in the sense of popularisation of access and control (partly described above) but also in sense of the space and diversity of the energy-sources.

From an anarchist perspective the processes of socialisation and decentralisation become almost synonymous. But one could say that the challenge of decentralisation is the priority. Why? Simply, because it is hard to imagine that the free society (with anarchist relations) can be set up all over the globe at the same moment – nice vision but hardly possible. It means that those communities/regions that reach they liberation earlier than the others will find themselves in a sort of isolation, especially with regards to energy, for some period. In order to not fall back on dependence on the state/capitalist enemy's resources, they should reach their self-efficiency in advance through the creation of local energy systems. Of course local energy systems controlled by a few, and not under popular control, has still nothing in common with the anarchist position – that is why the challenge of control remains fundamental – decentralisation its necessary complement.

Decentralisation of energy in the sense of popularisation of access and control means an end to the control-monopoly over the energy resources and energy-industry by oil-corporations and governments. This should be expropriated by the people themselves, in practise to the communities who will carry on production under new principles.

The best example of the dramatic results of the centralisation of control over energy resources, as well as focusing on only one central source of energy in todays world is that the regions with the least of their own resources (the importers) are the hardest hit by each rise in the price of oil . However, here we have to be more exact so as to not confuse anarchist concepts with for example the contemporary EU-energy-politics which is also interested in breaking the monopoly of US-oil-companies and Russian-gas-government, in order to raise the EU position in geo-political discourses. This is connected with the growing dependence of the EU on Russian gas (the role of gas as an energy medium is planned to grow in the EU over the next 25 years reaching about 33% of all energy mediums. A quarter of it coming from Russia).

To be very exact: the anarchist concept is about the abolishment of any property ownership over the resources or energy systems in general while the control over the processes of its exploitation, transformation, distribution and consumption is to be put in the hands of communities which, as it stands in most anarchist concepts, coordinate developments through horizontal and federal cooperation.

Decentralisation of the energy in the geographical sense means a return to the regional (sometimes traditional – sometimes innovative) acquiring of energy - energy being again close (or within) the community. There is a long list of arguments why it makes sense. Just few of them:
- it can dismantle the dominant global energy system (oil-society) and replace it with many local and cooperative ones;
- energy independence means independence of some people from others, it means a dismantling the power structure;
- huge amounts of energy can be saved in terms of decreasing the transport of the energy from energy centres to the periphery;
- local energy supports other local branches, e.g. most food products today travel up to 1000 miles on average before reaching the consumers (food distribution today relies mostly on the oil supply);
- decentralisation supports research, studies and developments of locally available, relevant and community friendly (in ecological and social sense) sources of energy;

Decentralisation of energy in the sense of diversity of its sources means ending the reliance on the use of fossil fuels, especially oil and gas. In this sense, each community decides what kind of energy system, and based on what sources, it wants to use and develop in their region. The regional wind-parks, solar-power-stations, biomass-stations, water-power-stations, ecologically improved small scale fossils (coal) mines, would replace the monopoly of gas and oil. Each community decision however can be determined:
- by circumstances and available resources (as in the case of the Spanish revolution),
- by local cultural and social traditions (BIEDASZYBY),
- by ecological arguments.

But in all cases these locally determined energy systems start meaning more to the community, energy is closer to the communities, the process of acquisition and distribution is connected with the social and ecological problems more in touch with the people – and not something alienated being organised and given by some good uncles from the east or from somewhere else. Therefore, it can be better organised, controlled and developed. Some communities would decide in the beginning to stick to the (traditional) fossil energy sources (here we could bring again the example of the BIEDASZYBY). It would be just a transitional period. When the local community is in full control of the energy system certainly with time it will tend to more ecological, cheaper and sustainable sources (especially that of wind-, sun and bio-mass energy can be had in most places) but the transformation should pay respect not only towards environmental but also to the social conditions (peoples traditional and social links to some sources of energy have to be respected). In the case of BIEDASZYBY it would mean that the community with huge amount of professional miners would need time at first to develop environmental consciousness and then learn the new skills needed to gain the energy from different sources – let us say building solar-panels. In the spirit of the welfare-balance between individual, society and environment, the tempo of such transformation would rely on all 3 factors. No social disaster should take place because of the costs of ecological development - people living in poverty will hardly be ready to make environmental issues their priority!

ECONOMY and ECOLOGY OF THE ENERGY

ECONOMY OF ENERGY

Similarly to coherence of the aspects of control- and decentralisation of energy, the aspects of economy- and ecology - of energy are very coherent.

One of the big arguments against decentralised energy is that the alternative energy systems based on sustainable sources of energy are not able to provide the necessary amount of energy. This is a very disputable issue with very different facts and analyses. Whatever assumption is true, anarchists will always emphasise the need to decrease the use of energy by civilisation. If the argument that “the quantity of energy provided by oil and gas cannot be quickly replaced by other sources of energy” is true – for anarchists it is proof of the necessity of drastically decreasing global production, consumption and transportation of energy. Just using less energy and this used use much more efficiently! There are so many ways to decrease the usage of energy that it presentation must be shorted here. The already above shown practices by anarchists during the Spanish revolution, in their provision of free public transport (as well as the example of infamous Cuba during its own Peak Oil Crisis in the 90’s) shows how it can work in reality.

Another tool for more efficient energy usage: described earlier processes of geographical decentralisation of energy and of implementation of various energy systems results in a situation where most of the energy would be acquired locally and used for local needs. These needs can be quite precisely described by each community or regional federation. Excess energy that is produced can be used for exchange and as solidarity benefits for regions with energy deficits. It means that popularly controlled and decentralised energy systems would put into effect a general decrease in consumption and therefore production as well.

In between the shortest summary of developments till now: the first billion barrels of the oil used mostly for energy-production was consumed in 125 years, while the second one just in 30 years!!! And the nuclear energy alternative progress: the number of nuclear power-stations which is already about 450 have had to rise to about 1600 world-wide in order cover the energy needs of today's civilisation. No comments are needed here.

To be honest - it even happens from time to time even today that the energy exploitation decrease … in Iraq, for example, the output of energy decreased from 2,5 million Barrels on 1,5 million Barrels during last 2 years ... Anarchists obviously mean decrease of energy-usage in way described before rather as a result of capitalist wars - Iraq decreases had no relevance to social processes, just increased the oil-market prices.

Thank as well to the geographical decentralisation of energy and its local acquisition, huge amounts of energy spent today on energy-transport could be saved.

In general the costs of traditional energy rise while the costs of the renewable fall. In the case of renewable sources their costs are limited just to the production of installations, but almost not costs of exploitation itself (except of bio-energy of work).

Using the example of the Spanish revolution we can see that the anarchist-organised collective production made possible a decrease in the number of people employed on the factory-floor to spend more (intellectual) energy in studying the new technologies. It could for example effect a development of less energy-absorbing (wasting) systems of production of goods, based on a decrease of technology and industrialisation. More (intellectual) energy could be invested in raising the consciousness of the people on the aspects of consumption which would lead to its decrease (without a actual decrease in the standards of living) what respectively would lead to an end of technocracy-mania: without ending in technophobia but in a decrease of the technology and production in many sectors. Public discussion towards over-technological aspects of life and its possible decrease could be put into effect. This discussion would begin from below, in the local communities, and continue on the inter-regional forums.

Finally, the decisions about the amount of energy that is consumed and which has to be produced should be discussed by councils of producers and consumers - another case from the Spanish experience of 1936.

And the last thing: the last period of fossil-fuel-energy should be used to build up for the sustainable society. In this sense instead of new cars and weapons, many wind-turbines or solar-panels could be built.

ECOLOGY OF ENERGY

Anarchists agree on last decades’ analyses by the ecological scientists and environmental activists calling for a move away from the ecologically catastrophic fossil and nuclear sources of energy (as it was mentioned before there are about 450 nuclear power-stations world-wide right now). The ecological problems connected with the fossils and atomic-energy are known: emission of coal-dioxide, injection of chemical agents into the soil (for example, practices of Lukoil-Perm in Pavlovo region in Russia) … the greenhouse effect … climate change … Change of energy use to an ecological renewable one is obviously supported by anarchists.

The current tendencies are quite different. The global usage of gas grows. In China alone by about 40 mld m yearly (mostly based on local resources and growing production), and in the EU as well (fear of nuclear energy). The global need for oil is also growing, which is also connected with the explosion of Chinas economy, besides others. Globally use is about 83 million barrels per day. And this in a situation where the capacities of the exploiters, transformers and transporters of the oil have reached their limits (Peak Oil) – for 20 years we have been extracting more oil than the stores of newly discovered resources. Atomic-energy and “clean-coal-energy plants” are facing their renaissance today as well.

And even if already in the seventies the French and American scientists proved the possibility of full coverage of global energy needs by renewable ones this is still not practised. The main arguments used officially in order to stop the transition into RES (Renewable Energy Sources) are:
- high costs (society and the economy are supposedly not able to cover them) – costs are only connected with building the infrastructure and new technologies and it does cost a lot of energy in fact – however, under the popular control, the last years of fossil-energy could be used to build up these technologies and infrastructures. At the same time, the exploitation of the renewable resources will cost then almost nothing and transportation costs will decrease as the energy will mostly be locally produced;
- too long a transitional period – installation of one windmill takes about 1 week, of the wind-power station about 5-15 years. With today’s tempo of growth of wind-energy it will take about (or only?) 10 years to reach the level of 20% of the global energy-needed. In an anarchist society in which the waste of energy rapidly decreases and there are no patents on the discoveries of progressive technologies, and therefore each community has access to knowledge of these technologies, the transitional process could reach an extreme dynamic;
- the supposedly not solved problem of their accumulation – there are existing accommodation methods like air-compression-power-stations or pump-storage-stations;
- the one of not enough capacity compared to the needs of today's civilisation – there are considerations toward bio-fuels in terms of the amount of energy necessary to reach them, as well as the fact of how much farmland is necessary to cover the needs of the auto industry – the issue of economy of energy rises again here; at the same time the sun and its derivates (wind, water, waves, biomass) provides the earth daily with 15000 times more energy than the civilisation uses. Wind alone has the capacity of providing 40 times more electricity and 5 times more of general global demand of energy. The possibility of the full coverage of needs by renewable energies were already presented in 1978 in France (Group de Bellevue) and in 1979 in US (Union of Concerned Scientists);

The fossil and atomic energy systems will be replaced by the decentralised systems based on renewable sources, people and environment friendly. Today we observe the artificially created revival of nuclear-energy. Here, except for the ecological (nuclear pollution) and political (atomic energy is and extremely elitists form of) arguments against the nuclear energy, the very logical one has to be said: according to some American scientists estimations the increase of nuclear-energy would lead very quickly to the end of the global uranium reserves.

In this sense, the environmental aspect of anarchism sees the post-fossil and post-atomic sources as necessarily safe, sustainable and renewable (sun-energy, wind-energy, bio-gas, biomass). At the same time the capitalist profiteers have no interest in promoting these methods.

The G8 understands “energy security” as safe conditions for providing and profiting from the resources, i.e. safe business! The G8 proposals to solve the worlds energy-security problem is to increase the output of resources and the further development of the network of its transportation for thousands of kilometres. This concept should be overshadowed by a call for a development of alternative renewable energy systems. As we are not interested in making profits, our understanding of energy-security is as different as simple: we want energy-systems to be safe for ourselves and for the environment. The energy systems massively based on fossil resources are as safe as a ticking time-bomb and there are thousands of reports on it.

However, two important remarks have to be added:

At first, the decrease of the global energy usage as well as a drastic decrease in usage of fossil fuels will create the circumstances in which marginal and local usage of the fossil fuels will not be dangerous anymore and therefore in some regions acceptable, especially during the period of transition to ecological energy, but as well as supplementary resources.

Secondly, it has to be emphasised once again that the ecological tendency can not overshadow the social aspects.

INTER-REGIONAL AND GLOBAL CONSCIOUSNESS, COOPERATION AND SUPPORT

Decentralised ecological energy, economically used, based on popular access and control of all energy resources, is still not an anarchist option if the common cooperation and mutual support between the communities and regions is not being practised. There is no place for competitive relations within anarchist social relations.

It is obvious that some regions and communities will always have some problems with energy. It can be a result of the natural capacities of the region (less winds, less sun, less water, some environmental disasters, etc.), but also through the mistakes made in the capitalist past (too high a technologically based life which uses too much energy therefore the process of decreasing dependence on the technology being very difficult; completely exploited regions; regions devastated by wars so needing more energy to rebuild its infrastructure, etc.) or just by community based difficulties to move forward with decentralisation of control, changing the community consciousness, transformation of energy systems, etc. To prevent such regions and communities from falling into deep energy depressions and isolation inter-regional support is needed.

The same in terms of the global problems which are already created by technocratic capitalist society, like climate change, the greenhouse effect, nuclear waste etc. They cannot be forgotten nor left for some particular communities to be solved (e.g. on those which life in a region with nuclear waste that was accumulated in the past). Therefore global consciousness and cooperation is needed.


***

Energy to switch off the power

It is always nice to hear non-anarchist personalities making statements which prove and support anarchist concepts. In this sense I want to quote someone called Herman Scheer, German parliamentarian and politician of the SPD who recently stated the following: “With the change to renewed energies, as well as to completely new energy ways, everything would change. From commercial into non-commercial primary-energies, from a few huge power-stations and refineries into many semi- and small ones, from international into regional energy infrastructures, from emission-full into emission-free energies. Finally the property system will be forced to change too”. However, what is a possibly wrong illusion of Mr. Scheer, is that this transformation to renewable energy systems will come sooner or later automatically, like afternoon rain comes in the tropics. It will not come just like that because the political and economic elites have analysed these issues and therefore are better informed than we are what these changes would mean. That is why they will do all they can to avoid this transformation, or prepare themselves for making the best advantage of this transformation and to keep their class in power. In both cases our future and the future of our planet has to be fought for.

On the socio-economic level, today's global energy situation (if nothing radically happens before) will result in a continuous rise of the prices of energy. It will make more and more people start questioning the issue of the energy-systems. Many of them are already now calling for a revival of other fuels like lower grade oil, coal or wood, and anarchists, as environmentally conscious, should deal with this trend too. But thinking on alternative energy-systems must bring people to also think about alternative energy-sources, about its control and about the energy distribution systems. And this should stimulate thinking about the social structures and status-quo in general.

That is why I hope this this piece does not remain just a dry theoretical set of ideas, it is an appeal to all anarchists and sympathisers of the free anarchist society for common efforts and struggles to make OUR dreams true…

… to all scientists and activists interested in this issue to give more shape to the above presented concepts

… to all publishers for their propagating

… to all workers and unemployed for keeping the spirit of the collectivisation/socialisation of energy sector as well as other sectors of production and distribution goods

… to all consumers for changing their consciousness from individualistic, passive and unreflective to social, active and ecological.

The last remark is to stress again the crucial point of this approach – a key to the revolutionary changes within the global energy system is the question of control. This we have firstly TOGETHER take away away from the leaders and spread amongst us all! It means that revolutionary energy is needed in order to change the system of energy and to switch off the power relations. In this sense everyone is an energy transformer, and as a multitude people are the most powerful power plant of the most sustainable and renewable energy which we already have under control. Capitalism needs its endless growth and its continued growth in usage of energy. The energy crisis is a chance for real radical changes! It should not be wasted. Let’s make a use of it! Let’s use the energy (issue) as an important tool to switch off the power. And as state power is a stabiliser for the capitalist power - Let’s make both of them history!

***

Veronika
May 2006