|
Sunday, August 17, 2003
Of Networks and Decentralised Power
The failure of the electrical grid in the US and Canada has a couple of interesting discussion threads. Paul Philp writes about the impact of networks on our lives: "The lesson of this loss is that networks aren’t machines. We cannot control networks the way we control machines. We must decentralize our control, distribute intelligence and allow the network to learn and adapt. We will find someone to blame and throw some bums out of office. We will serve ourselves well if, at the same time, we add to our ability to trust innovation...The machine era is over. Things fall apart; the center cannot hold." The Rocky Mountain Institute suggests: "Americans should look to distributed, diverse, and resilient clean technologies to power their industries, homes, and communities. America's existing system—based on a hundred years' worth of heavily centralized generation and distribution policies—can trigger a cascading series of errors that leaves us vulnerable and should be corrected." RMI also has published a book: "Small is Profitable". It may be worth a read in this context. From the introduction: "[The book] describes 207 ways in which the size of electrical resources —devices that make, save, or store electricity—affects their economic value. It finds that properly considering the economic benefits of distributed (decentralized) electrical resources typically raises their value by a large factor, often approximately tenfold, by improving system planning, utility construction and operation, and service quality, and by avoiding societal costs."
Shourie on the New India
Arun Shourie writes in the third and concluding part [1 2] of his series on the opportunities for the India:
A dramatic event happened yesterday in hockey in India's first match in the Champions Trophy in Amsterdam. India led 3-0 with six minutes of play left, and ended up on the losing side as the Dutchmen scored 4 goals in the final minutes. I hope that is not a reflection of the New India - snatching defeat from the jaws of victory has been an old Indian habit. The New India has to power home its advantage. Today, we have the world looking at us. Can we capitalise on this and become as Vajpayee says in the ads "a developed nation by 2020?"
Emerging Markets
| PermaLink
| Comments (6)
Rajesh, In your view, what are the three top reasons that China is performing better than India? Sincerely, John Posted by John RobbRand's recent publication on China's "fault lines" is worth a read, not for the China-India debate, but for the potential slip-ups in China's economic performance. http://www.rand.org/publications/MR/MR1686/ As for India's own "fault lines", just ask any Indian - no need for any Rand study! I still think a Shourie blog would be great idea! Posted by Mohan NarendranThe fault lines mentioned appear to be generic and not necessarily unique to China. The main difference seems to a perceptive rather than tangible. It continually amazes me how much economic activity flows from solely psychological factors. Posted by John RobbGeneric fault lines, perhaps, but no where else on the scale as it is or could be as in China. And certainly no other country with as much impact, positively or negatively, on geo-politics in this decade. Indeed, this article suggests the Rand article could be of service to China's leadership: Already, with China's opening-up to "foreign talent" for its state-owned enterprises, it may be availing itself to wider resources to tackle one of its "fault lines": http://www.asia-inc.com/July/insight_july.htm Worrisome to others for the prowess it will further unleash. And which may lead to other positive and tangible transformations in it's institutions and society. On the flip side, John, given the overall situation here in SEAsia in general, and Singapore in particular, I could paraphase your last comment to "how much economic INactivity flows from solely (negative) pyschological factors". Perhaps also true of the US? Posted by Mohan NarendranGeneric fault lines, perhaps, but no where else on the scale as it is or could be as in China. And certainly no other country with as much impact, positively or negatively, on geo-politics in this decade. Indeed, this article suggests the Rand article could be of service to China's leadership: Already, with China's opening-up to "foreign talent" for its state-owned enterprises, it may be availing itself to wider resources to tackle one of its "fault lines": http://www.asia-inc.com/July/insight_july.htm Worrisome to others for the prowess it will further unleash. And which may lead to other positive and tangible transformations in it's institutions and society. On the flip side, John, given the overall situation here in SEAsia in general, and Singapore in particular, I could paraphase your last comment to "how much economic INactivity flows from solely (negative) pyschological factors". Perhaps also true of the US? Posted by Mohan NarendranMy (four) reasons: - Infrastructure in China is much much better than India
Kiran Mazumdar-Shaw and Biotech in India
An inspirational story in the NYTimes calls the founder of Biocon as "India's Mother of Invention". Biocon was founded 25 years ago in Bangalore.
|
Rajesh,
Posted by ReubenThe NYT also carried an op-ed by Albert-Laszlo Barabasi called "We're All on the Grid Together" and you can find the article here -- http://www.nytimes.com/2003/08/16/opinion/16BARA.html