Peak Oil is You
Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)
Page added on January 11, 2015
Our ‘energy slaves’ impact environment
When I explain to people that I have not purchased electricity for 10 years, they are envious. When I tell them I have not bought gasoline or oil or a smog check for four years, they are amazed. When I tell them they can do the same thing simply by shifting their priorities, they yawn. Understanding the critical nature of our energy use is vital to our future well-being.
Fossil fuel is a form of ancient sunlight. Formed over millions of years, it is the product of the compression and heating of massive amounts of biomass, creating a highly concentrated form of energy.
Tremendous amounts of carbon were removed from the atmosphere and safely sequestered underground. It helped form the atmospheric conditions in which we have evolved and thrived. This natural process was integral in creating the current balance of elements in the earth’s biosphere that is essential to life as we know and enjoy it.
Though small amounts of fossil fuels have been used for thousands of years, the real journey to peak oil started with Thomas Newcomen’s invention of the steam engine in England around 1710, widely acknowledged as the start of the Industrial Revolution. Modern use of oil came into the picture in the 1800s, simmered a bit and then really took off in the 20th century.
Today, we use approximately 21 million barrels of oil per day in the U.S. alone. Globally, we’re burning more than 84 million barrels a day, according to the Energy Information Administration.
I’d like to try to put that into perspective. There are 42 gallons in a barrel. Imagine pouring just 1 gallon of gooey brown oil in a large pan and burning it in your backyard.
No one I know would do that on purpose, it would create a lot of black toxic smoke. Yet we are using more than 3.5 billion gallons of the stuff daily. That’s over 40,000 gallons per second.
How can any logical person deny that releasing that much carbon back into our atmosphere would not have a powerful effect on our climate?
We like to burn oil (as gasoline) since we largely ignore the environmental impacts, resulting in energy that is practically “free.” One barrel of crude oil produces about 5,800,000 Btu of energy.
A hard-working human being can produce about 500 watts of energy. Doing the math shows that it would take a person nine days, working hard physical labor for a solid eight hours per day, to equal the energy in just 1 gallon of gasoline.
If we fill our car each week with 10 gallons of gas at $2.75 a gallon, then for $27.50 we are getting the energy equivalent of 15 people working seven full days of hard labor. That works out to a few cents an hour, with no overtime pay. Every member of our industrial civilization uses these “energy slaves” on a daily basis, usually with no thought at all about the implications or true value.
Another way to imagine it is to drive the distance you can on 1 gallon of gas. Say that’s 25 miles. Now imagine how many people it would take, at any speed, to manually push your car back to the starting point. How many people would do it for an equal share of $2.75? To return your car in the same amount of time as the gas-powered portion of the trip would require the energy output of about 128 day laborers.
Search on www.YouTube.com for “Losing our Energy Slaves” by Jack Alpert to watch a sobering and serious illustration of this concept.
With practically free labor in the form of ancient sunlight, it’s no wonder we’ve burned through about half of all the oil in the world in such an incredibly short time. But it’s the oil that has been the most accessible and easiest to get to, thus the cheapest, that we’ve used so far. The latest “fossil fuel boom” is the dirty, hard-to-get-to stuff that provides a much smaller energy return on energy invested coupled with a much larger, destructive footprint.
It is time to divest and leave those toxic assets where they belong: in the ground. My investments in clean energy, efficiency and an electric vehicle have been the best I’ve ever made. My carbon footprint has dropped by 90 percent.
Lifestyle is a big part of it too. Change is inevitable, but our choices dictate the terms.
There is no magic bullet that will replace the incredible one-time gift of cheap oil that we have fundamentally taken for granted. We should have taken steps to ease this problem 50 years ago.
The warning signs are greater than ever yet we continue to rush headlong toward global disaster. About 7,350,000 gallons of oil burned while you read this article. Do we really want to waste the planet, just because we can?
Live simply. It matters.
Steve Rypka is a green living consultant and president of GreenDream Enterprises, a company committed to helping people live lighter on the planet.
47 Comments on "Our ‘energy slaves’ impact environment"
Davy on Sun, 11th Jan 2015 7:15 am
I am not going to knock his green message because we are killing the planet. I will knock his cavalier message of leaving fossil fuels without severe consequences. He is another green preaching renewables without the acceptance AltE is only a temporary bridge to the inevitable pre-industrial man we are to become. Hopefully we can manage a descent and reboot that remains civilized. Hopefully this will happen in time to avoid runaway climate change.
The science I have seen over a broad spectrum does not look optimistic for a happy ending. So in conclusion this guy proposes no solutions just another veiled view of a predicament with no solution. If we have any hope it will be a depletion forced liquid fuel crisis, economic contraction along with voluntary lifestyle changes that will buy us some critical time to adjust and mitigate the inevitable descent.
The survival of a local and for that matter our species requires an acceptable degree and duration of descent. We are animals in an ecosystem like any other. We just can’t fall too quick and too hard without severe consequences. Maybe just maybe an unhealthy economy and the liquid fuels predicament will baseball bat all of us from the top to the bottom to begin change.
Nothing is happening today except a few bottom up efforts that point to this change. The unfortunate reality is this change requires the ugly, the messy, pain and death. Who here or anywhere for that matter is going to embrace change with this painful reality. Every one of us will embrace the idea of change if it is “the someone else” doing the changing.
sunweb on Sun, 11th Jan 2015 8:32 am
Agree Davy – Solar energy collecting devices don’t need fossil fuels and the industrial infrastructure to make, install and maintain. There is a magic wand, as well as state and federal tax money. They don’t want to see the research on how poor the energy pay back is for these devices. “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.” ― Upton Sinclair
The climate change deniers and the solar device promoters should join forces. Neither are willing to look at the science.
“In psychology and cognitive science, confirmation bias is a tendency to search for or interpret information in a way that confirms one’s preconceptions”
http://www.sciencedaily.com/articles/c/confirmation_bias.htm
It is comforting to prefer the noise of delusional magical thinking and pretending that the system of perpetual growth can work forever. There is just too much tied up with it and any unraveling would be far too chaotic and unpredictable. Wrapping our heads around the eventualities of global warming; of overshoot; of the desecration of world wildlife; of the acidification of the oceans; of the poisoning of pollinators stymies. A world no longer powered by fossil fuels, no matter what incarnation, is almost inconceivable and for many terrifying.
ghung on Sun, 11th Jan 2015 8:54 am
Sunweb; have you divested yourself of all of your renewable energy devices (and all non-renewable energy slaves for that matter)?Perhaps you should be leading all of us, the deluded, by example.
Bandits on Sun, 11th Jan 2015 9:07 am
Whatsamatter Ghung, does the message offend you? Do you think every post on the realities of renewable energy devices, should have a little aside in reference to you and your backwoods establishment.
ghung on Sun, 11th Jan 2015 9:27 am
Unlike you and Sunweb, I don’t prescribe to binary thinking. Yes, I grow tired of Sun’s implications that all of us who have made a well-considered choice are “deluded”. Many of us are well aware of the trade-offs, but have made our decisions based on an evaluation of available choices; not some mindless belief that renewables will save the world or somesuch.
As for your “little aside” reference, I absolutely believe many who read these posts can consider other, perhaps better decisions by considering choices and experiences others have made.
Whatsamatter, Bandits? Do you have a problem with that? Or are you going to insult others by implying that we are incapable of considering all sides of an issue, as Sunweb is wont to do?
When you’ve made the choice to sit in the dark and freeze your asses off, get back to me.
Bandits on Sun, 11th Jan 2015 9:39 am
“Perhaps you should be leading all of us, the deluded, by example.” Talk about insults. Anyway been reading for years about how smart you are and how you have established yourself…just about sick death of that broken record. “by implying that we”……..Maybe you need to speak for yourself.
Davy on Sun, 11th Jan 2015 9:44 am
I have seen few business make it long term without risk management practices. Prepping is a form of personal risk management efforts. Anything is something even talking is something.
Criticism because one is too lazy to do something or not doing something for alternative economic reasons is disingenuous. These people want to discount others actions to justify their lack of action. There is no reason not to prep none whatsoever.
G-man and others chose like me to make it a life passion. If we decide to to ofer our advice to others from our experience this is generous not disingenuous self denial. I want to thank G-man and others for all the valuable information you have given me over the months. Thanks guys.
Kenz300 on Sun, 11th Jan 2015 10:00 am
Climate Change is real….. we can deal with the cause (fossil fuels) or we will deal with the impact.
Carbon Counterattack | Michael T. Klare
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-t-klare/carbon-counterattack_b_6435896.html
penury on Sun, 11th Jan 2015 10:04 am
As I have said before, alt energy is great, I applaud the use of non-fossil fuels, wind,water, and solar however in a world of 7.8 billion people I need convincing that the change over will take less than 200 yrs. How do people in cities reach the nirvana that Ghung has reached (really I am jealous)in the U.S what would be the price of a person changing their lifestyle? What per cent of the population owns their own little place like Davy and Ghung to be able to even start changing? Not everyone has the knowledge, financial means. or available resources to make the change. I salute the ones who can and preach the need to others but, expecting a (voluntary) major change in the next 20 years I am not. War, pestilence, and famine I am expecting but not solar panels on a majority of houses.
ghung on Sun, 11th Jan 2015 10:11 am
Bandits – Nobody forces you to read my comments, and I certainly don’t expect everyone to adopt my ways. That would be delusional. Perhaps you can offer some constructive criticism rather than belittling others who are at least making an effort to change things, or at least attempting different ways of doing things.
What do you suggest? Sun hasn’t offered much as to suggesting what we all should do in light of out collective predicaments. Know this, most people aren’t simply going to give up, and if they can become a bit more self-reliant and aware of their impact on things, I consider that a better form of delusion.
We all have our stories. At least mine don’t include attacking others’ choices without offering any alternatives. These choices can be reduced to four basic categories as I see it:
1. Continue to support BAU as is, with all of its known consequences.
2. Attempt to adapt in ways that, at least, includes some level of reduced consumption that hasn’t been forced in some chaotic fashion, and increases one’s self-reliance.
3. The “sit in the dark and freeze your ass off” option.
4. Or rid the planet of your resource load for good (the “blow your own head off” option).
If you can offer folks some better choices, go for it.
J-Gav on Sun, 11th Jan 2015 10:24 am
Davy – I’ll take “the ugly and the messy,” while preferring to put the “pain and death” part off for as long as possible. I think, at bottom,that’s what a lot of you here at PO are also trying to do … each in his/her own way.
Davy on Sun, 11th Jan 2015 10:30 am
Pen, as a lucky one, at least for now, I must be humbled and empathetic to those who are not in my advantageous position. I want to add I could lose everything at any time. I also want to say I almost didn’t make it more than once meaning I used up 8 of my 9 lives. I have had near death experiences and almost lost everything financially. Somehow I swum out of it all. So, concluding, I am in no position to act proud and if I do it is inadvertently or lack of clarity.
shortonoil on Sun, 11th Jan 2015 10:35 am
I am not going to knock his green message because we are killing the planet.
There is no doubt that the destruction of our habitat (the home of Homo sapiens) has been huge. The ongoing extinction of thousands of other species, that we share this spinning rock with, definitely testifies to what is happening. But, like most, the author of this article apparently fails to realize that the age of oil will soon becoming to an abrupt end. It is a reality that will become very apparent to even the most dubious doubters over the next few years. The demise of our most essential foundational commodity, petroleum, will result in social degradation that will reduce the use of all fossil fuels.
The oil age will not come to an end for a lack of supply, it will come to an end for a lack of supply that can be profitably extracted. The ability of petroleum to power its own production is declining:
http://www.thehillsgroup.org/depletion2_022.htm
Because of a lack of oil, the environmental destruction that will occur is likely to be much greater than what it has been when abundantly available; horrendous as that has been. Maintaining enough environmental integrity to sustain us in an era of declining petroleum production will be orders of magnitudes more difficult than attempting to rein in a few tons of CO2. A battle between survival, and the environment does not bode well for either. The author’s wish for us to deduce our consumption of fossil fuels will undoubtedly soon come true. One must be careful what one wishes for; the fulfillment of wishes has been known to bring even the greatest to their knees!
http://www.thehillsgroup.org/
ghung on Sun, 11th Jan 2015 10:40 am
penury – I’ve often stated that many (most?) folks don’t have much wiggle room; they have very limited choices. Conversely, those who have the ability to change (who have viable choices) generally have little incentive to do so. They like things pretty much the way they are. Further, any necessary and significant reduction in consumption, globally, will result in economic contraction, likely hurting those who already have limited choices the most. It is what it is; the nature of overshoot – the hard fact of the post-industrial age. All humans are screwed to some degree, eventually.
Question is, how will you respond? We may all be the victims of humanity’s collective lack of sapience, but I, for one, don’t have to act that way. I haven’t taken a vacation in years. I rarely spend money on things I don’t need. These are selfish choices born of what I think is a fairly realistic world view; no delusions about saving mankind or the world. It comes down to not foisting my bad choices on others when possible (at least thinking that way) – living with one’s self – and improving my family’s/community’s chances for survival as others talk about what won’t work, what they can’t do, and how they are trapped in things as they are.
I’m betting you can make choices that get you out of those traps, one at a time. Otherwise, why are you here? Each trap you avoid now is one that won’t be holding you back when the time comes.
Mike999 on Sun, 11th Jan 2015 11:05 am
I guess most of America, especially Republicans, are Risk Adverse, and are not really Entrepreneurs.
An Entrepreneur is someone that takes a risk, makes an investment, and then makes a Profit.
1) You have to overcome your natural risk aversion. Solar, if you haven’t studied it, looks risky. ( It’s not )
2) Then you have to understand an “investment”. But, most consumers are just that, they consume the products offered to them, they do not as a rule “Produce”
3) Lack of knowledge about profits means you won’t chase them. Most people do not calculate their biggest costs ( Home, car, home heating fuel, auto fuel ), and don’t attempt to reduce them.
So, you won’t see instant change in the population. But the population does change, and usually geometrically, like a Hockey-stick graph.
– Risk Aversion:
1) Move to a smaller home. A smaller home is a less expensive home to heat, and to repair.
2) Energy savings, is like have a slave put money back into your bank account every week.
A Hybrid: 50% savings: is an investment as it’s more expensive to buy, but, 20 bucks a week in savings for 11 years, typical auto ownership duration: is about getting back 50% of the cost of the car.
Insulating your home, is like buying a BOND, and getting the interest from that bond. Only it makes your home more sellable too.
High efficiency heater and electric-hybrid hot water heater: same thing: They literally pay for themselves or even pay you back 3X on the original price in savings.
EV’s & Solar: Get back 100% of the cost of the EV, if you install Solar get 200% back in savings.
We are now in an age where the average consumer can become the average PRODUCER, and generate income without Working.
Davy on Sun, 11th Jan 2015 11:05 am
Short said – Because of a lack of oil, the environmental destruction that will occur is likely to be much greater than what it has been when abundantly available; horrendous as that has been. Maintaining enough environmental integrity to sustain us in an era of declining petroleum production will be orders of magnitudes more difficult than attempting to rein in a few tons of CO2. A battle between survival, and the environment does not bode well for either.
Short this is an important statement and one I have thought long and hard about. I see our wonderful forest around the Missouri Ozarks again clear cut like the turn of the last century. I also worry the destruction of BAU may not be the end of environmental destruction like many of us here hope. Even if CO2 is reduced other dangerous ecosystem destruction is likely. CO2 may not even be reduced because we may still retain the ability to burn dirty fossil fuels like coal. Whole forest could be burned up relatively quickly reducing that source of CO2 mitigation.
We cannot fathom a collapse fully so we can’t know how far back population will fall and when. Population reductions is extremely important to survival. WOW, look at that loaded sentence, it is saying some people’s survival depends on some people not surviving. We will be in a classic lifeboat scenario where there is just enough food and water for a few. Who gets sacrificed is a horrible responsibility. More likely it will be Natures random actions that determines who lives and who dies.
Mike999 on Sun, 11th Jan 2015 11:08 am
Will there be a market for consumer-to-producer solar energy? You will become a net zero carbon consumer, but there is a market for your excess power: Corporations.
ethan on Sun, 11th Jan 2015 11:18 am
it is easy to look at the current system with rose color glasses but for those of us who have just finished college the system is already broken…with large debt, low wage job prospects, high housing costs…..a bloated health care system…young people are angry and getting angrier…I know of people that wanted to go on to med school but with a price tag of $200,000 it is just not attainable…the retirement system is bloated and we have to pay for it everywhere with no guarantee we will see any return other than watching people on here “prepare” for the collapse. It is no surprise that all the assault vehicles are ending up in college towns…
Davy on Sun, 11th Jan 2015 11:18 am
Mike, I made the small house choice. I went from a 1400 sq/ft home to a 350 sq/ft cabin with a 100 sq/ft enclosed porch and 200 sq/ft open deck. Here is the general floor plan mine was customized but similar:
http://www.oakloghome.com/Portals/0/images/GetawayFloorplan.jpg
It is not easy always and much like living on a sailboat. I do have the luxury of barns to story things and work on things. I love being in a small living space for many reasons. I like how my family is closer together instead lost in square feet. I recommend it to anyone who can but I realize it just is not realistic for most.
ethan on Sun, 11th Jan 2015 11:21 am
I think Nicloe Foss had it right, when she said the United States would be the last horse in the glue factory! Investment is now going into U.S equities.. but she has moved to an enclave in new Zealand where you have to spend $370,000 just for a plot of land!! Baby Boomers unite!!!
Bandits on Sun, 11th Jan 2015 11:28 am
Ghung nobody said anything against your situation but you attacked Sunweb’s generalities as if he was having a personal swipe at you and I have seen you do it on a regular basis to anyone offering similar to Sunweb’s view. Just because you offer a personal solution does not mean everyone that has a contrary view to yours has to offer something.
Read his/her post again, see if it deserves your criticism.
I’m fairly sure that most (those that are aware and read this blog) are doing what they can and would appreciate technical advice and even anecdotes. I very much doubt they will lay down and die. I have my own mitigation strategy, I have 26 solar panels (and a lot more stored)on my roof and a wind turbine and so on, but I see no merit in attacking the big picture.
The situation/predicament is dire and it is very problematical, that any preparedness will help in the long or even the short run but it’s good for the soul, and makes one feel better as having “done something”.
steve on Sun, 11th Jan 2015 11:29 am
Davy that is just like my house except it was built in 1919…Why not put a basement under it? I guess that depends on climate…I have a lot of kids laughing at the size of our house but I imagine a lot of nashing of teeth and crying when they can’t afford to heat their house…Where is the woodstove? I purchased a Jotul 6 years ago and it is working like a charm….1 and half cords of wood per year in MT….
Mike999 on Sun, 11th Jan 2015 11:32 am
ethan, your only choices are:
1) Vote
2) Run for office and change things.
A violent revolution? In a police state? Not really an option.
Only a stupid nation would dump debt on students. Vote against Any politician who supports making a Profit off of your Education.
J-Gav on Sun, 11th Jan 2015 11:32 am
Short – “Maintaining enough environmental integrity to sustain us in an era of declining petroleum production will be orders of magnitude more difficult than attempting to rein in a few tons of CO2.”
Well, I don’t know how many orders of magnitude we’re talking about here, but this is certainly a point that a vast majority of people simply cannot (or don’t wish to) wrap their heads around.
Makes it all seem sort of inextricable sometimes, doesn’t it? Trapped in a gathering storm created by inertia, propaganda, blind faith and over-optimistic simplicity (consumerist, technological, etc), it seems that, even at this late hour, only a trail-blazing minority has cottoned on to the situation, much less been able to make a dent in its train-wreck mentality.
If this minority fails to grow quickly and decisively,it looks like there could be a particularly “bad moon risin”.
steve on Sun, 11th Jan 2015 11:34 am
I would like to recommend the following book to people a cheap and easy way to build structures
Sheds: The Do-It-Yourself Guide for Backyard Builders Paperback – January 11, 2007
by David Stiles (Author), Jeanie Stiles (Author)
I built the wood shed and it works great!!
Mike999 on Sun, 11th Jan 2015 11:34 am
Davy, I think I’d have to make the optional porch, a quiet room, but it looks good, esp. for a retired couple.
Looks like a great plan.
Thanks
Mike999 on Sun, 11th Jan 2015 11:38 am
If we do nothing about our carbon output, we will see new housing look like buried Flying Saucers, because that’s the only type of structure that can survive 150+ mile per hour winds.
Hurricane Sandy is just the start.
ethan on Sun, 11th Jan 2015 11:40 am
“Only a stupid nation would dump debt on students. Vote against Any politician who supports making a Profit off of your Education.” Mike that is exactly what has been done….look around at the building it is mostly in college towns every major university is expanding and building “4 star hotel accommodations” also the other building that is going on is in the medical community go to a hospital in the United States and you will be disgusted with the bloated waste there..but they have to …to compete…how long can a police state last? In a collapsing system..? Vote???? Really have you seen the candidates we are supposed to chose from???
Mike999 on Sun, 11th Jan 2015 11:56 am
The future of housing in the US:
When you need to build an aerodynamic home, you know you’re screwed.
http://www.flickriver.com/groups/monolithicdomes/pool/interesting/
Davy on Sun, 11th Jan 2015 11:59 am
Steve, I have a crawl space I use as a storm cellar. A basement was not practical because of the bedrock below me.
My wood stove is a morso badger. It is a little stove that does allot. It is very efficient. My heat shield around it to protect walls and floor is 2″ soap stone. The only issues is burn time. Fire only last 4 hours so during the night I have to stoke the fire. There are always trade offs.
I am in my long johns now because it is 77 in cabin but with freezing rain outside.
ghung on Sun, 11th Jan 2015 11:59 am
Bandits – “Ghung nobody said anything against your situation but you attacked Sunweb’s generalities as if he was having a personal swipe at you and I have seen you do it on a regular basis to anyone offering similar to Sunweb’s view.”
Gosh, Sunweb and others have frequently posited that renewables, PV especially, are essentially useless as an alternative to 19th and 20th century energy sources, often in response to those who promote alternatives as a better choice, for a variety of reasons. I happen to disagree. Are you saying that his views holds some special status and that they shouldn’t questioned? Easier to say STFU.
I’ll continue to question his evaluations, if only because I consider them incomplete. At least this back-and-forth may be more informative to readers who care than constant diatribes on the evils of the USA, etc.
From Sun’s comment up top:
“The climate change deniers and the solar device promoters should join forces. Neither are willing to look at the science.
“In psychology and cognitive science, confirmation bias is a tendency to search for or interpret information in a way that confirms one’s preconceptions””
This type of blanket generalisation and his earlier sarcasm deserve to be countered, IMO. Most of us who think moving away from BAU energy sources is an important and necessary thing aren’t the same as climate denialists, usually quite the opposite. I was raised to call out a cheap shot when I see it, and don’t care who likes it or not. Serious times….
steve on Sun, 11th Jan 2015 12:18 pm
“I am in my long johns now because it is 77 in cabin but with freezing rain outside.” Ha….ha…I am at 65 freezing rain and snow 29 but I am wondering if I should be using natural gas as it is cheap right now….I do burn a lot of waste wood….2×4 scraps and latthe that people throw in the trash…!!! So much waste! Not as bad as heating decks outside!!
rockman on Sun, 11th Jan 2015 12:26 pm
As usual a good blend of comments. But being a simple minded geologist I have to keep it, hmm, simple. “My investments in clean energy, efficiency and an electric vehicle have been the best I’ve ever made”. He deserves accolades for his selfish utilization of non-fossil fuel resources. Selfish in the sense that it doesn’t appear to have provided any significant to anyone other then himself. And nothing wrong with that: it would be great if millions of Americans followed that. Except, of course, for the entrepreneurs who provide the rest of us with livelihoods. Livelihoods without which few could afford to go personally green.
The folks who would deserve a bigger pat on the back IMHO are those who will provide greater transitions from ff’s to the alts on a commercial level. That would allow the benefits to be amortized across a much larger segment of the population then we’ll ever see from individual efforts. There are many thousands of Texans today getting 100% of their electricity from commercial alt sources. And a very few of them would ever approach such a goal on an individual basis. Again individual efforts are terrific but IMHO won’t even come close to changing our trajectory down the PO path.
Edward Boyle on Sun, 11th Jan 2015 1:21 pm
Rockman,
you’re sounding positively European. Get a govt. industry program going to accelerate transition. Subsidies, tax breaks, low red tape, land rights for hue electric cables.
shortonoil on Sun, 11th Jan 2015 1:51 pm
Well, I don’t know how many orders of magnitude we’re talking about here, but this is certainly a point that a vast majority of people simply cannot (or don’t wish to) wrap their heads around.
Noah had the same problem. Building a great big boat when it was a hundred miles to the nearest body of water, and it hadn’t rained in three years was something that most people just couldn’t get their head wrapped around. He built such a big boat because he wasn’t quite sure just how deep the water was going to get, and the project came with a limited instruction set. If you are going to build an ark make sure to make it is big enough to hold a few more. With all those animals, someone is going to have to shovel out the bottom of the ark once in a while. Once it starts raining hard, there will be plenty of people willing to take the job!
GregT on Sun, 11th Jan 2015 1:54 pm
“but she has moved to an enclave in new Zealand where you have to spend $370,000 just for a plot of land!!”
You can buy a plot of land in New Zealand for only $370,000? A shack on an acre of land here will cost you 1.5 million.
Apneaman on Sun, 11th Jan 2015 2:13 pm
The element of prepping I find the most appealing is how it says fuck you to the government and main stream society in general. I have noticed how the greater society cannot seem to stand any deviation from their false choice living arrangements. Whether it’s the PTB or the lowliest cheer leading sheep, they view the entire spectrum of prepper’s as a threat. I fear that which I do not understand and/or disagree with. Nothing wrong with so called alternative energies as long as one understands and applies whole systems thinking to our world and our multiply inescapable predicaments. Thinking alternatives will “save us” is crisis cult mentality. Nothing can or will save industrial civilization. Prepping may reduce the suffering of you and yours. Depending on one’s particular situation it may draw survivors to you like moths to the light. It is true that some will just give up and die or even speed it along, but they will be a drop in the bucket. There will be many more who made no preparations at all and will partake in the most horrific and unspeakable acts so as not to “freeze in the dark” and starve. I have heard a number of doomers assuredly state that they are simply going to take a walk in the woods when the time comes. I’m sure some of them will, but for many that built in survival instinct will take over and that’s a real “game changer”. Ever hear of “9 meals away from anarchy”? That’s because around that time major bio chemical changes take place within the brain and survival savagery kicks in. That’s when people realize they are just another animal; red in tooth and claw. Those who embrace it may survive longer. If I ever opt for that final stroll in the woods, I’ll make sure I do it on a full stomach.
Apneaman on Sun, 11th Jan 2015 2:51 pm
Techno Fix – Why Technology Won’t Save Us Or the Environment
“You might not want to pin your hopes on nanotechnology, genetic engineering, or miracle drugs, says Michael Huesemann, author of Techno-Fix: Why Technology Won’t Save Us Or the Environment. As much as we’d like to believe that technological innovation will let us magically continue our lifestyle and prevent social, economic, and environmental collapse, Huesemann shows that most technological solutions are ineffective—and, in the presence of continued economic growth, modern technology does not promote sustainability, but hastens collapse.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1MsUypIHZhc
Energy Investor on Sun, 11th Jan 2015 3:02 pm
GregT,
I live in New Zealand and am contemplating buying some land that produces something. There is a disconnect between prices in Auckland, Wellington and Christchuch and the rest of the country, so that a plot to build on in the three cities could cost much more than the $370,000. But first remember that is NZ dollars. Second, remember that in some rural areas you can still buy houses on land for $NZ50,000 and much less.
These properties are ones I have been considering…
http://www.trademe.co.nz/property/residential/lifestyle-property/auction-633472841.htm
http://www.trademe.co.nz/property/residential/lifestyle-property/auction-742955735.htm
http://www.trademe.co.nz/property/residential/lifestyle-property/auction-468601239.htm
But of course we need to remember that not only do they generate cash flow, they have the potential to grow much more food than just being semi-retirement lifestyle orchards for the gentry 🙂
Energy Investor on Sun, 11th Jan 2015 3:10 pm
BTW, a standard lifestyle block in the same area with similar quality of housing and same acreage would cost about 30-40% less.
And this is an expensive area with moderate to warm climate and good water.
So Perhaps Nicole got it right when she headed our way (tho’ I have no idea where she settled).
Davy on Sun, 11th Jan 2015 3:10 pm
EI, NZ is on my bucket list that collapse will probably put holes in but maybe I will make it down there some day. My grandfather was a jet setter back in the old days before mass tourism his favorite place was NZ. Good luck with your gentleman farm and or doomstead.
Joe on Sun, 11th Jan 2015 3:48 pm
I think Geoff Lawton’s video interviews dealing with several subject matters such as permaculture,food systems,biogas,geo-solar,heating and much more is fascinating and very realistic.
Check it out.Just throw in your email and watch the videos for free.
http://www.geofflawton.com/sq/15449-geoff-lawton
GregT on Sun, 11th Jan 2015 5:24 pm
E I,
My wife and I spent 5 weeks on the North Island in November/December of 2013. We drove from Aukland down through Gisborne to Wellington, and then up through Lake Taupo, Hamilton, and back to Aukland. We absolutely loved New Zealand. Reminded me of BC back in the 60s and 70s, except for the fact that we here in Canada drive on the ‘right’ side of the road. The round-abouts took some getting used to, but we would both move there in a heartbeat. Wonderful country, wonderful people!
My point was not that NZ real estate is expensive, but rather more like wholesale prices compared to here in BC. IMO, Nicole made a wise move. You are also fortunate to call such a beautiful place home!
Apneaman on Sun, 11th Jan 2015 6:15 pm
Energy Investor, what about the John Key gang? Seems like they are even worse than the Harper gang here in Canada, but I’m only going from what I read; never been there. I would classify the Harper gang as soft fascists……so far.
GregT on Sun, 11th Jan 2015 6:56 pm
“I would classify the Harper gang as soft fascists……so far.”
And the truly alarming part, all of the other options are just as bad, if not worse.
dubya on Mon, 12th Jan 2015 12:23 am
The argument that all alternative energy is merely a fossil fuel extender may be true – on the other hand I can do an awful lot with 100W of electricity in my house – annual heat, heat exchanger, hot water.
However, can anyone explain how all those dutch wind pumps, wind powered grain mills, water powered sawmills etc existed when I keep getting told that they are all dependent on fossil energy?
I agree that our modern massive use of power is non-replaceable and unsustainable. That does not imply that there is no future scenario where a small amount of energy from wind, water and animal power could be used without fossil fuels – as it was for the past few thousands to million of years.
Sadly that might require a small reduction (to perhaps 10% of the current) in human population to make it work. 100kW motorized wheelchairs probably won’t make the cut.
GregT on Mon, 12th Jan 2015 1:09 am
Dubya,
You can do one hell of lot with that electricity in your house, because of all of the gadgets that modern industrial society manufactures through the use of fossil fuels.
Those dutch wind pumps were made from wood. The grain mills were made from stone, and the metal used in the saw mills were made with coal. (fossil fuels)
You are correct, sailing ships were built without fossil fuels long ago using manual human labour and sharpened stones. Cloth was made in wooden looms, and animals were used to till the soil, and to haul heavy loads.
Many scientists are in agreement that the sustainable number of people on the Earth was around 1 billion, back when the planet was still healthy. The Earth isn’t so healthy anymore.