Talk:Hi-tech versus lo-tech

Solar panels are placed in the high-tech category, and wind turbines are placed in the low-tech catagory. However, imagine having to maintain wind turbines on Mars? They will get clogged up with dust, abrasion will be a problem, etc. And, genetically engineered plants for use in greenhouses would be brought from Earth beforehand, unless greenpeace stops them. T.Neo 10:12, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi T.Neo, the difference between high-tech and lo-tech becomes clearer when you look at the tools and machinery for production and maintenance. To produce solar panels you need a complicated machinery including high-temperature doping ovens with rare minerals and a set of high-sophisticated electronic gadgets. This is what I refer to as high-tech, because we might not be able to reproduce such gadgets. On the other hand you can produce a wind turbine simply by hand-made parts of ordinary materials, with no complicated machinery required. This is what I refer to as lo-tech. Sure, wind turbines have some shortcomings, as you say. There is always a price to pay. After all the question is: How can we survive on Mars, with solar panels or with wind turbines. Your mentioning of the shortcomings of wind turbines is very helpful to find the answer, and that's why I thank you for the discussion. Please add the shortcomings to the wind turbine article.

Compared with legacy vegetables the new developed genetically engineered plants may not be stable in the long run. Genetic alteration will be necessary after a while, maybe unexpectedly. I would use them only if I have the ability to do corrections. Same with computer software. If a software bug shows up in a vital system (e.g. Y2K), I would want someone who can fix it. DNA is a kind of software.

-- Rfc 15:11, 30 June 2008 (UTC)