The rise of small, electrically-powered production machinery in the late 19th century was seen by many as the beginning of a new phase in technological history. Lewis Mumford later referred to the new era as “Neotechnic,” a decentralized model of production that would gradually supplant the “Paleotechnic” (the latter era characterized by centralized technologies suited to the needs of the new absolute states and privileged mercantile interests–e.g., mining, arms manufacture, and “Dark Satanic Mills”). Because machinery was freed from the need for co-location, and from dependency on a single prime mover or drive shaft, small-scale (even home) production was made competitive with factory production.

The electric sewing machine, interestigly, was the first major example of small-scale electrical machinery.

Back in the ’30s, Ralph Borsodi experimented with a variety of forms of household production, and found that (among other things) home-growing and canning, weaving and sewing, and furniture making, could all be done more cheaply overall at home than in a factory. The unit costs of production were still slightly lower in a factory, but the distribution costs of small-scale production were almost completely eliminated because goods were produced at the point of consumption. His first experiment in this regard was with tomatoes: figuring the costs of all gardening supplies and canning equipment, the power used, and the value of his and his wife’s labor time, he figured that home-grown and -canned tomatoes cost about a third less than storebought.

I can’t sew a lick myself, so take this FWIW. But aside from the relatively low cost of a small loom and sewing machine, I would guess the main barrier to small-scale production is the learning curve. And the costs of transferring information from one person to another–both basic skills and things like designs and patterns–are probably lower than ever before, what with networked and peer production.

As to the effects of peak oil, if fuel prices really do double, or quadruple, I expect one result will be the rapid rediscovery and reclamation of a lot of different forms of household production to fill in the gaps as the centralized distribution system begins to collapse. I expect, among other things, that a lot of quarter-acre lots in the cul-de-sacs will be spaded up and used to grow food. Those with sewing machines will find it profitable to use them in earnest as real production tools, bartering their labor for surplus crops of others in the neighborhoods. Backyard shops will custom machine replacement parts to keep appliances running, the first step toward a localized economy of production by general-purpose machinery rather than heavily capitalized factories with specialized machinery.

The how-to information is out there, and the building blocks of local production are already widely distributed. The question is whether people can get over the learning curves, and put the building blocks together, faster enough to cope with the dislocation.

Sorry for such a long rant (especially one that may seem to come mainly out of my, er, hat), but this a topic that really gets me going.

For example, what about recycled plastic? ALCOA currently pays for aluminum cans, but very few other industries actively seek recyclable inputs. ALCOA does it because it’s profitable. I suspect we may see more industries move in that direction as their raw inputs get more expensive, including petroleum-based fibers.

I agree that greed prevents a lot of good change, but I think that greed can be
Let’s say it’s cool to be eco. Greedy people will act on it too and see the possibilities to make money in this area. I have faith and I don’t mind that it took the world sooooooooo very long to realise a change had to be made. One thing; governments should be faster making new rules and that I do see as a problem, many governments are driven by the old polluting industries.
If it means the clothes will be made in your own (western)country with expensive fabrics, so be it. With the internet and such, fashion will be more versatile I think. New times ask for new creative minds. More individuality I hope.
Best regards,
Myrte

Most synthetic fabrics are made from oil-based derivatives. These become more expensive directly in line with the increasing oil price. Polyester may no longer be the cheap option.

The company I currently design for used to produce everything stateside and ran into some major problems with late (in excess of 3-4 weeks) delivery times, poor quality, and managing production costs. This was before my time and admittedly probably had more to with production management on our end than the production facilities. We’ve been manufacturing in China for the past 4-5 years and have been satisfied, if not ecstatic, with the process and the pricing has been good. The interesting thing is that now we’re looking into moving our production back to North America (mostly Canada) because of lower shipping costs, reduced lead times, etc.

This seems to be a trend amongst most designers and production managers I’ve spoken with over the past couple of years. They may not be ready to move all production right now but it seems to me like people are starting to explore other options and are open to alternatives. Maybe I’m being an optimist but I think this trend will continue, especially as rising fuel costs and a demand for more sustainable business practices push the efforts.

I’d be interested to know the stance of other industries on this too.

Coming back around to Kathleen’s point about conservation… I think it’s the wee guys, like us, who are the best audience for this discussion. If conservation and wholistic values are instituted into the genetic code (as it were) of our businesses we have a better chance of a) maintaining those values and b) keeping our businesses alive.

Big businesses, in contrast, are not eager to adopt these practices because so much needs to be undone and converted before they can implement “new” processes (note: sarcasm). The analogy frequently used in the corporate world is “herding elephants” or “steering elephants” to illustrate the difficulties of managing a large organization. Personally, I call it whining in hindsight – but, that’s a different story.

Frankly, that statement reveals to me that CEOs are still being taught (enculturated, conditioned, etc) that they have to dominate their operation instead of polarizing, harmonizing and leading. It also tells me they have never ridden a real horse or elephant. Otherwise, they would know you cannot dominate these animals and expect to get anything out of them.

I think with F-I and our network we can bring back cottage industries and co-ops. There’s a demand from both the consumer for our wares and from us as to the type of work we want to perform. It’s doable.