Oct./Nov. 1982 RAIN Page 15 i; By Nigel Dudley Centre for Alternative Technology SMALLHOLDING A Look at AT. Research Centers The problem with writing articles about the Centre is that I never know how to begin . . . either lyrical descriptions of communities nestling among foothills or a discourse on appropriate technology in Britain. So 1 will simply try to say U'hy we're here and what we have learned so far. We really are a "community nestled among the foothills" — in our case, the foothills of the Snowdonia National Park in Wales. Our immediate surroundings consist of an abandoned slate quarry with a small reservoir, abundant building material and virtually no soil. We've been here about ten years, have about 25 staff (of whom about half live on the site with their families) and survive mainly through entrance fees paid by about 60,000 visitors each year. And we're always short of money! The site has become somewhat of a focus, both for AT research in this country and, paradoxically, for tourists coming to Mid-Wales, most of whom have little idea about our field of interest before they visit. We are a registered charity, and were set up by the Society for Environmental Improvement. One of the first questions people ask us is why we set up in the way that we did: a weird mixture of research site, tourist attraction and alternative community. And why cover such a large field instead of concentrating on a few main research areas? The Centre arose out of frustration at the lack of progress in supplying concrete alternatives to the systems and lifestyles which so many of us were criticizing. At the time, self-sufficiency was in somewhat of a heyday but the alternative energy field was still largely in the hands of a few anarchistic technologists and was attracting little media or official recognition. The Centre was seen by its founders as an idealistic symbol, where a community could exist according to environmental principles, and where people could learn for themselves while teaching others at the same time. Thus, community research and demonstration were seen as parts of an integrated whole. And of course, such a symbol has to tackle the full range of life. Concentrating on, say, energy while ignoring food would be to miss many of the practical problems and opportunities inherent in the new ideas. Thus, while we certainly don't cover all the areas that we would like to as yet, at least we have the potential to develop them in the future, and as time goes on our "village of the future" can become a more complete entity. So what have we learned? What I would like to put across is the sense of wonder that supplying simple basics like food and energy can give when the usual channels are closed or limited. An American family that is staying with us was amazed by the excitement that a delivery of topsoil generated, but they might have shared in it more readily if they had lived a few years on a slate tip where any vegetable plots have to be literally created out of nothing. Maintaining a sense of wonder is vital if we are to really come to grips with even the physical realities of surviving in the future. Next we have learned (or rather are still in the process of learning) how best to introduce ideas to people who may be coming across them for the first time. Our task is not made easier by having to appeal both to casual visitors, looking for a mild diversion from the beach, and serious students after hard facts. All information has to be aimed at two levels, which we call "short and snappy" and "boring amplifications." Long explanatory signs are soon ignored altogether by most people, so they miss the point of much of what we do. Exhibits have to be fairly Cont. on page 16
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy NTc4NTAz