(Ok first off, for the sake of not having my vernacular being commented on again, I am referring to if anarchy were to happen on a large scale. I don't know how to better describe it than that.)
Moving right along, I'd like to address some of the points you've made, because I still feel there are things missing here.
One, as I stated above, I am NOT referring to self-serving, economic-based technologies, nor the war machine of governments. I am not talking about how can we make money off these technologies, I am talking about how can these things exist and continue to be produced in an anarchist system.
My problem with Spain as an example is that they were organized. If you're organized, you aren't really an anarchist. You may be anti-government, but it isn't a state( state of being, not formal state) of true anarchy.
As for "travel" as opposed to public transit, this is not really an answer. Would we walk everywhere? In addition a healthier relationship we may develop, but how would such a relationship be possible? What would we eat? Would we farm, or hunt? What about treating diseases and ailments? Both require some means of technology. As for garbage collection, even if we assume that somehow all waste becomes biodegradable once anarchy "takes over", what would we do with all the garbage already here?
I suppose my question is: Must we revert back to a pre-industrialized state for anarchy to be possible?
(Also, there is nothing in the definition of "technology" that refers back to the state. Therefore calling them "technologies" very much makes sense. I do agree that many new "technologies" would have the "potential" to come about in this system, but who would design and build them and how would they be shared with the public? It is these questions which keep me tentatively on the side of anti-government and from acceptiong "true" anarchy)