Technology

[Introductory note:  It’s hard to believe, but there is only a week plus a day left of my time in Nicaragua.  I remember older relatives always telling me how time goes faster as you get older, but an experience like this seems to put time into overdrive.  Today, I test-packed the suitcase (actually a carry-on/backpack/suitcase) and found that everything I plan to take (including my book bag) fits in (although I am discarding some old shoes, T-shirts, etc.).  So if need be, I can travel with only one bag.  It is pretty heavy and before I get home I may wish I didn’t have this computer to lug around, but it’s nothing like my backpack in the Olympics 2 years ago.  Carrying it a while should also help temper the urge to buy souvenirs!  No guarantees, but this may be my last post until arrival back in the states.  I don’t plan to post anything while travelling, but I’ll try to report on the trip north after I’m home.]

Since I am an engineer and I have been here working on technological solutions to problems and I have thought about/searched for various technology items for the past 3 months, it seems appropriate to reflect a bit on the technologies that are used here as the end of my stay approaches.  This will probably be a bit stream-of-consciousness, but I’ll have to save the refinement and editing for when I have more time.

One of my motivations for coming here for a sabbatical was to apply engineering to what I think of as “problems of substance” instead of “problems of economics.”  Much of what we do as engineers in the US is to work on small problems at the margin to refine methods/products in order to make someone more money and not on major problems that could truly impact lives.  Customer “needs,” of course, have to be in the mix somewhere, but with scientific marketing and a wealthy, consumer-driven economy, “needs” and “wants” get rather confused.   Just glance through Sky-Mall or Nieman-Marcus catalogs to find items to which the word “need” is pretty hard to attach.  On the flight down here, some examples were:  a DNA test for your dog to determine exact breed ($70), an Astro-turf potty for the patio so that Muffy doesn’t have to venture onto real grass and it comes complete with an automatic sprinkler system to clean away the evidence ($300) or an alarm clock with a built-in video camera/recorder so you can spy on your spouse, your kids, the maid, the plumber,… ($200).  Or for that matter, consider all the money/engineering effort spent on weapons systems whose existence is often justified by some twisted Dr. Strangelovesque (I know, probably not a word) logic (or simply whose district needs the jobs?).  Well, I’m wandering a bit here and better get back closer to topic…

There is, of course, LOTS of technology in Nicaragua—pick almost any century for the last 1000 years and there’s probably some technology from then in current use.  Designs of the typical stove for cooking, and many farm items (plows, threshing set-ups, harvesting) go back hundreds (if not thousands) of years, but these old designs may be updated with new materials (e.g., steel for stone) or perhaps mixed with newer systems such as drip-irrigation systems using photovoltaic- or gasoline-engine-powered pumps and plastic tubing.  Modern trucks of all kinds travel the highways here, but I’ve yet to see a fork lift to help with loading/unloading.  That’s done with shovels for bulk materials and piece-by-piece for boxes, bags, etc.  Corn milling is done with an electric powered mill, but women still walk to carry their corn to a central location to do the milling.  Wells are dug with modern drilling equipment, but the pumps are still hand-powered and must be shared by several neighbors.  Cell phones and TVs are literally everywhere, but running water, sewage systems, etc., are virtually non-existent outside of cities.

What I, as well as scores of NGOs and government agencies, purport to do is to apply “appropriate” technologies to local problems.  But defining “appropriate“ --there’s the rub!  I’ve thought about this concept quite a bit while here.  Most would probably understand the word to mean within the financial means, the material availability and cultural norms of a particular place.  But if it’s “appropriate” for someone in the US to have 3 cars, unlimited energy delivered via pipes/wires and 4000 square feet of living space, why is it only “appropriate” for a Nicaraguan to have a solar cooker to save a bit of firewood?   Or have to go to town on overcrowded, used school buses instead of in an air-conditioned SUV?  Or to be limited to a “modern,” pre-fab latrine instead of indoor plumbing?  Or to be provided with a manual (though well-designed) water pump half a mile from home instead of water on tap?

On the private sector side, companies are working hard to draw people in (hook them?) on whatever technology they are selling (be it corn chips in indestructible polymer bags or large home appliances or cars)—consideration of “appropriate” is not even in the equation.  Chemical fertilizers and pesticides made by multi-nationals are well-entrenched and heavily promoted, “cheap” food for the masses is produced by using large industrial ag models with patented genes, rent-to-own stores are common and offer the temptation of every modern convenience for only a few Cordoba per month, and soap operas bring a very consumptive lifestyle directly into living rooms with ample product placements to promote brand loyalties.  Except for the dominance of Spanish, you could live here using only brand-name consumer products that are familiar in the US (but not made in the US, of course, since our products aren’t made there, either).

This whole discussion also bumps into another popular buzz-word in the engineering world (as well as the political world):  sustainability.  In the US, we typically think of “sustainable” as adding a bit more insulation to the ceiling, setting  back the thermostat, buying a hybrid car, installing a 95+% efficient furnace, having an air-conditioner with a SEER of 14, etc.  But ultimately, sustainable means (or should mean) that we (all of us!) can continue doing exactly what we’re doing right now and keep doing it indefinitely—not 50 or 500 years, but indefinitely.  So if we define the word appropriate for us the same as we do for others, then we have to limit ourselves to technologies that allow all 8 billion (or 9 or 10 or whatever the number becomes {note that the term “sustainable growth” seems like an oxymoron to me}) of our neighbors to have the same type of lifestyle we do and have it continue indefinitely.  Considering that probably 80-90% of that 8 billion is consuming FAR below the current US consumption rate, is it even possible to talk about raising the standard of living of the entire world to our level and still move towards sustainability (let alone truly become sustainable)?  Are we, in fact, being disingenuous or flat-out lying when we (i.e., the US government) distribute foreign development aid with the alleged purpose of raising the standard of living until it is ultimately similar to ours?  To have anything that resembles a current US lifestyle, typical, rural Nicaraguans would probably need to consume an order of magnitude more energy—the same probably goes for China, sub-Saharan Africa, India, …  And it’s hard to imagine where that quantity of truly sustainable energy can be found, at least in the foreseeable future.

On a less philosophical and more practical level, it’s interesting to observe what technologies have made the most headway and why.  This is anecdote-based rather than research-based, but I see 3 keys when you look at what has and hasn’t made serious in-roads into Nicaraguan life.  First, is there a requirement for extensive infrastructure?  If yes, the chances seem to be less since neither government nor private industry has the means for large, extensive infrastructure (they’re still working on getting the electric grid to all the country).  Cell phones, however, require much less infrastructure (isolated towers instead of ubiquitous wires), so have penetrated quite quickly.

Second, cost is very critical.  Because the cost/performance ratio for electronic devices continues to plunge, electronics Is one of the areas of greatest technological penetration, whether it be cell phones, I-pods, boom boxes or satellite TV.

Third (and perhaps related to number 2), low-maintenance or disposable technologies have a distinct advantage.  Because electronics have become so cheap, they are essentially disposable and the kids here play with old cell phones just like kids in the US.  Snacks in disposable bags/bottles are everywhere (as are the bags and bottles after emptying them!).  I think one reason this item is important is that the culture here is simply not a culture of maintenance.  My observation is that people tend to not even notice when maintenance is needed, but wait for things to break, then fix them or dispose of them (or just let them lie around).  They do not generally have extensive experience with machinery that requires maintenance (such as oil changes or radiator checks with cars), hence don’t tend to think in a maintenance mode.  If a tile on a roof is slipping, there is a tendency to wait till it falls and replace it or wait till it rains and there’s a major leak before re-adjusting it.  Insects give uncoated wood a typical life of 10-15 years (even under cover), but instead of treating, sealing or painting every 4 or 5 years, it is typical to replace the wood structure every 10 or 15 years.  At the Solar Center restaurant, I commented that the pump sounded louder than it had been when I arrived, but no one else noticed it and they even thought it was simply vibrations from rubbing on the tower.  A couple of days later the pump failed and it had to be re-greased.  So technologies like bio-digesters that require periodic servicing to keep functioning or even photo-voltaics, whose batteries require some maintenance, require extensive training and a real commitment on the part of the customer—simply supplying a manual probably won’t cut it.  It will probably take considerable time for maintenance to be something that is ingrained in the typical Nicaraguan.

On the other hand, in spite of the lack of what many North Americans would consider ne

cessities and a life that is admittedly much harder than in the US, it doesn’t seem to impact on levels of happiness, contentment, friendliness, etc.—things that are ultimately very important to a satisfying life.  (In fact, compared with some places in the US, I’m sure the “happiness index” or “contentment index” or whatever is much higher here.) So perhaps ultimately the question of “appropriate” as it relates to technologies is not so much about matching it to a society’s technical sophistication or economics, but rather ensuring that any technology introduced, no matter the sophistication of the society, enhances (or at least “does no harm” to) those less tangible factors that make life joyful and meaningful.