The Vatican’s Extraeconomic Opportunity

Pope Francis has seen the light. He is in many respects an impressive Pope, because his moral positions overlap with that of many atheists, meaning, it is based on experience and observation. Human suffering is to be avoided, humans in dire straits will commit crimes, degrade themselves, and this is not good for the coherence of society.

Pope’s Encyclical 

In his recent encyclical, which is a letter to whomever wants to read it, he explains that be believes the Roman Catholic church has an obligation to protect ‘creation’. This is quite a perfect stance from our point of view, because even though creationism is an incorrect belief, the idea we need to protect life as it presented itself in the last 2000 years is actually what most climate activist and scientist mean when they warn of risks and changes. Life will go on even if the planet warms 12 degrees, but it won’t be us or the animals and plants we know. The Pope has the right focus.

Now all around the world people ‘of faith’ will start to think about ways to protect ‘creation’. The reason they follow this Pope’s advise is because his suggestion is good. It has no drawbacks for normal people. We do what we feel has the least negative consequences, that is how humans operate. Republicans in the US already shown they are a bunch of flaming hypocrites, Jeb Bush saying he doesn’t take econoic advise form the Pope, but that is because wealth is what they care about, and their wealth is born out of fossil fuel economics.

We see a resurgence of ideology over economics. Elon Musk, the Party for the Animals in Holland, the Pope all three are driven by non-economic motives that are none the less valid and good. And in all three cases the ideas and actions find widespread resonance. It is simple : Only caring about maximizing fossil fuel cashflow is not the way most people want to spend their time on Earth.

Renewables mean many parts of Earth become viable to sustain life, because solar electricity can generate water, make fertilizer, drive planting etc. without costing anyone anything

But there is more the Pope could do. In fact he could do something nobody else could or would be motivated to do. He wants to mobilize people to protect creation, he does that by writing, talking and tweeting about it. But he is also the ruler of a small nation, the Vatican. It has a bank, the Vatican bank. This is a unique situation to be in if we think about Extraeconomics.

Extraeconomic rules :

  1. Start by spending savings, not by going into debt
  2. Use only renewable energy
  3. Don’t transact with the world economy
  4. Sustains its own population
  5. Create/maintain a significant surplus in resources
  6. May transact with other extraeconomic zones

Extraeconomics is a new kind of thinking, not in terms of creating enterprises as part of the world economy, but instead creating them as 100% self sufficient operations, which get started by taking from the world economy, but which then stop interacting with it and which create large resouce surplusses (wood, fish, plastic, whatever) and only sustain the people involved in them. They are like martian colonies on Earth, with a mission to replenish resouces, mainly focussing on those that help us keep ‘creation’ alive and well, so carbon sequestering, biodiversity enhancing, carbon capturing activities.

Extraeconomics is not about isolation from the rest of the world, but  only about disarming the economic forces that now drive us to exploit,destroy and consume so much more than we would without this misguided economic philosophy. The market is not king, and resources are not limitless. To sustain ourselves over millions of years to come, we need to work within our planetary limits, not follow the demands of fossil fuel producers and use as much of it as fast as possible to make them rich. Because that is what makes our economy so destructive, the drive to sell fossil fuels.

The vatican has build its wealth on banking, it was practically the first bank to print money, and it started doing that right after the printing press was invented. It’s booming sale of indulgences allowed it to thrive and build its grand cathedrals, until people got fed up with paying for redemption and created the protestant and other spin-offs. Now the Vatican could do this once more, by creating a currency for Extraeconomic operations, because internally such operations have to be run like companies, with a big difference, namely without fossil fuel cost. An extraeconomic operation or enterprise has to be 100% renewable energy powered. That said they might be of such a size and complexity that they need a currency, one that does not invite interaction with the wider economy.

The church has always had monestaries, that where usually self sufficient, so in the religious realm extraeconomic systems are nothing new. What is new is that those systems can be set up to protect creation, that we have a Pope that has the motivation to do so, and that it even has all the economic autonomy needed to do it right. It has people motivated to put in the effort, people willing to cooperate, land around the globe, money to take the first resources and a philosophy that will always put life first.

Basically every non-economic ideology could bind people enough to allow them to set up and run an extraeconomic zone/system/enterprise. It is about the focus on preserving ‘creation’ and seeing beyond the limits of fossil fuel economics. Our planet has enormous potential if we use locally available resources, even in the deepest deserts and the middle of the atlantic ocean.

Lets hope Francis gets this..




Creating Heaven on Earth

It is interesting to look at motivation for the sustainable and renewable revolutions that are now gathering speed. For many people captured in a tight economic matrix buying solar panels has to be explained as a cost saving choice with an acceptable ROI. But many people, expecially in the early days of solar technology, where motivated by either purist or idealist motivation. Purists where found in the scientific community, they where the rational logical thinkers, who would try to see the world as it is, and where looking to solve problems (for instance energy supply in space for the Appollo missions).

The people that designed the ambition to go to the moon where also driven by reason. They could empirically show that an ambitions goal can have an enormously positive effect on developemnt of all kinds of technology, the dreams of children and thus the transferral of (at that time) fossil energy into wealth. They did not hesitate to push this rational insight into policy, because it satisfied their drive for sound action and increased wealth. These where no-nonsense engineers and economists.

Today we have reached the moon, and due largely to the work of Elon Musk a new goal has been presented : Going to Mars. It is not only a cathalyst for creation of new technology. In a way it is also a distraction from what is happening to our planet. Economically speaking you have two choices : 1. Work in the economy 2. Think about space.

That star..

Thinking about space is something rather contemplative, which is no surprise because most of our evolution we spend evenings in the dark with nothing more to stare at than the stars. For most of our evolution we attributed events to gods who would fly around up there, move the sun through the sky and do all kinds of other things. The kingdom of the christian god is in ‘heaven’. Part of the psychology of heaven as a good place is probably our confusion of the upward gaze with that of looking at our parents as infant. This has been cleverly used by strangers ‘church fathers’ for centuries to turn us into children “of god in heaven”. Of course the childisch mentality has economic advantages.

But today, as we are trying to think straight in our economic matrix we can once again choose a goal, one rather similar in holistic terms to a journey to Mars. We can work to reach “Heaven” here on Earth. After a century of playing god the time has come to complete the act so to say.

This may seem a rediculous idea, but think about it. What would be required to create heaven like circumstances on Earth? Maybe the “eternal life” part of heavenly existence will have to wait, but the environmental circumstances of heaven are now within reach.

We can make a world that grows, is lush and green, while we ourselves only have to enjoy it. We can make one in which we don’t need to sweat and toil to stay alive, in which most diseases can be cured..

Practically this translates into a world where energy production does not burden what lives in any way, in which automated systems maintain and expand the regions that are suitable for life, which includes deserts and oceans, in which people may work but in which pefroming heavy labour is a choice, not something one gets forced into by a harsh society.

The goal to create ‘Heaven on earth’ is not rediculous now, and the key aspect that will make it happen is that it is congruent with the way the makers and doers of our world set their goals. It is a rational conclusion that compared to todays world we can create one that is infinitely more pleasant. One in which we don’t have to ignore slavery or remote wars, because they won’t exist. One in which we don’t have to dread the death of oceans or the extinction of most life. One in which we can predict how our children will fare because they don’t have to fight over fossil fuel rations. The last generations opened the gates of hell, the following generations will ascend the stairway to heaven (ok, sorry, that’s corny)..

Are you into sustainable agriculture, you bring a piece of this future world about, if you install build wind parks you do the same. If you educated kids so they care more about what keeps them alive, you are part of the ‘movement’. If you insist on selling fossil fuels, if you want to exploit natural resources and not care about what you leave behind, you are someone that brings about hell on Earth.

This is no religious thing, religion is only responsible for teaching us to group things we dread under the name Hell, and things we enjoy under the name Heaven. Hell was always buring underground, a bit like coal seam gassification. Evil is darkness. Oily darkness? The devil’s sulfurous stench.. These attributes probably came from open coal seam fires and the observation of lava, but the translation to products of the fossil industry is an easy step. Heaven? The Sun up there, it brings life. It causes the release of Oxytocin when it warms our skin, associated with the feeling of being loved. Religion just borrowed that effect to attribute it to god.

Right now we can make empirical lists of the outcome from the actions of one kind of person : accelerated climate destruction, increased suffering and extinction of mankind and of another kind : climate conservation, reduced suffering and a better chance for mankind.

Perhaps those that want to fight climate change and return our world to a better state can all be considered servants of a new faith, one that is surprisingly rational and has a simple goal : Creation of heaven on Earth. Think it over, it is a goal well worth your effort. Accept it and you may become a knight of heaven 😉



A look at a Strawbale Appartment Complex in Holland

Some pictures of a straw bale appartment complex in Nijmegen (map link) build by a collective of its inhabitants. It has just been finished a couple of months ago, so we’ll have to return for pictures when it is in its final state. The appartment complex has different sizes of appartments, some are in the social housing price range, eligible for rent subsidies. More info to follow.

The internal walls are covered with adobe, directly onto the straw. This can be retouched with a wet sponge later. It creates a breathing wall that in some cases even helps purify the air.

The walls of the complex are thick. Strawbales are about 50 cm wide. This also helps sound proofing and cooling in summer.

The design of the complex uses a lot of wood. The internal frame is wood, wich gives it a relaxing atmosphere.

The complex includes a community center with a green roof.

On its roofs a large solar power plant supplies electricity. The energy requirments will be low because of the high insulation factor of straw bales.

Close by a multi generational housing project appears to be half way, more to follow about that.

Extraeconomic systems to deal with African refugees

Europe is struggling with africans being shipped by human trafficers across the Mediterranean sea. Many lose their lives in rickety boats, and once in Europe they have to make money to repay the people that smuggled them here, or harm will come to their relatives at home.

Whether these people come here to find fortune or be free of war or prosecution, the response right now is not adequate. If they land in Italy they are now practically quarantined there, shipped back from France and Switzerland. Their ability to cross the channel to the UK is also being stemmed, also because they damage cargo passing through the channel tunnel.

The people themselves can be illiterate or engineers, usually this is not found out by anyone because most of them are not allowed to work in Europe. The potential for wealth wasted this way is obvious. In a society where so many jobs are lost because of automation (and more will follow), it makes no sense to claim that a few able africans cause to much hardship for Europeans. After all, if they work they create wealth, which benefits all.

In a ideal world one could dispatch some special forces to deal with the traffickers themselves, but the complexity of the network of criminals and corrupt officials that allow the human trade to go on may be underestimated. Too many people involved, too many eager to get involved, not enough governmental care, maybe even officials that see the trade as a nice source of additional income? Who knows. Even in the US the law enforcement system can be semi criminal (for example the ability of cops to take any cash you may have on your person without reason if they stop your car, a practice that is now being abolished).

Some politicians have stepped over the (send back/let enter) false choice by suggesting the refugees are send back with some assistance. This seems a great solution, because in a way it deals with the economic motive of many to flee. However such a plan would be sensitive to the same problems as every 3rd world aid program, and many of them have been unsuccesfull (except the ones that where covert subsidies to European companies).

But there is another crisis brewing in Africa, the climate crisis. Rainfall will drop 50% by 2020 in most of Africa, meaning widespread drought, problems for farmers, famine etc. The epically autistic Robert Zoellick, former World Bank CEO suggested africans stuck without irrigation would have to buy ‘rain index futures’, insurance against drought. First : Which poor farmer gets the idea to go insure his harvest this way? Second : Which insurere is stupid enough to insure for drought if the trend is predicted and shown to occur? Third : How do you feed half a continent suffering from drought even if you have your money (food prices would go through the roof) ? Supid, insane, irresponsible World Bank advice.

The african climate crisis will produce many more refugees than are already coming here, some of which are exactly that. Fleeing climate change however is a losing strategy. If arable land is destroyed and lost to the desert it has to be reclaimed, because it isn’t getting better, it is only getting worse. This is something Europe can assist in, and perhaps in doing so it can employ africans that where looking for a better existence in Europe. A project of climate resilient carbon sequestring development may even produce so much wealth that it can sustain itself without outside financial support.

It is naive to think one can simply start some kind of program in Africa, in any of its countries. It is also naive to think that one can simply recruit refugees to start a project. Short term there is a lot to do even in Europe for people that want to work. There’s endless farmland that lies fallow, recieving annual money to be plowed but not used. The plowing money goes directly into the pockets of the fossil fuel suppliers, and the land loses carbon from being exposed. Why not plant carbon sequestring biomass, trees on that land. Trees bring rain, so dry regions will see more rain and biomass in general. Silvopastural woods (ones meant for wildlife) can increase biodiversity and create a pool of CO2 neutral biomass (although this should not be the goal). The more we grow where we don’t have to grow food, the more perpared we are for climate change.

In Africa one could go down the routes travelled by refugees and look for places they might want to stay on their route. Of course one would have to deal with the traffickers as well. Countries like Niger should be assisted in creating centers of eco restoration, desert farming, even if it is a super dry desert. With solar energy this doesn’t have to be a pipe dream at all.

Renewables create new economic opportunities, ones we like to call Extraeconomic or Roboeconomic, because economics is about the “Maximization of utilization fo fossil fuels”. Extraeconomics is about creating a renewable based autonomous system including peope, food production and some kind of climate related service (carbon capture, biodiversity protection) without interacting with the world economy. These systems can exist in regions with economic activity, but they can also be set up soley based on the renewable energy resources.

Instead of viewing Africa as a lost continent and waiting for the millios of people to find their way to places that will remain relatively fertile (Europe will fare well initially) on can assist them in protecting them against climate change, while at the same time learning about extraeconomic systems and protecting the planet as a whole. There are even interesting export opportunites for Europes innovative horticulture industry. The driver can be renewables and the goal can be to create places where refugees can find opportunity without having to risk their lives..





The Roboeconomic Challenge

In discussions with people that are working hard to green our economy it is often hard to convey an insight that is fundamental to solving our current climate predicament. We’re on a dangerous course and it seems like we’re on some kind of supertanker, while we’re not. To see that it is necessary to understand how fundamentally pro-fossil fuels our economic system is. It is the supertanker we are stuck on.

So we present a challenge, it is a challenge to explain how to do things in two situations. One in which there is 100% fossil fuel energy, the other in which there is 100% renewable energy.

The challenge is simple :

A group of people wants to build a swimming pool for kids. A bank (that is kept around for this special purpose) creates 2 million Euro in credit to start the build. What happens next?

To be sure, the world in which this happens runs on renewables, only on wind, solar and storage, and these resources are utilized to their full capacity.

With two million in your hands, what would you do? What would happen? Can you describe this in one page and send it to this website so we can share it here? Our email adress is

We call it the Roboeconomic challenge because understanding the difference between our economy and the future economy (which we call the roboeconomy) is stark. It requires a new way of thinking that has nothing to do with our current economic framework. Roboeconomics hints at the bigger role of robotics, the ecological nature of our way of life and the fact that there will still be an economic system when we are running on 100% renewables, but a different one. Solving the challenge above is part of learning about this roboeconomy..





Edible Plant Expert Joseph Simcox

Joseph Simcox is a one in a 8 billion kind of guy, who has been fanatical about plants from a very early age. He hold incredible knowledge about what kind of edible plants exist and is not shy in sharing it.

He shows we don’t need a Monsanto to make desert hardened plant varieties, the deserts are full of plants that do well. The small group of plants we know could be expanded if we grow more of them locally, and if we didn’t have big agriculture having such financial and legal advantages.

He shows that high tech horticulture can partner in making seedlings available of region specific plants for export around the world, something Holland is good at. Of course then we have to push out companies that patent and steal varieties and make them unavailable for breeding such as Monsanto.

Gezocht : EV Tuners

De introductie van electrische auto’s gaat in een slakkengang. Terwijl sommigen de aanschaf ipv de via de bijtelling via een subsidie willen ‘bevorderen’ om zo voer te geven aan rechts die elk financieel voordeel dat ze niet zint een ‘subsidie’ noemen, tikt de klok door. Dagelijks kunt u op straat ruiken hoe uw toekomst door de fossiele sector ellendiger wordt gemaakt. Op deze manier duurt het 20 jaar eer de laatste fossiele auto’s van de weg zijn.


Some converison kits can give your car a radius of 30 km, we can do better than that!

In een recente bijeenkomst waarbij de CEO van Nissan aanwezig was brachten we de optie om bestaande auto’s aan te passen voor electrisch vervoer ter sprake. Daar was geen animo voor. Dit heet ook wel ‘aftersales’. Aangezien de grootste geldstromen bij de aankoop van nieuwe auto’s plaatsvinden ligt daar de focus. Maar wat werkgelegenheid betreft zou dat wel eens anders kunnen liggen.

Ombouwen kan met behoud van oude versnellingsbak, of efficienter door gebruik te maken van wheel hub motors

De monteurs van Kwikfit, leden van de BOVAG, profiteren nu wel van de APK, hoewel die de laatste jaren steeds milder wordt. Ze zouden een stuk meer kunnen verdienen door het oppakken van de taak om het bestaande wagenpark om te toveren naar electrisch. Dat kan vast niet met elke auto, maar voor veel is het best een optie. De middelen om auto’s om te bouwen zijn voorhanden. Wat nog ontbreekt is het initiatief om het serieus aan te pakken.

Een vroege hybride auto met wheel hub motoren van Lohner-Porsche

Niet elke auto is geschikt voor een omkat actie, en voor elke auto zal het gebruikte systeem anders moeten zijn. De gewichtverdeling in een auto is belangrijk voor de wegligging, dus waar nu het motorblok zit moet wel iets komen van soortgelijk gewicht.

EV tuner : Een monteur die weet hoe je een IC auto ombouwt naar electrisch..

De electro  motors komen in de wielen, daar zijn kant en klare producten voor. Zo is het ombouwen een proces van motor en wielen verwijderen, batterijen  en nieuwe wielen aanbrengen, misschien nog wat gewicht trimmen en de laad aansluing waar de takdop zat plaatsen. Dit proces optimaliseren en het werk voor monteurs explodeert.

Zie ook

“The arrival of the wheel hub motor”

“De snelweg naar electrisch rijden: De Wheel hub conversion”




De Hypotheekbijstelling

U zult denken, wat heeft het onderstaande met duurzaamheid te maken. Alles. Want doordat we nu we moeten investeren in zonnepanelen etc. vast zitten komt de energie transitie veel trager op gang. Ook stemmen veel mensen die zo klem zitten rechts, dus pro-fossiel. De mobiliteit op de arbeidsmarkt lijdt er ook onder, dus ook het onstaan van nieuwe bedrijfstakken. De banken vinden dit prima, ze zijn fundamenteel-pro fossiel. 

Ik hoor mensen klagen dat we nog maar 90% mogen lenen, en niet meer dan een paar jaarsalarisen. Dat maakt het kopen en verkopen van huizen lastig, mensen zitten ‘vast’. Niet om irritant te doen maar twee dingen storen me hieraan. Ten eerste heb ik verschillende huizenkopers gewaarschuwd toen de banken besloten om meer te lenen (tot 120%) en grotere bedragen (tot hoeveel jaarsalarissen) en de huizen prijzen stegen (ook door de lagere rente en de hypotheekrente aftrek) dat dit een schijnwaarde stijging was. Ook de truc (risico) van de beleggingshypotheek was eenvoudig te doorzien.

Iedereen was lyrisch over de waardestijging en ging er in mee. Dat is begrijpelijk. De banken pakten hier een groot voordeel mee, want al die handel door de stijging van de prijzen was er anders niet geweest, en ook de economische groei door de besteding van winst van huizeneigenaren. Het was een grote subsidie bubbel bedacht door de banken. Maar nu gaat het de andere kant op, en het tweede ding dat me stoort is dat mensen zich dat aanrekenen. Ze zeggen “nou ik krijg straks minder voor mijn huis” en zijn sip over de eigen inleg. De banken zeggen “We moeten verantwoordelijker zijn” en ook al hebben ze minder omzet omdat de verkoop daalt, ze lachen in hun knuisjes want ze hoeven fuck-all te doen. Ze zijn alweer opper machtig over onze vrijheid om te verhuizen bv.

Wat banken zouden moeten doen is iets waarvan mensen niet weten dat het kan, en wat niemand voorstelt, en dat is dat ze de hoofdsom van hypotheken van mensen zo moeten aanpassen dat deze 1. hun hypotheek kunnen betalen en 2. de prijzen van huizen zo daalt dat mensen weer vrij zijn om te wonen waar ze willen (binnen grenzen natuurlijk).

De taxatie van een huis in 1995 was voor een groot deel gebaseerd op de financieringsmogelijkheid, dwz door de banken bepaald. Nu zijn de eigenaren van de huizen de dupe, omdat die nog een hoge hypotheek hebben, en de kopers maar een lagere krijgen van de bank. De banken moeten dat recht trekken door over de hele linie, alle hypotheken te verlagen. Dus een eigenaar heeft (van de ene dag op de andere) geen 350.000 hypotheek, maar een van 250.000 af te betalen. Door het over de hele linie te doen voor alle hypotheken verandert er niets aan de relatieve waarde van huizen. Voor internationale transacties moet wel iets bedacht worden.

Het is idioot dat we al 20 jaar achter de feiten aanlopen en onze politiek ons elke keer weer laat beetnemen door de banken, die zelf blijven doen alsof ze het beste met ons voor hebben. Ja, inderdaad, zolang ze goed kunnen boeren. Geen gesprekken meer van “jeez nu zit ik klem” en “ik heb het al vier jaar te koop staan, kost me bakken met geld”. De banken kunnen aan dit leed een einde maken. Het is een kwestie van een pennestreek en we zijn er vanaf.



The world economy is not compatible with human survival on earth. It has principles and rules that dictate one ignores resources and focusses on the ‘free market’. It is on one sentence “A system that maximizes the utilization of fossil fuels”, for the simple reason that there are people that sell fossil fuels, who want to trade them for goods and services produced with them (mostly).

The banking system is complicit in the fossil fuel dependence of economics and the world economy, because credit which is created based on a business plan and estimated ROI, can only work if there is a world out there that accepts it, uses it to buy fossil fuels and uses those fossil fuels to power trucks, cranes, cars, tools, shop lighting, heaters, printing presses etc.

If credit bought everything except fossil fuels it would not be able to be used to start any business except ones that are outside the economy like manual labour organic farms

The above means we have a problem and we need a solution. We are in a situation where economists are like diving instructors, leading us through a beautifull reef, that like their power as a leader, but who know that that role will be over when the oxygen runs out. Rather than cutting their important existence short and leading us to the surface they keep going deeper, because that is what they like to do.

There is no way to bring people to their senses within the economic system, because the system has no leader, it has, just like a religion, followers, believers who think the theories are right and who see them proven right in their local context. Also the traders who came up with our economic theories are exactly those in a position to say “The market is most important” and who don’t care about where the merchandize comes from. Economics is the traders religion, and traders are rich and powerfull (count the banks in that group).

Economics does not use the full potential of our situation, it ignores most of it

This system does not use the full potential of our situation, because it almost fundamentally wants to include the fossil fuel sector in every trade. Almost anything you buy today will have a fossil fuel sector component in it, f.i. plastic, or it comes from China (logistics) or it was farmed intensively (with a 10:1 fossil fuel to calories ratio). This seems like it maximizes the available potential, and it does maximize the economic potential, but not the full potential that is available to us. Economics doesn’t really aknowledge that potential or it would have to abandon fossil fuels like right away.

The realization that there is more wealth potential in our situation than economic predictions claim is becoming more clear,  more people realize that solar, wind, geothermal, wave energy are a significant source of productivity and wealth. The trouble we see in opening up those resources has to do with us existing in a fossil fuel economy, where any activity is the result of a competition with other activities over the use of fossil fuels. If Ford sells a car because it gets payed by a customer, General Motors does not sell a car and does not spend the fossil energy to make one, Ford does. This is the zero sum nature of our carboncredit economy.


To rise above economics we need a new separate system. It has to be separate in the sense that it does not trade with the existing economic system in the existing financial context. It acts independent of it and interacts with it only on a very stictly regulated basis, and minimally. The reason for this is that if one allows an Extraeconomic enterprise to interact with the normal economic system, it will be attacked, undermined, looted and destroyed, as is any natural resource.

An extraeconomic enterprise produces a surplus of natural resources

An extraeconomic enterprise is autonomous, it has everything it needs to function and it does something that is decidely uneconomic : It produces a surplus of natural resources. It can produce trees, grass, fish, ecosystems, clean water etc. and it does not intent to sell any of these resources. It can consume it for itself, marginally, but overall it has the explicit intent to create a surplus, to add to natural resources.

An extraeconomic enterprise can store carbon because for instance it plants trees and turns them into charcoal that it burries underground. It can farm seaweed and create biomass and also pull out the carbon and store that in the deep ocean. It can bring life to desert areas, foster rich ecosystems in them, and see that as its mission. This is only possible because the enterprise does not follow economic rules, and does not participate in the economic system.

Starting an Extraeconomic Enterprise

Extraeconomics has its own rules. To start an extraeconomic enterprise resources from the wider economy are necessary, and those resources can only be payed for with cash, not credit (cash is money banks don’t control, technically ‘free’ money). This is because banks never give money, but only invest, and if they do they assume your business will participate in the economy. So first off an extraeconomic enterprise is cash initiated.

Secondly the energy used in an extraeconomic enterprise can not be fossil based or sourced externally, because that would require interaction with the wider economy. It has to be renewable and be produced in the EE ‘zone’ (because most interesting applications of this approach are in more or less deserted economically uninteresting territories).

Thirdly the purpose of the enterprise/zone has to be to produce a resource, while also sustaining the existence of it’s population. The ratio of resources that are produced relative to the amount consumed by the population has to be significant, so 1000:1. Also it may be that for instance trees planted in the zone never serve the population, who eats from farmland that is also part of the zone.

Primary purposes of these zones will have to be 1. Capture carbon 2. Restore/extend the ecology

An extraeconomic enterprise does not have to be technologically backward. It can use the newest technologies. There’s no need for electronics to use fossil fuels when they are produced, even if they do today. There can be economic enterprises that supply the extraeconmic zones, but they have to give their products, not profit form them. As renewables power more and more of economic businesses this becomes less and less of a hard decision, because the use of renewbles drops the cost of everything.

An extraeconomic zone can use high tech methods to achieve it’s goals

Alternatively there can be extraeconomic zones that produce what other zones need. This would constitute a normal economic system in the sense that it allows free trade, only without the primary driver of our present day economy, the sale of fossil fuels (which makes a huge difference).


The concept of an extraeconomic zone is easy to comprehend, as is its benefit to people inside and outside it (as it reduces the progress of climate change). Owners of the normal economy do not have to worry, their economic world won’t be touched (as extraeconomic zones don’t export), but the greed that economics drives, for resources will mean constant pressure on extraeconomic zones, by corruption or violence. An extraeconomic zone is effectively like a poor african country with lots of minerals. Therefore the EE zones need real military protection. We would see this be supplied by the zones themselves, but also by the UN in the beginning.

These zones must be allowed to protect themselves, and be under protection from significant military force

This means the creation of these zones, as a measure to deal with climate change for instance, needs to be done on a significant political level. The only way security is achieved by these kinds of enterprises (autonomous communities) is to be small and not overproduce (so be unattractive). What we need is immense zones that overproduce enormous amounts. The problem of course is that our armies are fueled by fossil fuels, and mostly exist to protect fossil fuel supplies. One approach to get started with these zones is to do it in secret. And one way to protect them without involving many people is to make it hard to discover them.

More articles about Extraeconomics and Roboeconomics

To spread the word you can invite Frits Rincker (author of this blog) as speaker.

Voltage Boosting Extends Life of Batteries

By shrinking a voltage boosting circuit to a size that fits into a battery sleeve a big reduction in battery waste can be achieved. Alkaline batteries are thrown away with a lot of energy still in them, but the devices that they are used in still need the voltage to be 1.5 volt. Transformerless voltage changing is a recent trend, as a technology it has been known for quite some time. It uses a simple method by first collecting charge parallel, so in to reservoirs of 0.8 volt. Then by switching the circuit the two reservoirs are put in series, and the voltage becomes 1.6 volt. This new product does that but with a circuit that is very tiny.

This is good for exteniding battery life of disposable batteries (landfillers), but also for rechargeable, because they have a lower voltage of 1.2 volt (different chemistry), which if corrected makes them usefull in more devices. If the usefull life is extended as much as claimed, 8 times, then there is probably room inside recheargable batteries for a similar circuit. This will make them immediately competitive.