Analyze

TS: Kirsch discusses two international networks focused on the mining industry. Looking at these networks, particularly their organizational forms and histories offers comparative perspective on networks that have formed around Formosa Plastics and related industry. The analysis also illuminates how networks fit within Kirsch' framework of the "politics of space" and "politics of time". 

The first organizatin is the US-based Global Mining Campaign, with membership from over 40 countries. Kirsch argues that due to its "top-down" approach, the network didn't last long (2014, 194). The initative was focusing on blocking new mining projects, and is therefore representative of the politics of time (ibid).

The second organization is the Mines and Communities network, which he describes as a horizontal network where participants can contribute information about affected communities. He notes that unlike the top-down approaches, this organizational form seems more in line with the desire of activists. A search for Formosa Plastics on the website turns up newspaper articles about the Formosa Steel disaster in Vietnam.

He further elaborates:

"The signature contribution of the Mines and Communities network has been its ability to track and analyze the strategies of the mining industry, information that is posted on its website (www.minesandcommunities.org). Other mining websites tend to focus on specific mining projects, companies, or countries; technologies such as mountaintop removal; or particular commodities, such as coal, diamonds, or gold. The Mines and Communities website provides a more comprehensive overview of the mining industry by drawing on regional materials submitted and reviewed by its members, who contribute important contextual information and analysis. Participation in the editorial process for the website has been a two-way street for network members, enhancing the content posted on the website while providing the editors with a valuable comparative perspective on the mining industry. Although the original objective of the website was to provide information that could be used by indigenous communities affected by mining projects, it largely failed to reach its target audience" (2014, 196-7).

Kirsch states that the website is mostly frequentd by academics and other researchers, rather than affected communities. Based on my reading, I'm not sure why that is, but it raises questions about the "target audience" of the Formosa Plastics Archive. 

TS: According to Kirsch, an important strategy of a politics of time is centred around distributing information to affected communities. In his words, this includes "accelaration of the learning curve of communities facing the prospect of a new mining project" (2014, 192). He provides terms to characterize different approaches, as well as their shortcomings:

"NGOs have employed a variety of means to reduce the disparity in access to information between mining companies and local communities. The most common strategy for achieving this goal is the vertical transfer of information from metropolitan NGOs to rural communities by sharing materials about comparable mining projects or the track record of the relevant mining company. NGOs also facilitate horizontal information sharing between communities facing similar challenges (Appadurai 2002); this may involve sponsoring visits by local leaders or community representatives to comparable mining sites or attendance at conferences where they can learn about the experiences of other communities affected by mining. [...] NGOs also exploit new opportunities provided by the Internet to share information with people from communities affected by mining, although these efforts are constrained by both the problems of translation and the persistence of the digital divide. Nevertheless, NGO reports are generally more accessible to the public than academic publications, the digital forms of which are ordinarily locked behind expensive paywalls. And the information gap is shrinking as a result of increased attention to mining conflicts by traditional news media, as well as by new social media, including electronic mailing lists, websites, and online video." (Kirsch 2014, 193).

TS: The text "compares two different kinds of political movement. The first example is the politics of space, which makes use of resourcesthat are geographically distributed. It strives to create oppositional power through the development of extensive transnational alliances. The second is the politics of time, which pursues alternative strategies focused on the prevention of industrial activities that are almost certain to cause harm—activities that become very difficult to halt once set in motion given the huge capital investments they entail and the economic resources they provide to the state and other parties. The politics of space was characteristic of much of the environmental activism that emerged in the 1990s, which often addressed problems after the fact. In contrast, the politics of time leads to more hopeful forms of intervention given its potential to prevent harm from occurring" (Kirsch 2014, 226).

Kirsch notes that the recautionary principle is an example of the politics of time as discussed in his ethnography (Kirsch 2014, 260).

• Outside of this group, I believe my work will/is performing a similar type of work to Boyer's, detailing all of the factors, the multiplicity of forces, both historical and contemporaty, that enable, preclude, and characterize energy transition in a specific locale. However, I will dedicate more effort to developing that middle ground between conceptual minima and ethnographic maxima, primarily through the scales and systems. I hope to use the scales and system huristic to provide a clearer analysis of how these specific “multiplicity of forces” become entangled in different ways. I intend to tease out how these entanglements engender processes and phenomena that can be abstracted to generate such concepts as energopower and the like.

• Renewable energy transition, if it recreates the same extractive, centralized, domineering, energopolitical regimes as the fossil fuel industry, has the potential to be just as damaging to the planet and to human beings as fossil fuels.
• Abstract power concepts like energopower, biopolitics, capital do not do justice to the particularities of specific locales. Ethnography is needed to be better attuned to the historical and contemporary relations of power that characterize politics in the Anthropocene.

• "If we wish to imagine and discuss aeolian futures in the Isthmus of Tehuantepec—or, for that matter, anywhere else in the world—what is needed are more and better ethnographies of the multiplicity of forces (historical and contemporary, material and anthropolitical) that are generating, inflecting, and obstructing potential futures" (193).

• The separation of theory and ethnography in this text is… stark. There were literally only a few lines here and there that tied the ethnographic material back to the discussion in the introduction. I understand this to be an intervention in Anthropology that privileges ethnography over social theory. And I appreciate that. But perhaps there is a meso level between conceptual minima and ethnographic maxima? A level that identifies “the multiplicity of forces” that characterize the political terroir and that attempts to discern the entanglement of these forces in a way that clearly specifies the limits of the concept.  

The text builds on the concepts "biopower" and "capital" and introduces the concept "energopolitics" to exisiting anthropolitical minima. In the text's introduction, Boyer disucsses the limitations of these concepts when universalized, because they are multiplicities that have been bundled into more nominal forms as part of analytic projects, and then expands on these concepts in order to situate them within anthropolitical and technopolitical domains in Mexico. For example, biopower, which can be defined as a practice of governance that denotes vast networks of enablement with many infrastructures and actors in order to optimize human life, and in Mexico the government put forth discourse around renewable energy development that discusses it as a means of guaranteeing or imporiving the health and welfare of human enviornments, economies, communities, and individuals. 

I will consider the impacts of retrofitting, rennovations, and weatherization in new terms now. A "just" transition will be at the forefront of my mind when considering the impacts of green energy in Philadelphia. Gentrification is already a massive issue in Philadelphia, and I had considered how green energy may play into it, but now I have models, like the Yansa model, which offer ways for a green transition to benefit the community at large. On top of this, I can now relate capital and biopower into this transition better, with detailed examples as seen in the book.

I good example of biopower in the book is how the extractive nature that is a requirement for oil and fossil fuel bussiness has translated into wind, despite not being a requirement. In Philadelphia, we have seen something similar with solarize Philadelphia. I do not have the exact details right now, but I remember a plan for a community based building for solar panels running into issues. I would like to reanalyze that and compare it to wind farms in Mexico.

At the end of the book, the authors state "in our view, there will be no 'renewable energy transition' worth having without a more holistic reimagination of relations in which we avoid simply greening the predatory and accumulative enterprises of modern statecraft and capitalism." A great example of this is the Ixtepec wind farm. Yansa's plan was a new model for Mexico, one in which the authors show full support for because it reduces the extractiveness and exploititiveness of the current wind farm plans. Other chapters in the book talk about how only landowners seem to benefit from wind farms, which is something the Yansa plan was hoping to address.