I am working a project to use the solar electricity feed-in-tariffs in
South Australia to create eco-villages.
By arbitraging the rules, that is, by making small houses and very
large photovoltaic arrays I can effectively give away houses without
cost. There is a normal mortgage on the property but the income
generated from the solar array (aka solar farming) is more than
enough to pay the costs. It works as the cost of the land and house
is very low.
Being freed of the burden of a mortgage.
What new economic system could be developed?
Would artists and hackers go to a small town?
What products and services can be exported away from the region?
The two locations that we are currently working on are outside Port
Lincoln and the other outside of Berri.
With low /no cost housing and a high level of sustainability what kind
of projects would be possible?
My initial thoughts on the export industries would be;
1) eduction (people looking and learning from out town/region
2) organic food - as long as the carbon footprint is low
3) tourist
4) innovation
-----Original Message-----
From: silicon-beach-australia@googlegroups.com [mailto:silicon-beach-australia@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of rgh....@gmail.com
Sent: Sunday, 28 June 2009 2:15 PM
To: Silicon Beach Australia
Subject: [SiliconBeach] How would a 'small regional town' go as 'start-up and innovation centre'
Dear SBA,
I am working a project to use the solar electricity feed-in-tariffs in
South Australia to create eco-villages.
By arbitraging the rules, that is, by making small houses and very
large photovoltaic arrays I can effectively give away houses without
cost. There is a normal mortgage on the property but the income
generated from the solar array (aka solar farming) is more than
enough to pay the costs. It works as the cost of the land and house
is very low.
Being freed of the burden of a mortgage.
What new economic system could be developed?
Would artists and hackers go to a small town?
What products and services can be exported away from the region?
The two locations that we are currently working on are outside Port
Lincoln and the other outside of Berri.
With low /no cost housing and a high level of sustainability what kind
of projects would be possible?
My initial thoughts on the export industries would be;
1) eduction (people looking and learning from out town/region
2) organic food - as long as the carbon footprint is low
3) tourist
4) innovation
There are two things that are core to Silicon Valley's success: natural
crapness and alumni networks.
If it was purely capital and talent, then there is no reason why New York
couldn't beat the Valley. In fact, New York will never beat the valley
because it has too much capital and too much talent: a developer would
rather a $100k/year job at a big bank creating market algorithms over a 50k
startup with no guarantee or prestige (yet).
Sydney has a horrible urban plan, and Melbourne as a city is much better.
But Sydney never needed to care about its urban planning, because of it's
natural beauty. This in turn has shaped the character of the city. The
environment of a place makes a huge impact on the culture of a city.
Silicon Valley - if you look at San Jose where it really started - is an
absolute hole. Walking the streets leaves you uninspired. There are no great
views to distract you. And there was no geographic advantage which could
have given it the opportunity to be a major town due to its proximity to
other markets (like New York, Chicago in the American empire - or the
medieval equivilant of NYC: Constantinople).
So like the Israeli's did, the success there was when humans created
something through hard work. And they could focus on technology (pure human
innovation), because they couldn't rely on anything else.
To my second point about alumni networks: the way the Valley works was
described to me as it being like a big company. Everyone knows each other
and are working in different divisions. They share advice, hold parties -
but at the same time they do their own thing. When one of these "divisions"
needs help, they can pull in resources from friends. If you look at the real
success stories of the Valley - not the high profile social media
celebrities who talk but don't build much, but the entrepreneurs that out of
no where get a $600m exit - you notice it's the same people and they all
know each other. People that have worked together before from ten years ago,
doing it again.
The silicon chip factories kick started these alumni networks (and hence the
valley's success): people got to know each other, and people that were
wealthy would invest in each other.
So to your question now, how could this work:
- the isolation will give a sense of focus. If I am in Sydney trying to do a
startup as a 25 year old, I am distracted by the awesome social scene here,
wasting my money and time (well depending on whether you judge success in
life as generating financial gains over experiencing it). If I am in the
middle of nowhere, I've got nothing better to do but build something
amazing.
- the geographic proximity will create a strong sense of community. These
alumni networks I am talking about - membership is earned through
collaboration and share experiences. Living with someone and working on a
not-for-profit idea creates the same relationship bonding as colleagues at a
company. The most important outcome of the startup camps is that it's
creating shared experiences and alumni networks. Forget the businesses that
emerge from them - watch the relationships that get formed which
subsequently lead to something more serious later down the track.
Perhaps this could be the evolution of the startup camps: lock a bunch of
university students in a regional town for three months, and tell them to
come back only when they have a product they are able to sell.
In terms of export industries, it doesn't really matter what it is. But pick
one specifically, and only allow people wanting to operate in that field to
live together. Personally, I think "silicon beach" needs some build and flip
companies to boot up our country - and info-tech is the best option for that
due to the markets maturity. Not because I don't want to see sustainable
businesses in Australia, but to build the ecosystem, we need veterans who
have got experience and made some money along the way.
> I am working a project to use the solar electricity feed-in-tariffs in
> South Australia to create eco-villages.
> By arbitraging the rules, that is, by making small houses and very
> large photovoltaic arrays I can effectively give away houses without
> cost. There is a normal mortgage on the property but the income
> generated from the solar array (aka solar farming) is more than
> enough to pay the costs. It works as the cost of the land and house
> is very low.
> Being freed of the burden of a mortgage.
> What new economic system could be developed?
> Would artists and hackers go to a small town?
> What products and services can be exported away from the region?
> The two locations that we are currently working on are outside Port
> Lincoln and the other outside of Berri.
> With low /no cost housing and a high level of sustainability what kind
> of projects would be possible?
> My initial thoughts on the export industries would be;
> 1) eduction (people looking and learning from out town/region
> 2) organic food - as long as the carbon footprint is low
> 3) tourist
> 4) innovation
2009/6/28 Elias Bizannes <elias.bizan...@gmail.com>
> There are two things that are core to Silicon Valley's success: natural > crapness and alumni networks.
> If it was purely capital and talent, then there is no reason why New York > couldn't beat the Valley. In fact, New York will never beat the valley > because it has too much capital and too much talent: a developer would > rather a $100k/year job at a big bank creating market algorithms over a 50k > startup with no guarantee or prestige (yet).
> Sydney has a horrible urban plan, and Melbourne as a city is much better. > But Sydney never needed to care about its urban planning, because of it's > natural beauty.
You're being sarcastic?
Remember that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. For me, Sydney is as nice a place to visit as Silicon Valley may be, but there exist forces much stronger than mere aesthetics driving people to work in both cities. Employer ignorance, human habit, and lack of a cultural response to technological change are three.
> This [natural beauty] in turn has shaped the character of the city. The > environment of a place makes a huge impact on the culture of a city.
Hmmm... no, natural beauty of the location has little to do with its character. If the citizens' perceptions of their home's natural beauty have done anything, these perceptions have made the city of Sydney a stubbornly parochial and inward-focussed place. People give up their lives and move to an urban centre because they need jobs that keep the mouths of their children fed.
The necessary technological change I am of course talking of is telework, but maybe this isn't a good forum to talk about this?
The silicon chip factories kick started these alumni networks (and hence the
> valley's success): people got to know each other, and people that were > wealthy would invest in each other. > Perhaps this could be the evolution of the startup camps: lock a bunch of > university students in a regional town for three months, and tell them to > come back only when they have a product they are able to sell.
That is surely sarcasm? I really don't want to work in that type of world. It's all yours.
> 2009/6/28 Elias Bizannes <elias.bizan...@gmail.com>
>> There are two things that are core to Silicon Valley's success: natural >> crapness and alumni networks.
>> If it was purely capital and talent, then there is no reason why New York >> couldn't beat the Valley. In fact, New York will never beat the valley >> because it has too much capital and too much talent: a developer would >> rather a $100k/year job at a big bank creating market algorithms over a 50k >> startup with no guarantee or prestige (yet).
>> Sydney has a horrible urban plan, and Melbourne as a city is much better. >> But Sydney never needed to care about its urban planning, because of it's >> natural beauty.
> You're being sarcastic?
> Remember that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. For me, Sydney is as > nice a place to visit as Silicon Valley may be, but there exist forces much > stronger than mere aesthetics driving people to work in both cities. > Employer ignorance, human habit, and lack of a cultural response to > technological change are three.
>> This [natural beauty] in turn has shaped the character of the city. The >> environment of a place makes a huge impact on the culture of a city.
> Hmmm... no, natural beauty of the location has little to do with its > character. If the citizens' perceptions of their home's natural beauty have > done anything, these perceptions have made the city of Sydney a stubbornly > parochial and inward-focussed place. People give up their lives and move to > an urban centre because they need jobs that keep the mouths of their > children fed.
> The necessary technological change I am of course talking of is telework, > but maybe this isn't a good forum to talk about this?
> The silicon chip factories kick started these alumni networks (and hence >> the valley's success): people got to know each other, and people that were >> wealthy would invest in each other.
>> Perhaps this could be the evolution of the startup camps: lock a bunch of >> university students in a regional town for three months, and tell them to >> come back only when they have a product they are able to sell.
> That is surely sarcasm? I really don't want to work in that type of world. > It's all yours.
> I am working a project to use the solar electricity feed-in-tariffs in
> South Australia to create eco-villages.
> By arbitraging the rules, that is, by making small houses and very
> large photovoltaic arrays I can effectively give away houses without
> cost. There is a normal mortgage on the property but the income
> generated from the solar array (aka solar farming) is more than
> enough to pay the costs. It works as the cost of the land and house
> is very low.
> Being freed of the burden of a mortgage.
> What new economic system could be developed?
> Would artists and hackers go to a small town?
> What products and services can be exported away from the region?
> The two locations that we are currently working on are outside Port
> Lincoln and the other outside of Berri.
> With low /no cost housing and a high level of sustainability what kind
> of projects would be possible?
> My initial thoughts on the export industries would be;
> 1) eduction (people looking and learning from out town/region
> 2) organic food - as long as the carbon footprint is low
> 3) tourist
> 4) innovation
> I am working a project to use the solar electricity feed-in-tariffs in
> South Australia to create eco-villages.
> By arbitraging the rules, that is, by making small houses and very
> large photovoltaic arrays I can effectively give away houses without
> cost. There is a normal mortgage on the property but the income
> generated from the solar array (aka solar farming) is more than
> enough to pay the costs. It works as the cost of the land and house
> is very low.
> Being freed of the burden of a mortgage.
> What new economic system could be developed?
> Would artists and hackers go to a small town?
> What products and services can be exported away from the region?
> The two locations that we are currently working on are outside Port
> Lincoln and the other outside of Berri.
> With low /no cost housing and a high level of sustainability what kind
> of projects would be possible?
> My initial thoughts on the export industries would be;
> 1) eduction (people looking and learning from out town/region
> 2) organic food - as long as the carbon footprint is low
> 3) tourist
> 4) innovation
Nope - no sarcasm. The point I was trying to make: innovation centres are
influenced by a particular type of environment and the human relationships
that are built. And that culture is ultimately what makes an innovation
centre - but that culture is derived only from having the right environment.
People harp on about lack of capital and lack of talent as being the reason
Australia can't compete globally in tech. I say bullshit to that: it's
because we haven't got the right culture yet. What I proposed is setting
something up that allows us to then export that culture to Australia more
generally, based on experiences, networks and success stories generated.
Startups in San Francisco can be classed silicon valley, because they've
exported the culture from Palo Alto and San Jose - despite being much
further away from what was originally considered the Valley.
You don't want to work in that world? You're choice of words there
classically show the cultural problem we have. This isn't about work/life
balance. We are not a trade union to make better employment conditions. Go
work at a big company if you want that, that's at the mature stage of the
business cycle. This is about creating brutal startup business success.
Every startup founder I've spoken to or interviewed, reveals a very
non-glamorous life with a lot of early sacrifices.
If Richard teams up with Bart (from Startup camp - which may I add, they
already do), I think people will run at the opportunity for this.
On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 3:54 PM, Owen Thomas <owen.paul.tho...@gmail.com>wrote:
> 2009/6/28 Elias Bizannes <elias.bizan...@gmail.com>
>> There are two things that are core to Silicon Valley's success: natural
>> crapness and alumni networks.
>> If it was purely capital and talent, then there is no reason why New York
>> couldn't beat the Valley. In fact, New York will never beat the valley
>> because it has too much capital and too much talent: a developer would
>> rather a $100k/year job at a big bank creating market algorithms over a 50k
>> startup with no guarantee or prestige (yet).
>> Sydney has a horrible urban plan, and Melbourne as a city is much better.
>> But Sydney never needed to care about its urban planning, because of it's
>> natural beauty.
> You're being sarcastic?
> Remember that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. For me, Sydney is as
> nice a place to visit as Silicon Valley may be, but there exist forces much
> stronger than mere aesthetics driving people to work in both cities.
> Employer ignorance, human habit, and lack of a cultural response to
> technological change are three.
>> This [natural beauty] in turn has shaped the character of the city. The
>> environment of a place makes a huge impact on the culture of a city.
> Hmmm... no, natural beauty of the location has little to do with its
> character. If the citizens' perceptions of their home's natural beauty have
> done anything, these perceptions have made the city of Sydney a stubbornly
> parochial and inward-focussed place. People give up their lives and move to
> an urban centre because they need jobs that keep the mouths of their
> children fed.
> The necessary technological change I am of course talking of is telework,
> but maybe this isn't a good forum to talk about this?
> The silicon chip factories kick started these alumni networks (and hence
>> the valley's success): people got to know each other, and people that were
>> wealthy would invest in each other.
>> Perhaps this could be the evolution of the startup camps: lock a bunch of
>> university students in a regional town for three months, and tell them to
>> come back only when they have a product they are able to sell.
> That is surely sarcasm? I really don't want to work in that type of world.
> It's all yours.
I've been enjoying sitting back and reading this thread, but thought
it was time to chime in with support for Elias.
You won't find a more patriotic Aussie than myself - I love the
country and the people, but I live in Silicon Valley. Why? As much as
I love Australia, it doesn't have the "can do" attitude or passion
that exists here in the valley. People here are driven by passion and
the desire to make a difference to the world we live in - what Elias
is saying is absolutely spot on.
Australians have an extremely low tolerance for self-reflection - here
in the USA (and many other countries) there is a massive amount of
reflection, analysis etc. We don't take kindly to criticism even when
caged in constructive terms. Doing so may earn you the ultimate label
(which actually says nothing) of "unAustralian". This is an easy way
to dismiss any real analysis.
For me everything clicked into place after reading Donald Horne's "The
Lucky Country" - I can't imagine why this isn't mandatory reading at
every high school. Most people even don't realize that the title was
meant to be a wake up call, not something to be proud of (which pissed
Donald off to no extent). OK, some of it is a bit dated, but 90% is
still relevant, and gives the historical background for many of our
cultural mores.
We need to change attitudes in Australia around risk, failure and
success. With risk comes success or failure. Both are ok. Business
creates employment and wealth for everyone.
I firmly believe that Australia can meet or exceed any other country
in intellectual endeavors, but we lack the cultural context to
succeed. My ambition is to change that at the high school level, but
first I need to make loads of money to make this possible :-)...
Phil Montgomery
Silicon Valley
On Jun 28, 1:01 am, Elias Bizannes <elias.bizan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Nope - no sarcasm. The point I was trying to make: innovation centres are
> influenced by a particular type of environment and the human relationships
> that are built. And that culture is ultimately what makes an innovation
> centre - but that culture is derived only from having the right environment.
> People harp on about lack of capital and lack of talent as being the reason
> Australia can't compete globally in tech. I say bullshit to that: it's
> because we haven't got the right culture yet. What I proposed is setting
> something up that allows us to then export that culture to Australia more
> generally, based on experiences, networks and success stories generated.
> Startups in San Francisco can be classed silicon valley, because they've
> exported the culture from Palo Alto and San Jose - despite being much
> further away from what was originally considered the Valley.
> You don't want to work in that world? You're choice of words there
> classically show the cultural problem we have. This isn't about work/life
> balance. We are not a trade union to make better employment conditions. Go
> work at a big company if you want that, that's at the mature stage of the
> business cycle. This is about creating brutal startup business success.
> Every startup founder I've spoken to or interviewed, reveals a very
> non-glamorous life with a lot of early sacrifices.
> If Richard teams up with Bart (from Startup camp - which may I add, they
> already do), I think people will run at the opportunity for this.
> On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 3:54 PM, Owen Thomas <owen.paul.tho...@gmail.com>wrote:
> > Hello Elias.
> > 2009/6/28 Elias Bizannes <elias.bizan...@gmail.com>
> >> There are two things that are core to Silicon Valley's success: natural
> >> crapness and alumni networks.
> >> If it was purely capital and talent, then there is no reason why New York
> >> couldn't beat the Valley. In fact, New York will never beat the valley
> >> because it has too much capital and too much talent: a developer would
> >> rather a $100k/year job at a big bank creating market algorithms over a 50k
> >> startup with no guarantee or prestige (yet).
> >> Sydney has a horrible urban plan, and Melbourne as a city is much better.
> >> But Sydney never needed to care about its urban planning, because of it's
> >> natural beauty.
> > You're being sarcastic?
> > Remember that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. For me, Sydney is as
> > nice a place to visit as Silicon Valley may be, but there exist forces much
> > stronger than mere aesthetics driving people to work in both cities.
> > Employer ignorance, human habit, and lack of a cultural response to
> > technological change are three.
> >> This [natural beauty] in turn has shaped the character of the city. The
> >> environment of a place makes a huge impact on the culture of a city.
> > Hmmm... no, natural beauty of the location has little to do with its
> > character. If the citizens' perceptions of their home's natural beauty have
> > done anything, these perceptions have made the city of Sydney a stubbornly
> > parochial and inward-focussed place. People give up their lives and move to
> > an urban centre because they need jobs that keep the mouths of their
> > children fed.
> > The necessary technological change I am of course talking of is telework,
> > but maybe this isn't a good forum to talk about this?
> > The silicon chip factories kick started these alumni networks (and hence
> >> the valley's success): people got to know each other, and people that were
> >> wealthy would invest in each other.
> >> Perhaps this could be the evolution of the startup camps: lock a bunch of
> >> university students in a regional town for three months, and tell them to
> >> come back only when they have a product they are able to sell.
> > That is surely sarcasm? I really don't want to work in that type of world.
> > It's all yours.
On Jun 28, 5:52 pm, Peter Griffyn <petergrif...@gmail.com> wrote:
> What kind of houses do you plan to build?
There are two major options:
1. Architect designing townhouses
or my preference
2. Traditional Australian cottages with a large veranda around the
house.
It is easy to create efficient buildings is you just get the basics
right, orientation, thermal mass, cross-flows ventilation, insulation
and solar hot water. But we will have 100% water recycling on-site
and many other 'green' features. It will have one of the lowest carbon
footprint of any development in Australia.
I too have been sitting back and enjoying this thread and Phil and
Elias comments hit me like a slap in the face - a good one :)!
I have recently discovered the real potential of growing business
online through sharing experiences, networks and success stories, as
Elias explained. As a young business women with a traditional
bookkeeping business and some experience in the accoutning corporate
world in Australia, I learnt about such opportunities through the many
women on the web sharing their stories and how much they love
"inspiring" other women. Don't get me wrong we know inspiring other
people gives you motivation and joy but everyone is in it for the
money, are they not?
It was refreshing and exciting to see established business men in the
tech world explain that this way of thinking is as much about creating
change in an embedded Australian culture than it is about making money
by inspiring others. You have changed the way I will think when
teaching my young kids about responsibilities and opportunities in
business.
On Jun 29, 4:40 am, Aussie Phil <phil.montgom...@majura.com> wrote:
> I've been enjoying sitting back and reading this thread, but thought
> it was time to chime in with support for Elias.
> You won't find a more patriotic Aussie than myself - I love the
> country and the people, but I live in Silicon Valley. Why? As much as
> I love Australia, it doesn't have the "can do" attitude or passion
> that exists here in the valley. People here are driven by passion and
> the desire to make a difference to the world we live in - what Elias
> is saying is absolutely spot on.
> Australians have an extremely low tolerance for self-reflection - here
> in the USA (and many other countries) there is a massive amount of
> reflection, analysis etc. We don't take kindly to criticism even when
> caged in constructive terms. Doing so may earn you the ultimate label
> (which actually says nothing) of "unAustralian". This is an easy way
> to dismiss any real analysis.
> For me everything clicked into place after reading Donald Horne's "The
> Lucky Country" - I can't imagine why this isn't mandatory reading at
> every high school. Most people even don't realize that the title was
> meant to be a wake up call, not something to be proud of (which pissed
> Donald off to no extent). OK, some of it is a bit dated, but 90% is
> still relevant, and gives the historical background for many of our
> cultural mores.
> We need to change attitudes in Australia around risk, failure and
> success. With risk comes success or failure. Both are ok. Business
> creates employment and wealth for everyone.
> I firmly believe that Australia can meet or exceed any other country
> in intellectual endeavors, but we lack the cultural context to
> succeed. My ambition is to change that at the high school level, but
> first I need to make loads of money to make this possible :-)...
> Phil Montgomery
> Silicon Valley
> On Jun 28, 1:01 am, Elias Bizannes <elias.bizan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Nope - no sarcasm. The point I was trying to make: innovation centres are
> > influenced by a particular type of environment and the human relationships
> > that are built. And that culture is ultimately what makes an innovation
> > centre - but that culture is derived only from having the right environment.
> > People harp on about lack of capital and lack of talent as being the reason
> > Australia can't compete globally in tech. I say bullshit to that: it's
> > because we haven't got the right culture yet. What I proposed is setting
> > something up that allows us to then export that culture to Australia more
> > generally, based on experiences, networks and success stories generated.
> > Startups in San Francisco can be classed silicon valley, because they've
> > exported the culture from Palo Alto and San Jose - despite being much
> > further away from what was originally considered the Valley.
> > You don't want to work in that world? You're choice of words there
> > classically show the cultural problem we have. This isn't about work/life
> > balance. We are not a trade union to make better employment conditions. Go
> > work at a big company if you want that, that's at the mature stage of the
> > business cycle. This is about creating brutal startup business success.
> > Every startup founder I've spoken to or interviewed, reveals a very
> > non-glamorous life with a lot of early sacrifices.
> > If Richard teams up with Bart (from Startup camp - which may I add, they
> > already do), I think people will run at the opportunity for this.
> > On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 3:54 PM, Owen Thomas <owen.paul.tho...@gmail.com>wrote:
> > > Hello Elias.
> > > 2009/6/28 Elias Bizannes <elias.bizan...@gmail.com>
> > >> There are two things that are core to Silicon Valley's success: natural
> > >> crapness and alumni networks.
> > >> If it was purely capital and talent, then there is no reason why New York
> > >> couldn't beat the Valley. In fact, New York will never beat the valley
> > >> because it has too much capital and too much talent: a developer would
> > >> rather a $100k/year job at a big bank creating market algorithms over a 50k
> > >> startup with no guarantee or prestige (yet).
> > >> Sydney has a horrible urban plan, and Melbourne as a city is much better.
> > >> But Sydney never needed to care about its urban planning, because of it's
> > >> natural beauty.
> > > You're being sarcastic?
> > > Remember that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. For me, Sydney is as
> > > nice a place to visit as Silicon Valley may be, but there exist forces much
> > > stronger than mere aesthetics driving people to work in both cities.
> > > Employer ignorance, human habit, and lack of a cultural response to
> > > technological change are three.
> > >> This [natural beauty] in turn has shaped the character of the city. The
> > >> environment of a place makes a huge impact on the culture of a city.
> > > Hmmm... no, natural beauty of the location has little to do with its
> > > character. If the citizens' perceptions of their home's natural beauty have
> > > done anything, these perceptions have made the city of Sydney a stubbornly
> > > parochial and inward-focussed place. People give up their lives and move to
> > > an urban centre because they need jobs that keep the mouths of their
> > > children fed.
> > > The necessary technological change I am of course talking of is telework,
> > > but maybe this isn't a good forum to talk about this?
> > > The silicon chip factories kick started these alumni networks (and hence
> > >> the valley's success): people got to know each other, and people that were
> > >> wealthy would invest in each other.
> > >> Perhaps this could be the evolution of the startup camps: lock a bunch of
> > >> university students in a regional town for three months, and tell them to
> > >> come back only when they have a product they are able to sell.
> > > That is surely sarcasm? I really don't want to work in that type of world.
> > > It's all yours.
> It was refreshing and exciting to see established business men in the
> tech world explain that this way of thinking is as much about creating
We are not 'established business men' we are ratbags, scum, dreamers,
geeks, basket weavers, greenies and much much worse. If you want to
change the world, just change bits you can control. Educate and
inspire other through your own actions.
The easiest way the predict the future is to make it.
Because I lack any true opposition or advocacy of the issue of solar farms, I'm not going to make myself look like I'm arguing any further in this discussion. I'm going to stick my thread and argue the case for cultural change around the subject of telework - an orthogonal debate to the one going on here.
I wish Richard every success in advancing his business aspirations.
A few observations (from someone who's never been south of the equator):
- Your offer may have the most appeal to people who cannot afford to buy a house but want one. Not necessarily college educated knowledge workers. Perhaps low-to-medium skill service industry workers? Seniors who like warm sunshine but who find themselves unprepared financially retirement?
- If you're not tied to anything but microclimate, consider partnering with local anchor industries. Who are the big employers in Port Lincoln's aquaculture business? Companies might get some value out of helping employees own houses.
- Do local governments subsidize housing for hard-to-attract employees like doctors or teachers?
- The closest temperament to a solar farmer might just be an agro farmer. Someone comfortable with the idea of living with land that needs care, that's valued for being productive.
Good luck with your parasol property development. It seems a good work.
My wife and I always talked about joining a technology/science
commune. Perhaps comune is too strong a word. But a community of
geniouses definitely appeals. A town where everyone has a hand in
high level science and research. The kids get the best education in
the world. If you've ever watched the TV show "Eureka"
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eureka_(TV_series), you would know what I
mean. :)
Colorado has similar energy laws but not enough people explored this
really interesting idea. I'm curious as to how large an array (and
how small a house) meets the cut-off. Also, consider solar thermal
electric as an alternative. Either way, my vote is Port Lincoln for
location.
Other suggestions:
- The incubator idea is a natural fit.
- Two words....LASER TAG :)
- Electric Car manufacturing center (Contact Elon Musk's Tesla
Motors?)
- Electric Car recharge stations
- Electric Car race track (you've GOT to put this next to the laser
tag arena)
Okay, so the electric car is a bit tongue in cheek (but you never
know....it is related). If you wish to attract a wider market of home
and business owners, consider work/life balance becomes very
important. Work/life balance will be necessary for the artists,
writers, and liberal arts community folk who need a relaxed and
beautiful place (not sure what you mean by hackers). Even if the
incubator start-up leaders are all students, the village will need a
few pubs (Microbrew!).
Cheers
Jason Held
On Jun 28, 2:14 pm, "rgh....@gmail.com" <rgh....@gmail.com> wrote:
> I am working a project to use the solar electricity feed-in-tariffs in
> South Australia to create eco-villages.
> By arbitraging the rules, that is, by making small houses and very
> large photovoltaic arrays I can effectively give away houses without
> cost. There is a normal mortgage on the property but the income
> generated from the solar array (aka solar farming) is more than
> enough to pay the costs. It works as the cost of the land and house
> is very low.
> Being freed of the burden of a mortgage.
> What new economic system could be developed?
> Would artists and hackers go to a small town?
> What products and services can be exported away from the region?
> The two locations that we are currently working on are outside Port
> Lincoln and the other outside of Berri.
> With low /no cost housing and a high level of sustainability what kind
> of projects would be possible?
> My initial thoughts on the export industries would be;
> 1) eduction (people looking and learning from out town/region
> 2) organic food - as long as the carbon footprint is low
> 3) tourist
> 4) innovation
> Colorado has similar energy laws but not enough people explored this
> really interesting idea. I'm curious as to how large an array (and
> how small a house) meets the cut-off.
Basic financial model:
The SA Feed-in-Tariff limits you to 30KWp (10KW per phase) and you
must power yourself first and then export surplus.
PV System should generate circa 54MWh annually
Income: $0.64KWh + GST per KWh ($700 per MWh) nett
If you have a highly efficient house and use only 4MWh you can export
50 MWh
50 * $700 = $35,000 electricity sales
Government grants and tax breaks are worth up to $140,000 currently,
depending on who you are but YMMV.
House mortgage $340,000
House & land $100,000
PV $240,000 and the price of PV is rapidly dropping
Current interest rate 6.7% or $23,000 a year.
I am focusing on cottages 75-85sqm with verandas all around them.
I was wondering if this initiative took off and became successful, would
there be a point where the houses producing the surplus solar power would
create an over supply of power and therefore reduce the amount of money
generated from on selling their excess solar power?
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 6:04 PM, Richard Hayes <rgh....@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Colorado has similar energy laws but not enough people explored this
> > really interesting idea. I'm curious as to how large an array (and
> > how small a house) meets the cut-off.
> Basic financial model:
> The SA Feed-in-Tariff limits you to 30KWp (10KW per phase) and you
> must power yourself first and then export surplus.
> PV System should generate circa 54MWh annually
> Income: $0.64KWh + GST per KWh ($700 per MWh) nett
> If you have a highly efficient house and use only 4MWh you can export
> 50 MWh
> 50 * $700 = $35,000 electricity sales
> Government grants and tax breaks are worth up to $140,000 currently,
> depending on who you are but YMMV.
> House mortgage $340,000
> House & land $100,000
> PV $240,000 and the price of PV is rapidly dropping
> Current interest rate 6.7% or $23,000 a year.
> I am focusing on cottages 75-85sqm with verandas all around them.
> Richard Hayes
> Carbon Free Solutions
> 0414 618 425
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 6:08 PM, Daniel Purchas <purc...@gmail.com> wrote: > I was wondering if this initiative took off and became successful, would > there be a point where the houses producing the surplus solar power would > create an over supply of power and therefore reduce the amount of money > generated from on selling their excess solar power?
Good question but it won't. The way the GreenPower brand and Emissions Trading Scheme will have an impact on the economy, is that it will practically cost more to buy non-Green power (because of the carbon penalty that firms will pass down to the consumer). As such, when consumers have the option of buying power, they will go for the cheaper supplier as energy has been commoditised. This will in the long term create a structural change in the industry where all energy converts to Green power, as it's cheaper than buying offsets to meet legal obligations. So it's not creating surplus energy as much as it is forcing the rest of the energy industry to drop current means to production (ie, coal).
Failing that however, with the resource intensive data centres being built globally for satisfy the evolution to a cloud computing world, the surplus might create a major new Australian industry. Australia's geographic location to Asia as well as its massive land mass with heat that makes solar power en masse possible, may result in Australia becoming a major data centre base for companies like Google, Microsoft, Amazon, Rackspace and the rest. Make it a tax free ecomomic zone like how Google negotiates with governments in the Deep South, and combined with its cheaper operating costs due to Green power - you will have all those beforementioned companies running to build something here.
Elias, don't want to dump on you too much, but you sound so much like
so many of the gov. plans that never seem to take off.
Speaking of Adelaide, does anyone remember the great oz/japanese
techno tower that was originally going to be built on a beach in qld,
and then moved to adelaide ? (this is early 90's).
The BAY area is not about average - the highs are high and the lows
are low - sonoma is great. Or how about south of the valley ? or up
in the mountains ? A lot of bay area people live elsewhere. Having a
beer at a micro-brewery say in Walnut Creek followed by a burrito
after can be pretty nice. There is that great sandwich bar opposite
the Berkeley uni (i just can't remember its name, but it so often has
a queue out the door from morning to night).
One thing to keep in mind - years ago, when it did start - the south
bay was WAY different (for a laugh, compare some of the shots from A
View to a Kill with today) and the Menlo Park area was a lot nicer,
and housing not so expensive. (not the case today). But the bay area
is about living in the Area, not a city. So many people hit the
mountains every weekend, or go north to the redwoods, or south the
beach or just hang in in SF, or golden gate park or get lost in Frys.
Its a place you can have any climate within 2 hours ( 3 and you have
snow). Weather is great 90% of the year. It does have really bad
traffic - 2 hours to cross the west gate bridge on a weekend happens a
lot (especially after a baseball game) and don't even mention the 880
or the 220 in rush hour.
Actually, Sydney and the bay area share a lot in common (including bad
traffic).
Silicon valley also has a bit more :
2 of the top unis on the west cost at either end - smart guys and gals
those same 2 unis are also in the top 10 in the US - really smart guys
and gals
in between there are people that have money to invest - looking for
smart guys and gals.
a culture that says giving it a go is cool.
A history and a set of people that have worked out how to make it all
work.
Its also so much about the californian way. About a place where
people just seem to think differently ?
Young people don't really hang out in the sticks, so that for a start
is going to make it hard (note -i am currently living out of town, and
I have just about had enough - its lovely - we have 100's (really,
there are hundreds) of kangaroos at the moment - apart from skippy the
rest just can't code) but next month i am heading back to the big
smoke because there is no vibe or you just need others to connect to.
Apart from that, i like the thinking about the town - thats cool.
Great idea for retirement villages (seriously). Over 50, have a decent
super account, want out - save on the price of house free's up a lot
of cash - could even just ask say for 20K fee as price of entry. It
actually sounds almost too good to be true - one slip of the finances
or a management team that gets a little too greedy and it could all go
to the dog house.
On Jun 29, 9:49 pm, mmp1 <missingmatt...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Elias, don't want to dump on you too much, but you sound so much like
> so many of the gov. plans that never seem to take off.
The only thing wrong with your argument is that the government has
nothing to do with the project.
I am the developer and the financing is from the a credit union.
> Its also so much about the Californian way. About a place where
> people just seem to think differently ?
> Young people don't really hang out in the sticks, so that for a start
> is going to make it hard
Yes a major problem for a regional town is the lost of young people.
But that is one of the challenges I would like to overcome. It is
doable.
(note -i am currently living out of town, and
> I have just about had enough - its lovely - we have 100's (really,
> there are hundreds) of kangaroos at the moment - apart from skippy the
> rest just can't code) but next month i am heading back to the big
> smoke because there is no vibe or you just need others to connect to.
I am not talking about making city of 50,000 but 3 or 4 towns each
with 100 houses so a total population of 230 each.
> Apart from that, i like the thinking about the town - thats cool.
> Great idea for retirement villages (seriously). Over 50, have a decent
> super account, want out - save on the price of house free's up a lot
> of cash - could even just ask say for 20K fee as price of entry. It
> actually sounds almost too good to be true
No, it is just a normal government stuff up. We are twisting the
rules into forms they were not envisioned.
The credit unions are very conservative capital providers and
understand that there is a natural limit to the size of the projects
but are happy 200 houses. If other organisations went crazy and tried
to make a huge number of houses the government would limit the size of
the payments as they have in both NSW and Queensland.
one slip of the finances
> or a management team that gets a little too greedy and it could all go
> to the dog house.
> There are two major options:
> 1. Architect designing townhouses
> or my preference
> 2. Traditional Australian cottages with a large veranda around the house.
I am wondering why do you prefer going without an architect?
In general a good architect saves developers money and also produces
better results.
And why do you consider a relatively remote areas for the project?
It looks like your idea will work in other places too. If land is
expensive it may not remove mortgages all together but surely it will
help people out.
Dmitri.
On Jun 29, 11:39 pm, Richard Hayes <rgh....@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jun 29, 9:49 pm, mmp1 <missingmatt...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Elias, don't want to dump on you too much, but you sound so much like
> > so many of the gov. plans that never seem to take off.
> The only thing wrong with your argument is that the government has
> nothing to do with the project.
> I am the developer and the financing is from the a credit union.
> > Its also so much about the Californian way. About a place where
> > people just seem to think differently ?
> > Young people don't really hang out in the sticks, so that for a start
> > is going to make it hard
> Yes a major problem for a regional town is the lost of young people.
> But that is one of the challenges I would like to overcome. It is
> doable.
> (note -i am currently living out of town, and
> > I have just about had enough - its lovely - we have 100's (really,
> > there are hundreds) of kangaroos at the moment - apart from skippy the
> > rest just can't code) but next month i am heading back to the big
> > smoke because there is no vibe or you just need others to connect to.
> I am not talking about making city of 50,000 but 3 or 4 towns each
> with 100 houses so a total population of 230 each.
> > Apart from that, i like the thinking about the town - thats cool.
> > Great idea for retirement villages (seriously). Over 50, have a decent
> > super account, want out - save on the price of house free's up a lot
> > of cash - could even just ask say for 20K fee as price of entry. It
> > actually sounds almost too good to be true
> No, it is just a normal government stuff up. We are twisting the
> rules into forms they were not envisioned.
> The credit unions are very conservative capital providers and
> understand that there is a natural limit to the size of the projects
> but are happy 200 houses. If other organisations went crazy and tried
> to make a huge number of houses the government would limit the size of
> the payments as they have in both NSW and Queensland.
> one slip of the finances> or a management team that gets a little too greedy and it could all go
> > to the dog house.
> Like every other mortgage.
> BTW, I am older and not as sexy as Elias.
> Richard Hayes
> Carbon Free Solutions
> 0414 618 425
On Jul 2, 2:06 pm, dimka <dimka.koz...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > There are two major options:
> > 1. Architect designing townhouses
> > or my preference
> > 2. Traditional Australian cottages with a large veranda around the house.
> I am wondering why do you prefer going without an architect?
I am going to use an architect.
> In general a good architect saves developers money and also produces
> better results.
I agree, totally.
> And why do you consider a relatively remote areas for the project?
> It looks like your idea will work in other places too.
There are a variety of reason for looking at Berri, South Australia.
1. It is sunny.
2. The council is keen to help get the project and may offer cheap
(free??) land.
3. South Australia pays the highest rate for the Feed-in-Tariff.
4. I am trying to transfer economic activity to regional centres.
With the increased work opportunities I am trying to get different
societal outcomes, that is country towns should not need to lose all
of their young people so they can get a job.
It is easier to work on a clean sheet than to try and retrofit
buildings.
If land is
> expensive it may not remove mortgages all together but surely it will
> help people out.
Yes it will. In fact, yesterday a developer wants to put lots of PV
on a new aged care facility and use the income to offset the cost of
care. Each unit would get about $1500 per year in extra income.
> On Jun 29, 11:39 pm, Richard Hayes <rgh....@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Jun 29, 9:49 pm, mmp1 <missingmatt...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Elias, don't want to dump on you too much, but you sound so much like
> > > so many of the gov. plans that never seem to take off.
> > The only thing wrong with your argument is that the government has
> > nothing to do with the project.
> > I am the developer and the financing is from the a credit union.
> > > Its also so much about the Californian way. About a place where
> > > people just seem to think differently ?
> > > Young people don't really hang out in the sticks, so that for a start
> > > is going to make it hard
> > Yes a major problem for a regional town is the lost of young people.
> > But that is one of the challenges I would like to overcome. It is
> > doable.
> > (note -i am currently living out of town, and
> > > I have just about had enough - its lovely - we have 100's (really,
> > > there are hundreds) of kangaroos at the moment - apart from skippy the
> > > rest just can't code) but next month i am heading back to the big
> > > smoke because there is no vibe or you just need others to connect to.
> > I am not talking about making city of 50,000 but 3 or 4 towns each
> > with 100 houses so a total population of 230 each.
> > > Apart from that, i like the thinking about the town - thats cool.
> > > Great idea for retirement villages (seriously). Over 50, have a decent
> > > super account, want out - save on the price of house free's up a lot
> > > of cash - could even just ask say for 20K fee as price of entry. It
> > > actually sounds almost too good to be true
> > No, it is just a normal government stuff up. We are twisting the
> > rules into forms they were not envisioned.
> > The credit unions are very conservative capital providers and
> > understand that there is a natural limit to the size of the projects
> > but are happy 200 houses. If other organisations went crazy and tried
> > to make a huge number of houses the government would limit the size of
> > the payments as they have in both NSW and Queensland.
> > one slip of the finances> or a management team that gets a little too greedy and it could all go
> > > to the dog house.
> > Like every other mortgage.
> > BTW, I am older and not as sexy as Elias.
> > Richard Hayes
> > Carbon Free Solutions
> > 0414 618 425
|
