Insight and inspiration in turbulent times.
Are you planning to “build community” next year to help your community face the problems of economic downturn and energy decline? Here’s a simple, time-efficient, way to start: take advantage of your existing neighborhood newsletter to promote your ideas.
In which I uncover the most compelling reason to stay put in my California home, track my about face from a knowledge driven quest for truth to an intuitively informed one, and contact the dead. …
California is the most conducive place for believing, as Lewis Carroll put it, six impossible things before breakfast.
It may surprise you to learn that it is not blue-eyed yuppies and liberal- commie environ-metal heads (as a neighbor puts it) who are the most influential group in the protection of the Dreadnought Deer of Destruction. The real power is the hunting fraternity itself.
This article is in response to last month’s article by Kathy Leotta and her colleagues, Observations on local governments’ preparedness for fuel supply disruptions. First, I congratulate Kathy on her earlier research and thank her for reviving this neglected topic in her most recent paper. The purpose of my submission is to support and supplement various observations made by the Leotta team.
Hand-powered devices have been used for millennia, but during the last quarter of the 19th century a radically improved generation of tools appeared, taking advantage of modern mass production machinery and processes (like interchangeable parts) and an increased availability in superior material (metal instead of wood). One of the outcomes included an array of new drilling machines, but their heydays were over fast. These human-powered tools were not only a vast improvement over those that came before them, they also had many advantages in comparison to the power drills that we use today.
The literature on Liquid Fuel Emergencies is considerable, dating back to rationing during World War Two. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) in the USA did some exceptional work for two decades (1975- 1994). Unfortunately, there have been relatively few studies during the past 15 years, with the notable exceptions of the comprehensive analysis by Alan Smart for the Government of Australia and Kathy’s research in the USA.
Maybe it’s the approach of winter, or maybe it’s the spectacular fiscal irresponsibility at play in Washington DC, but the concept of storing food seems particularly relevant just now. Beyond the undeniable practical value of a full pantry, though, storing food offers two useful lessons in practical ecology — one about ecological limits, and the other about a strategy individuals, families and communities can use to prepare for our species’ impending collision with ecological limits.
I want to talk about the 10,000-year-old problem of agriculture and how it is both necessary and possible to solve it. Were it necessary but not possible this idea would be grandiose, and were it possible but not necessary it would be grandiose. But it has passed the test of grandiosity.
Is a BTU today worth more or less than a BTU ten years from now? It’s seemingly an easy question. A BTU will heat one pound of water one degree whether its 2010, 2020, or 2100. And, in a world of entropy where the easiest and best quality energy sources (generally) get used up first, one unit of energy should increase in value over time, as its ability to accomplish work becomes more valuable to society as time progresses. However this is solely a physical perspective, one that ignores biology of time preference. Once humans with finite lifespans and cultures with sunk costs enter the picture, a BTU today, behaviorally, becomes worth more than one in the future.
The good news from the Green New Deal is that ecological microeconomics (such as valuing ecosystem services) has risen from the recesses of academia into the realm of international diplomacy. The bad news is that ecological macroeconomics (such as limits to growth) apparently has not. Let’s take a look at the implications.
The UN Climate Conference (COP16) in Cancun is turning out to be both anti-climactic and anti-climatic. There will be no major agreement to stop global warming this week, despite the timed release of a number of reports that show that the phenomenon is advancing more rapidly than expected, with lethal consequences. There likely will be announcements of progress in schemes to allow contaminating industries and nations to continue with business as usual and add another lucrative area to their portfolios—trade in carbon offsets and credits. It’s a worst-case scenario for the planet.
– Glenn Beck embraces simplicity (for real!)
– 21 Holiday Gift Ideas for the Permaculture and Guerrilla Gardening Activists in Your Life
– NYT: The Beekeeper Next Door
– The UK Crash Course… now online and available free to all UK Transition initiatives…
– Why not eat insects? (video) – new!
