![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
winneganfakeNow, don't get me wrong before I really start in on this post- I like steampunk. I think it's a great aesthetic, and the potential for fantastic and awesome stuff to come out of it is definitely there.
At the same time though, I have to admit that there's some people into the same aesthetic, like any subculture, that really make me wonder if they're coming from anything approaching the same reality as the rest of us. Mostly because I keep seeing the same argument being made in different forums and elsewhere by them, and just about every time I see it, I end up falling out of my chair. Here- let me try to sum it up in a sentence:
"Steampunk is an environmentally positive movement."
Ok, let me get back up in my chair now.
For those not following yet, let me continue- the gist is that steam power is a wonderful, clean energy source, and that those following a "steampunk lifestyle," are actually doing their part to help out the environment, especially if steam technology is getting adapted to take the place of current-day technology.
Sorry, gotta climb back up into the chair again.
Steam technology as a clean energy source- this one gets me damn near every time. Why? Because we're talking about a system that absolutely requires fuel to be burned. In order to make steam, (and if you don't know this part, really, get offline, go find your high school physics teacher, and beg him to kick your ass) you have to heat water. That takes the consumption of fuel at some stage, even if you're doing it via electrolysis. It also depends on keeping that steam in gas form- which means you need to consistently keep it hot. Since no engine has yet been developed that can perfectly store and recycle all the heat from the initial fuel burn, that means you need to keep burning fuel, as heat will eventually be lost out of the system.
And what's the fuel, you may ask? Well, steam tech does have one advantage- just about anything that burns is usable. What's going to be available to most people though is not stuff that's very environmentally friendly- it's the same fuels available back when steam power was truly the high point of technology. Wood. Coal. Big, smoky, gassy, combustibles that, just like before, leave behind tons of particulate in the air. Making the landscape look like an entire crew of chimney-sweeps decided to roll all over it is not exactly what I'd call an environmentally sound move.
Now, don't get me wrong- you can actually engineer a steam engine that burns fuel a lot more efficiently than an internal-combustion engine. You can even build one that has a better exhaust output than internal combustion. But you can't dump thermodynamics by the wayside- fuel has to be consumed- consumption of said fuel creates exhaust, since there is no such animal as a 100% burn fuel.
So until your airship actually has a working cold fusion generator under the hood, and your soot-stains are merely there for cosmetic purposes? Can it. You're about as much of a stalwart of the environment as an Halliburton executive.
In fact- I would seriously love to see someone put their money where their mouth is. Any would-be steampunk engineer reading this want to prove me wrong? By doing more than flapping their fingers at me on the internet? here's a building challenge for you:
(In the spirit of the X-Prize) THE WTF PRIZE!
Build an airship capable of carrying four or more people into flight, and do it with an engine that produces less pollution than a standard internal combustion engine. And by build it, I mean that you, the entrant and pilot, must actually undertake the fabrication and construction of this device. Prefabricated parts may be used for your construction, but pre-built, purchased engines are right out. You must build your propulsion system, not just install it.
This ship must be capable of true directed flight, rather than simple wind-directed flight, so the ship must include a propulsion and navigational system in addition to basic lift.
Build it, fly it to Seattle, and land it safely at the venue location for Steamcon '09. For those already in the area, you need to prove that your airship can sustain flight for more than three hours. On landing, your engine will be inspected by a team of judges to consider the following: fuel type, fuel consumption-power ratio, and exhaust output. This means you will have to present your blueprints as well.
Winners will receive the following:
A metric fuckton of notoriety for landing an airship at a public convention.
Women swooning at your air-piratical feet.
The satisfaction of me apologizing and having to eat my words in public.
Permanent advertising for any of your endeavors via Tormented artifacts, the LXB, etc, etc... (It's not much, but it's something at least.)
if any sponsors want to step forward and offer a prize to this, I'll gladly include them.
...Hell- you built yourself a working airship- what kind of prize do you need when you've got one of those?
Anyone seriously willing to take up this challenge had best contact me, however, in order to make sure I actually put together stuff for this. And also contact the FAA- wouldn't want to see you get shot down for failure to register your aircraft.
At the same time though, I have to admit that there's some people into the same aesthetic, like any subculture, that really make me wonder if they're coming from anything approaching the same reality as the rest of us. Mostly because I keep seeing the same argument being made in different forums and elsewhere by them, and just about every time I see it, I end up falling out of my chair. Here- let me try to sum it up in a sentence:
"Steampunk is an environmentally positive movement."
Ok, let me get back up in my chair now.
For those not following yet, let me continue- the gist is that steam power is a wonderful, clean energy source, and that those following a "steampunk lifestyle," are actually doing their part to help out the environment, especially if steam technology is getting adapted to take the place of current-day technology.
Sorry, gotta climb back up into the chair again.
Steam technology as a clean energy source- this one gets me damn near every time. Why? Because we're talking about a system that absolutely requires fuel to be burned. In order to make steam, (and if you don't know this part, really, get offline, go find your high school physics teacher, and beg him to kick your ass) you have to heat water. That takes the consumption of fuel at some stage, even if you're doing it via electrolysis. It also depends on keeping that steam in gas form- which means you need to consistently keep it hot. Since no engine has yet been developed that can perfectly store and recycle all the heat from the initial fuel burn, that means you need to keep burning fuel, as heat will eventually be lost out of the system.
And what's the fuel, you may ask? Well, steam tech does have one advantage- just about anything that burns is usable. What's going to be available to most people though is not stuff that's very environmentally friendly- it's the same fuels available back when steam power was truly the high point of technology. Wood. Coal. Big, smoky, gassy, combustibles that, just like before, leave behind tons of particulate in the air. Making the landscape look like an entire crew of chimney-sweeps decided to roll all over it is not exactly what I'd call an environmentally sound move.
Now, don't get me wrong- you can actually engineer a steam engine that burns fuel a lot more efficiently than an internal-combustion engine. You can even build one that has a better exhaust output than internal combustion. But you can't dump thermodynamics by the wayside- fuel has to be consumed- consumption of said fuel creates exhaust, since there is no such animal as a 100% burn fuel.
So until your airship actually has a working cold fusion generator under the hood, and your soot-stains are merely there for cosmetic purposes? Can it. You're about as much of a stalwart of the environment as an Halliburton executive.
In fact- I would seriously love to see someone put their money where their mouth is. Any would-be steampunk engineer reading this want to prove me wrong? By doing more than flapping their fingers at me on the internet? here's a building challenge for you:
(In the spirit of the X-Prize) THE WTF PRIZE!
Build an airship capable of carrying four or more people into flight, and do it with an engine that produces less pollution than a standard internal combustion engine. And by build it, I mean that you, the entrant and pilot, must actually undertake the fabrication and construction of this device. Prefabricated parts may be used for your construction, but pre-built, purchased engines are right out. You must build your propulsion system, not just install it.
This ship must be capable of true directed flight, rather than simple wind-directed flight, so the ship must include a propulsion and navigational system in addition to basic lift.
Build it, fly it to Seattle, and land it safely at the venue location for Steamcon '09. For those already in the area, you need to prove that your airship can sustain flight for more than three hours. On landing, your engine will be inspected by a team of judges to consider the following: fuel type, fuel consumption-power ratio, and exhaust output. This means you will have to present your blueprints as well.
Winners will receive the following:
A metric fuckton of notoriety for landing an airship at a public convention.
Women swooning at your air-piratical feet.
The satisfaction of me apologizing and having to eat my words in public.
Permanent advertising for any of your endeavors via Tormented artifacts, the LXB, etc, etc... (It's not much, but it's something at least.)
if any sponsors want to step forward and offer a prize to this, I'll gladly include them.
...Hell- you built yourself a working airship- what kind of prize do you need when you've got one of those?
Anyone seriously willing to take up this challenge had best contact me, however, in order to make sure I actually put together stuff for this. And also contact the FAA- wouldn't want to see you get shot down for failure to register your aircraft.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-06-19 09:24 pm (UTC)Wow I am sorry, I had no idea there were idiots who really were claiming steam power was pro-environment. That is pretty lame, and believe me if I see it (haven't seen it on whitechapel personally, or brass goggles, but I will trust you are following those things closer than I, because I barely read boards ever) I will be one of the people laughing hardest at them right with you.
Okay, one point on literature vs culture... the thing I consider steampunk is a cultural style, and really has almost nothing to do with the literature base. I have read most of the fiction that this style is based on, and yes there is steam power in it, but there is also babbage style computers writ large and clockwork automatons and all sorts of stuff in it... I guess it is important to know where it came from, but I don't feel there is any need whatsoever to be tied down to it.
I didn't say steampunk has nothing to do with steam power. I said if you take any random person who calls themselves a steampunk today, they couldn't build a steam engine to save their lives, and I stand by that claim, and I think you even agree with me on that. The word steampunk doesn't refer to literature anymore, since we have people walking around dressing it and trying to live it, and I think you know that too.
One could make a case that Steampunk literature is pro-factory, yes... in some ways it might be (depending on what authors you prefer)... but what is more important is looking around the world and seeing what is needed and using whatever method necessary to build it. I think *that* more correctly captures a spirit people can get behind and will change the world for the better. Is it based in history? Nope. Does it turn people on? Sometimes... mostly only the people I want to be around. This is why I don't consider myself a steampunk. I am not concerned with trying to connect the world to some hundred year old sci-fi literature ideas, I want to see something brand new come out of this, and I saw some potential for an aesthetic I love to begin to develop through steam, so I decided to play along with it for a while and I am happy with the results so far.
Can I do my art without factories? The way I do it now, probably. I use 90% antique materials so that's not a problem, and everything else is hand made brass findings by other artists... what I can't do without would be the epoxy and wire I buy from the hardware store. I am confident that if they joined some sweeping American Economic movement and stopped buying wire and epoxy from whatever factory they get it from, that some local metal workers and chemical companies would see a chance to make a buck and step in to replace the metal wire (for a much higher price of course) and epoxy.
Would that be better? Meh. Doubt it. That is why I haven't been making jewelry for the last couple months, I realized that *I* was the problem with the system. If I make goods, people will buy them, and that only plays into the insane consumption system we are stuck in. I don't want to encourage more consumption of goods, so I need to change how I express my artistic desires.
Yes, I take this all very seriously. I know that if I didn't take it seriously I would be rich right now, but being rich isn't my top priority. Making sure I am living according to my morals is. You keep doing your art the way you want to, and I'll keep preparing myself for the changes that the world is about to go through, and I am confident I am going to lead a happier life in the long run. Not to say I wish you harm, because I really don't.
Thanks for your well-reasoned reply!
Solar
Date: 2008-06-21 12:39 am (UTC)