Saturday 28 December 2013

coming to a town near you - and is it such a bad thing?

This is America's Most Apocalyptic, Violent City — And You’ve Probably Never Heard Of It

  •        
this, is, america's, most, apocalyptic,, violent, city, —, and, you’ve, probably, never, heard, of, it,
This is America's Most Apocalyptic, Violent City — And You’ve Probably Never Heard Of It
Image Credit: AP
We all know about Detroit. We've heard the sad story of this dwindling midwestern city's deterioration into desperate insolvency. We know how they filed for the largest municipal bankruptcy in American history, with debt estimated at $18-20 billion following the collapse of the auto industry. The city, which was No. 1 on Forbes' "most miserable cities" list, has 78,000 vacant buildings; 40% of the streetlights do not work, and more than half of the city's parks have closed since 2008. It takes an average of one hour for the police to respond to any call.
But this story is not about Detroit. It's about Detroit's failing and forsaken neighbor, 66 miles to the northwest. It's a story about Flint, Michigan.
Flint was the birthplace of General Motors (GM) in 1908. According to journalist and Flint native Gordon Young, 47, the city flourished on a strong economy built around the auto industry. By the 1960s, it's per capita income for a city of its size was one of the highest in the world, Young says. "That is really hard for people to even fathom now."
Before the Great Recession and at peak employment, there were 80,000 jobs from GM alone. In addition, there was a satellite system of part suppliers for GM, who sprung up around the factories, supplying thousands of more jobs.

(Photo by Justin Clanton)
Today, there are only 4,000 GM jobs. An average of five people leave the city every day. "The memories of the old Flint made this decline even more dramatic for me," Young said.
The Buick city plant is the largest brown field in the U.S. now. Because it's an industrial site with potential toxic environmental damage, attempts to re-sell and re-purpose the land are highly risky.
Flint now drowns in the hell that has become of much of America's Rust Belt. The New York Times labeled it "murdertown, USA" and said it was "synonymous with faded American and industrial power."

(Photo by Gordon Young)
In a Slate article, Young wrote, "After the loss of nearly 80,000 GM jobs over the last three decades, Flint has landed on the Forbes list of 'most miserable cities' and 'fastest-dying cities.'" Filmmaker Michael Moore is a Flint native and made the 1989 documentary "Roger and Me" about the city (which was recently inducted into the National Film Registry.) Moore said of his hometown, "The only difference between your town and Flint is that the Grim Reaper just likes to visit us first."

(Photo by Gordon Young)
In Young's book, Teardown: Memoir of a Vanishing City, he chronicles his return home after being away for 15 years. One synopsis of the book reads, "There are desolate blocks where only a single house is occupied, and survivors brandish shotguns and monitor police scanners. While the population plummets, the murder rate soars. Throw in an arson spree and a racially motivated serial killer and Young wonders if Flint can be saved."
In the book, Young compares bright childhood memories of Catholic schooling and free swimming lessons to the grim present of abandoned houses and shuttered schools.
"I went back to my old neighborhood," he said. "It’s one of those neighborhoods where outsiders wouldn’t even believe it was the United States. So many burned out houses, houses with trees growing through them."
"Some of these areas would look totally abandoned, but in fact, they're not," he said.

(Photo by Gordon Young)
A third of the city has been left abandoned. If all of the abandoned houses, vacant lots, and buildings were consolidated, there would be 10 square miles of "blight" in the city.
Young said, "You can buy houses by the dozen on eBay. You can get houses for $500."
Flint is a small city of about 100,000 people. In 2012, Flint's statistics, per 100,000 people, were: 62 murders, 106 forcible rapes, and 662 robberies. The murder rate alone is higher than Baghdad's.
The numbers have earned it the No. 1 spot on Business Insider's "most dangerous cities" lists for 2010, 2011, and 2012. Violent crimes in total — including murder, nonnegligent manslaughter, rape, robbery, and aggravated assault — reached 2,729.5. The poverty rate is over 40%, and the percentage of adults with a high school degree is roughly 83%.

A 24/7 Wall St. special report stated that, "Like Detroit, Flint has suffered economically in recent years. The median household income was just $23,380 in 2011, the second-lowest of all 555 cities measured by the U.S. Census Bureau."
Photojournalist Brett Carlsen visits Flint whenever he has the means. He wrote, "With close to one third of the city’s homes vacant, those that are left exist in a whirlwind of violence, abandoned homes, and financial struggles unlike many other places in the United States."

In a Wired piece, documentary maker Zackary Canepari said, "Flint is an incredibly unique place. Historically, it is the American dream turned into the American nightmare."
***
Flint is emblematic of a deeper story in America, only one of the many similar tales to emerge from the once thriving, now deteriorating Rust Belt of the United States. These manufacturing and industrial hot spots, spanning from Albany, New York, west across Ohio, Indiana, and through Michigan, were once the great symbols of American innovation and economic prosperity. Today, they're mere vestiges of a bygone era that's been eclipsed by new economic power centers like Wall Street and Silicon Valley.
Proof is in the numbers: Of the 15 American cities that have lost the largest share of their populations since 1960, 14 are in the industrial Northeast and upper Midwest. Flint, like Detroit and Gary, lost about 20% of its population during the first decade of the 21st century. In the 1960s, Flint's population was double what it is today.

***
Thankfully, there's another side to this story of depression and decay, a side of this city that's easy to forget by focusing on the despair alone.
There's a spirit, a certain resilience, and an undeniable loyalty. Canepari said, "For a place that is so deeply dysfunctional, it has an incredible amount of identity. People are proud to be from there. And you can see why."
The everyday people of Flint refuse to be defeated. Flint native and photographer Justin Clanton, 27, said, "I love it here. Crime is a bitch, but, hey, not every place is perfect. There are few other places I would want to live. I'd choose the 'worst city in America' over a ritzy area any day."
Locals hate that the only story told about Flint is a negative one. "There are people trying very hard to make this city a better place," Young said.
"People who have not given up."

Sunday 8 December 2013

letting the corporations go

The day I closed my Amazon account

I've done it.  I've closed my Amazon account.  I now stand before you as an ex-Amazon account-holder.  I feel curiously shaky, but at the same time empowered, excited even.  While opening a new Amazon account is easy as pie, closing one is another matter altogether.  I'd like to share with you how, and why, I did it.

Was it the recent Panorama programme about working conditions in those vast Amazon 'fulfilment centres' that tipped me across into doing something?  Was it the stories about the appallingly low levels of tax Amazon pay in the UK?  Was it the recent video showing Amazon's plans to be delivering across the UK within 30 minutes through the use of drones? Was it hearing the level of taxpayers' money that goes in sweeteners to attracting Amazon to open up in different communities, while the profits generated pour out of those same places?  What actually tipped me across was a conversation I had with a book seller in my town. It was that that led me, finally, to build the steely resolve needed to close down my Amazon account.
Yes, I confess, I had an Amazon account.  I buy music from my local record shop, I support my local book shops, but there are times when I need a book quickly, or feel I do, and it's just easier and more convenient.  And, if I'm honest, I love getting exciting parcels in the post. And isn't it cheap?  But as Carole Cadwalladr, who went undercover in Amazon's Swansea 'fulfilment centre' for The Guardian puts it:
Our lust for cheap, discounted goods delivered to our doors promptly and efficiently has a price. We just haven't worked out what it is yet.
I've always had that nagging conscience that it's not OK really, but I have just had it ticking away in the background and carried on using it on occasion.  The conversation that tipped it for me, with my local bookseller, was around "what would it take for you to stop supporting Amazon?"  His example was Primark, recently implicated in child labour in the manufacturing of some its clothes.  We know that's the case, but we still shop there.  If we knew that 8 year olds work there, would we stop shopping there?  Or 5 year olds?  If we knew that every day they arrive for work they get hit with a stick, would we still pop in there for a cheap new shirt?  And if they got hit 3 times, and then again in the middle of the day?  Where do we draw the line?
Amazon fulfilment centre
Our tendency is to draw a line, but then for that line to slip.  What swung it for me was thinking that actually, what I already know should be enough to make me withdraw my support.  Also, it was thinking about where the world will be in 5 years time if we continue to give Amazon our support.  More and more low paid jobs, with little Union protection, in conditions described in the BBC documentary as "... all the bad stuff at once. The characteristics of this type of job, the evidence shows increased risk of mental illness and physical illness."  
We'll see Amazon 'fulfilment centres' that look like a wasp's nest, with drones flying in and out.  High streets swept clean of bookshops, indeed of most shops, as Amazon spread into selling virtually everything that local economies sell, but far cheaper.  It made me think about what kind of a world I'm creating for my sons as they enter the work place.  What kind of opportunities will Amazon offer them, as they gut local economies and focus economic activity into vast warehouses along the side of motorways? 
I give so much of my time every day to trying to create a different, more just, more resilient world, yet my shopping decisions undermine that.  There is also an extraordinary arrogance to thinking that it is OK for you to fill peoples' airspace, the sky above their heads, with your drones, delivering your products to people for your profit.  What happens for a company to get so huge that that is considered acceptable?  It is about getting too big.  Amazon is too big.  Far too big.  But it clearly sees that it has only just started.  That's not good. 
So, decision made, and with a commitment to source those things in other ways, I went to the website to close my account. Closing an account with Amazon is like breaking up with a girlfriend whose level of obsessive denial is such that the possibility you might want to split up with her doesn't even enter her consciousness.  It's a fascinating process.  Opening an account with Amazon is so easy.  Closing an account is, as my 15 year-old son might put it, a right mission.
Click on 'Your account' and there is no option anywhere of "Close my account".  Nothing.  Like it's not even a possibility that it might entertain.  I had to Google (and don't get me started on them) "closing your Amazon account".  If you search the Amazon site for "close my account" it yields no results.  See below:
Close my account

The Google link took me to their Help section, on pages that bear the slogan "we're the people with the smile on the box", prompting the thought that the inside of their box-like warehouses are probably somewhat bereft of smiles.  If offers you a drop-down menu under the helpful title "what can we help you with?".  Surely that's where I'll find "Close my Account"?  No. You get a range of choices, "An order I placed", "Kindle", "Digital services" and, er, "Something else".  Guess I'm "something else" then.  So I click that.
I'm then given another 4 options, none of which are "Close my account".  I'm asked to "tell us more about your issue", and given another list where my option is "other non-order question".  Given that still, the idea that I might have got this far could mean I want to close my account is clearly unimaginable, I am then given an option to email, to phone, or to "chat".  So I click on "chat", and am told "a customer service associate will be here in a moment".
A charming man then begins to chat with me.  Here's how our conversation went:
Me: I want to close my account please. How do I do that?
Tom (not his real name): Thank you for contacting Amazon.co.uk. My name is Tom. May I know your name, please?
Me: Rob
Tom: Thank you.  I'm sorry to hear that you want to close the account.  May I know the reason for closing the account please?
Me: Certainly. I am appalled by the way Amazon operate as highlighted in the recent BBC Panorama programme. I am appalled at the recent story on Amazon considering deliveries in future by drone. I am appalled by the low level of tax Amazon pay in the UK. I have been a customer for years, but I feel Amazon has become too big, and eats everything in its path. It is no longer something I wish to support.
Tom: I'm sorry for the situation. For confidentiality reasons, I'm not able to close your account for you in chat, so I'm going to send you an e-mail with the information to close the account. When you receive it, please respond to that e-mail so that we will close your account.
Me: Thank you Tom. I would really like my reasons for leaving to be registered somehow, as I think a lot more people will be closing their accounts for similar reasons, and it would be good for that to be noted by those in charge. Will that be possible?
Tom: Unfortunately we will not be able to comment on this issue. However, I will send you an email regarding the closing of the account. Is there any thing else I can help you with?
Me: I am not asking you to comment on the issue. I am asking you to make sure that the reasons for my closing my account are passed on to management. If I ran a business I would want to know why my customers were closing their accounts. Is that not the case at Amazon?
Tom: Sure, all the information's will be recorded and forwarded to the appropriate department.
Me: Thank you Tom. I appreciate your help.
Tom: Thanks for your understanding.  We hope to see you again soon! Have a Nice Day!
I later received an email from Customer Support to say:
"We appreciate your feedback and have forwarded it to the appropriate team internally. We are proud to provide a safe and positive working environment for all of our associates. Information about working at our fulfilment centres can be found at the following link: www.amazon.co.uk/fcpractices"
Amazon may be cheap, but cheap comes at a cost for someone else.  And, after all, much of what is bought on there is throwaway rubbish.  As Carole Cadwalladr puts it:
The warehouse is 800,000 square feet, or, in what is Amazon's standard unit of measurement, the size of 11 football pitches (its Dunfermline warehouse, the UK's largest, is 14 football pitches). It is a quarter of a mile from end to end. There is space, it turns out, for an awful lot of crap.
Me, I resolve to buy less, but better.  Less, but longer-lasting.  Less, but local.  The thought of where we will end up in 5 years time, 10 years time, 20 years time, if companies like Amazon continue as they are, really frightens me. It's not good, it's not right.  It's not about our needs, it's about the needs of huge investors.  I want a different world for my boys.  
I can't, on my own, do that much about it.  I can't insist that the UK government legislate so that, as in Holland, the Recommended Retail Price (RRP) is the legal minimum at which any book can be sold, although I think that is grounds for a really timely campaign.  Because of that, Amazon don't really operate in Holland.  Bring back the RRP for books here, and let's have a level playing field.  As I say, I can't do much, but I can withdraw my support. I just have withdrawn my support.  It feels surprisingly unsettling, as one does after ending a relationship, but it was the right thing to do.  It may be a drop in the ocean, but if enough people do it....

Thursday 21 November 2013

practical sustainable hot water ...

I've always assumed that we would find hot water very hard to come by in the future and that cold showers would be the order of the day. So what a BRILLIANT idea this is. We all have compost heaps, obviously, so all we then need is the piping to bring the water to where it's needed. This could also be done on a larger scale in a farm etc.

Remember - as a practical idea this info should be printed off and kept somewhere safe - the Internet won't always be around!

Compost Water Heaters From Jean Pain

by Resilient Communities on November 4, 2013 · 11 comments
For those of us who have successfully composted in the past, we know that a properly made compost pile produces a substantial amount of heat. In fact, when the pile stops creating heat it is usually done “cooking” and ready for the garden.
We focus a lot on leveraging technology to become more resilient. So what can we learn from a Frenchman who died over three decades ago?
A lot!

Who is Jean Pain?

jeanpain1
Jean Pain was a French innovator who lived in southern France from 1930 until his passing in 1981. He was able to create a compost-based energy production system that was capable of producing 100% of his energy needs.
Using compost alone, Jean was able to heat water to 140°F. He used this water for washing, cooking and heating his home. We aren’t talking about a small amount of water either. His system was able to heat water at a rate of 4 L per minute; or almost 1 gallon per minute.
Many of our modern hot water heaters can’t even boast figures that impressive.
In addition to heating water using compost, Jean also distilled methane to run a generator, a stove, and fuel his vehicle.
The work he did is still viable today. Sometimes known as Jean Pain Composting or the Jean Pain Method, we can learn a lot from the work of this Frenchman about resiliency.
Interestingly enough, just about all of Jean’s work is in French. There are English translations available around the Internet, however, so with a little bit of research we can take advantage of Mr. Pain’s successes as one of the early innovators of modern resiliency.
If you are interested in learning more about the work of Jean Pain, check out the book entitled “Another Kind of Garden.”  It is translated from the original French so it is a little hard to read, but the information is extremely interesting and we could all learn a thing or two from his work.

How Does it Work?

It may seem unbelievable that a simple compost pile filled with anaerobic bacteria could heat water to temperatures hot enough to scald skin. It is, however, entirely possible and easily replicated at home.
You only need to search YouTube for a few minutes to find thousands of videos detailing variations of Jean Pain’s design being used in towns and cities around the world.
The basic idea behind a compost water heater is that tubing is coiled throughout the compost pile and then filled with water. The water within the tubing heats up substantially (and relatively quickly).
Looking back at the work of Jean Pain, his compost piles were massive. In some cases, he was employing 60 tons of compost in a single pile to provide his energy needs. More recently, however, experiments have used piles that are as small as 6’ x 6’ to create a similar effect. Some of these modern piles are producing temperatures of 150°F or more.
The trick to improving the original design is the use of more polyethylene tubing. In the typical 6’ x 6’ compost pile mentioned above, you might expect to use at least 300 feet of 1 inch diameter polyethylene tubing. This tubing is carefully coiled and layered in between the layers of compost to repeatedly heat the water as it moves through the various layers of the coil system.
As a general rule, the pile will start with a compressed layer of compost followed by a layer of coiled tubing followed by a layer of compressed compost until you reach the desired height.
Since a compost water heater does not have a hot water tank, the tubing becomes the “tank” in this example. This means that the more tubing you use, the more hot water you will have available at a given time. Think long, relaxing shower versus being the last one in the house to get a shower before work.
Although the original designs of Jean Pain did not include a hot water tank, there has also been some interesting research done in the last few years where this technique is combined with the use of a conventional hot water tank as a way to preheat water entering the tank. This is an excellent way to save on your energy bill without relying completely on the benefits of a compost water heater.
jeanpain2
Once the decomposition process is functioning properly within the compost pile, you can expect several weeks of reliable water temperatures. In the early 80s, Mother Earth News tested a design very similar to Jean Pain’s system and was able to achieve consistent water temperatures above 130°F for several months before the heating action began to dwindle.
The length of time your compost water heater provides a reliable energy source depends on its construction. Not only do you have to consider how large your pile will be, but the ingredients you put in it and the amount of tubing you use are also considerations when designing your own compost water heating system.

Additional Thoughts

Based on the experimentation of others, there are a couple of things you want to keep in mind if you decide to create your own compost water heater. First, try to locate the compost pile near the intended usage location. Obviously, heat is lost as the water travels across large distances.
Some people have created separate outdoor showers that are located just a few feet from the compost water heater.
jeanpain3
As previously mentioned, you could also consider using a compost water heater as a way to preheat water entering your hot water tank. This is often easier than implementing a standalone compost heater and it will save significant amounts of energy typically used to heat groundwater in your hot water tank.
Other people have also used compost water heaters in conjunction with various solar water heating techniques. Although a compost water heater is a very effective solution by itself, the power of the sun makes it an even more reliable option.

Thinking of Building Your Own?

Creating a compost-based water heater is excellent weekend project. The only things you really need are compostable material, an area to devote to your compost pile, and lots of polyethylene tubing.
There are tutorials all over the Internet detailing various methods – some work very well while others fall short of the performance achieved by Mr. Pain himself.
One of the most important things to remember when creating your own compost water heater is to compress the compost pile very well. Since anaerobic bacteria are responsible for heating the pile, the more compressed your compost is, the better your water heater will work.
Another thing that some people have done successfully is create two small piles with tubing coiled in each of them. In areas where space is limited, this may be a good alternative that will still heat water practically as well as a single large pile. Truly, the key is to use lots of tubing and coil it throughout the compost pile – as long as you do that, you should have no issues heating up your water to 130°F or better.
With the cold winter months fast approaching in many parts of the country, the idea of hot water that does not require any external energy source is a welcome solution and an idea we should all think about incorporating into our current resiliency plans in the near future.

Friday 1 November 2013

the internet crash



This is an excellent article! I think we all know deep down that the internet is a transient thing and won't be around for ever, but despite that many of us are building our businesses and even lives around it - so where will that leave us as the internet grinds to a halt? I am slowly building an alternative that doesn't need the internet (or electricity) but at the moment my business is 100% (not 50%, not 99%, 100%!!) internet based. When the internet is gone then so is the business. I may be lucky and the real internet crash may be 10 or even 20 years off, and I may just sell it in time before the internet crash becomes obvious to everyone, but I'm not holding my breath! Read the article, the conclusions for a post-internet world are actually quite good, but I can see an awful lot of pain during the transition!

What Are You Going to Do When the Internet’s Gone?

Filed under: Using Weblogs and Technology — Dave Pollard @ 21:18
jackzieglercartoon
Cartoon by Jack Ziegler in the New Yorker. You can buy his stuff here.
What are you going to do when the Internet’s gone? That is the question that no one dares ask. I’m not talking about Net Neutrality and the takeover of the web by corporate interests. I’m talking about its simple disappearance, as infrastructure that’s simply unaffordable and unsustainable in a world of economic, energy and ecological collapse, stops working and falls apart.
The technophiles, the “bright greens” will tolerate no such talk, of course. They believe with a religious passion that technology will solve all the world’s problems (and let us live forever to enjoy the resultant eternal bliss of allknowingness). But the “dark greens” — the post-civs who see our society collapsing (“all civilizations do”) probably in this century — want to believe too. They want the Internet to help them organize resistance to the corporatists and globalists who are exacerbating the crises driving us off the edge of the cliff, if not in time to stop it, at least enough to be able to piece together some alternative models of how to live sustainably that the survivors (our grandchildren) will be able to use.
So asking this question generally raises a lot of scowls from all sides. Even the corporatists have become utterly dependent on it for the information and communication systems of their dysfunctional and plundering empires. A world without the Internet is simply…unthinkable.
Until you think about it. Consider that:
  • The Internet is a huge user of electricity and related electrical and telecommunication infrastructure. That infrastructure, as invisible as it is, requires massive amounts of continuous maintenance.
  • During the Great Depression of the 1930s, one of the first things to go was reliable phone and electrical service. The utilities went bankrupt like everyone else, because their customers couldn’t afford to pay the bills, so the utilities as a result couldn’t afford to pay repair, maintenance and service people to keep these services operating. (When farmers abandoned their unsustainable, monoculture farms, they left notes on their doors inviting other migrants to stay and take care of their homes to ward off poachers, and left the doors unlocked. No power, no phones.)
  • The Internet requires, for most of its value, a huge number of ‘volunteers’ working mostly at the ‘edges’ providing millions of hours of free labour to write the software to keep it running and to keep its content current. Most of these volunteers are people who have a source of income (other than the Internet) that allows them to volunteer this effort in their ‘spare’ time. No full-time jobs, no time for volunteer work.
  • The hardware that allows us to use the Internet is utterly dependent on large-scale, inexpensive global trade in metals, minerals and materials, some of them rare and scarce. You can’t build computers, servers and telecom lines from materials you can find locally. When global trade grinds to a halt, made worse by the end of cheap, affordable oil, where are we going to get these things? And what happens when supply of these materials simply runs out and there’s no money to research and develop alternatives?
Just as in the last Great Depression, the collapse of essential information and communication infrastructure won’t happen all it once. It will be a gradual decline. The first signs, I think, will be the loss of the generosity economy features that have made the Internet so ubiquitous — the free software and free services that advertisers and ‘free-mium’ service buyers and enthused volunteer labour funded. There are already some disturbing signs of this happening: Gaia.com, a large blog platform, has folded; Friendfeed has been bought out by Facebook (which, despite its immense popularity and reach, has surprisingly small revenues and must be operating on razor-thin margins); Yahoo has been closing many of its services and is rumoured to be in difficulty. And all the wonderful stuff we have from Google comes thanks to advertising revenues, even though there is almost no evidence that such advertising is effective.
So what you’ll see, I think, is a lot of consolidation, disappearance of free services (Ning recently announced it is abandoning all its ‘free’ services, and their customers) and an annoying increase in fees (the giant global right-wing news empire News Corp is again planning to start charging for its content). “The end of free” will drive millions of Internet readers (and writers) away. Advertisers will then flee. What will be left will be tons of people using ‘free’ bandwidth to try to download huge amounts of ‘free’ music and video, and ISPs will then find relatively little resistance to them bringing in huge increases in bandwidth fees (and the end of fixed rates). If you’ve ever dealt with the outrage of ‘roaming’ charges for data, imagine such charges for all use.
The next wave of the Internet’s decline will be when the next long Depression begins, probably in a decade or two. When communication and electrical service becomes intermittent as utilities cut back, Internet service, having been marginalized by the events described above, will be considered a non-essential service, and regularly shut down in favour of more critical uses of these services. And then, as PCs become less ubiquitous and people get used to finding alternative ways to get their information and entertainment, and as the availability of components and materials falls and their cost increases, computers will start to become community resources rather than personal ones, and you’ll have to go to the library or the neighbourhood school to find one in working order. And eventually even these will break down, and people will, as they always do, find workarounds.
I’m sure most readers of this article are shaking their heads, saying this will never happen. And I’m sure that most readers who are also students of history are probably nodding their heads, saying they can imagine this, and perhaps it wouldn’t be so terrible. True innovation blossoms when there is a real human need that is not being met, and the need for information and communication and entertainment is eternal. How to evolve and adapt to the end of the Internet? Maybe like this:
  • Instead of downloading music and film, create your own music and theatre, in live performance
  • Instead of taking photos, draw, paint, sculpt
  • Instead of blogging, write a journal, and meet in your community and share stories and ideas, cook together, rant, organize, build something together
  • Instead of playing online games, organize a real-space scavenger hunt, eco-walk, or bicycle rallye
  • Instead of taking online courses, unschool yourself in your own community, and learn about your place… or show/teach others what you know (including, most importantly, teaching children how to think and learn for themselves)
  • Instead of organizing online petitions and complaining online about the state of the world, go visit your local politician, get involved in community activities that make a difference (disrupt, show your outrage, satirize, or create something better)
  • Instead of looking for health information online, set up a local self-help health co-op, offering preventive care, self-diagnostic and holistic self-treatment information
  • Instead of porn… well, use your imagination
How well will you be prepared to adapt to the end of the Internet? Are you dependent on it, now, for critical information you need, for connection with those you love and those you seek to love, to work with, to partner with, and for what brings you joy or blessed escape? The biggest uses of the Internet today are music, porn, health information, games, and amateur photo/video sharing. To the extent you use the Internet for any of these things, do you have a way of doing them, with no or low technology, when the Internet’s gone?
And in the meantime, don’t take the Internet and all its ‘free’ offerings for granted. It’s a rare window of incredible opportunity, and it won’t last forever. Like everything else in our overwrought civilization, it’s unsustainable.
So blog like hell while you can.



Friday 11 October 2013

not all doctors are retards!

Postcard from the Frontline

 
 
 
 Peter Gray, MD.
I’m a small town family physician in Ontario, Canada with an unremarkable practice consisting mainly of obesity, diabetes, arthritis, hypertension, anxiety / depression and the “worried well” who want to know why they feel tired all the time.  Nothing unusual, nothing particularly glamorous.  One thing which is different about my practice is that I became aware of peak oil five years ago, and since then I have been struggling to integrate this knowledge into my medical practice and family life.

I didn’t intend this to happen.  In the summer of 2008 I did some background reading into peak oil, prompted by an article in our local newspaper.  The more I read, the more concerned I became.  It appeared that although oil wasn’t going to run out any time soon, the global production of oil would soon peak and then decline, if it hadn’t already done so.  This, I discovered, was likely to result in two problems.

Firstly, there will be a decreasing amount of net energy.  Unconventional oil, for example produced by “fracking” or from tar sands, uses a lot of energy to get it out of the ground compared to conventional oil, and therefore there is less energy left over to do useful work.  Solar and wind energy, although useful in a small way, can never replace the energy we get from oil because there is too great a disparity in energy density.  So the future touted by the mainstream media, that when the oil runs out we will all be driving around in electric cars, is simply bunk, because it’s not consistent with the laws of physics or geology.

Secondly, and more importantly, there will be a decreasing amount of food.  Oil is used in every stage of modern food production, from plowing, fertilizing, planting, pesticides and herbicides, harvesting and processing right through to distributing the finished product to the consumer.  As oil begins to get more expensive and go away, food will begin to get more expensive and go away, and ultimately, the people who depend on that food will have to go away.  How long this process will take, how rapidly it will occur, and what it will feel like to live through it, are somewhat unknowable, but it’s hard to see how this will end well.  Wind and solar power will not help us with the food problem, because you can’t get food out of a wind turbine or solar panel.

The next thing I discovered is that you rarely hear any of this from the mainstream media, economists or politicians, who are fixated on endless progress and infinite growth.  In fact, most of what we are told by mainstream sources about energy and the economy is simply wrong.  It took me about two years to get my head around this.

Once I had recovered from the initial shock of “peak oil awareness” I found that my perspective on my medical practice had changed, and in particular I became aware of some ethical dilemmas.  Bariatric surgery, for example.  This is surgery which is designed to make morbidly obese people lose weight, and it works by making the body less efficient at absorbing food.  This may be an advantage in times of abundant food, but if food becomes scarce, this surgery could be a liability or even a death sentence.  Ethically, patients undergoing these operations should be told of this risk so that they can give properly informed consent.  However, this is not in accordance with mainstream medical practice and might result in a complaint, so I send off my morbidly obese patients for their operations and leave it up to the surgeon to obtain whatever informed consent he thinks appropriate.

Another problematic area is pharmaceuticals.  Like many family physicians, we allow pharmaceutical reps to come to our office and present their latest products in return for giving us all a free lunch (it is said that there is no such thing as a free lunch, but our office staff think differently).  When I first became peak oil aware, I used to ask the reps how their products were manufactured and what raw materials were used.  I soon found out that they have a fairly limited script for their presentations, and this is not part of the script.  None of them knew where their products came from.  They all promised to find out from their head office and let me know, but none of them ever did.  I suspect that most modern pharmaceuticals are manufactured from oil-based chemical feedstocks using processes which cannot be replicated outside a large chemical plant, which would make home-based production of essential pharmaceuticals like insulin almost impossible.

Herbal medicines seem to hold out more promise in a post-peak world.  I have tried to educate myself about basic herbal medicines, but here too I ran into some ethical dilemmas.  For symptom relief, there are a number of herbal medicines which have been shown in some clinical trials to have some effect: valerian for insomnia and black cohosh for menopausal symptoms, for example.  If patients ask me about herbal medicines for their symptoms, I feel fairly comfortable recommending these, because if they don’t work, the worst that results for the patient is discomfort.    

It is more difficult recommending alternative treatments for serious or life threatening conditions.  For example, there is some evidence from controlled trials that ginseng is effective at relieving the symptoms of ischemic heart disease.  However, if I were to treat an angina patient with ginseng and something went wrong, the malpractice lawyers and medical licensing board would be crawling over my charts with a microscope demanding to know what on earth I was thinking of.  Unfortunately, this means that we will not be able to use many of these herbal medicines in routine medical practice until the pharmaceutical alternatives are no longer available, which is not really the ideal time to start learning.

Like most family physicians, a large part of my practice consists of prescribing antidepressants, tranquillizers and hypnotics to people with chronic low-grade anxiety, depression and insomnia.  It is difficult to get accurate estimates of the prevalence of use of these drugs, but possibly about a quarter of the population of North America takes one or more of these drugs at any one time.  I have often wondered why this is so.  One possible explanation is that people feel a cognitive dissonance in today’s society which makes them feel psychologically uncomfortable.  I feel the cognitive dissonance too, when the words spoken by politicians and economists are not consistent with the laws of physics and arithmetic or with objective reality.  I manage my dissonance by reading and listening to alternative sources of information, for example blogs and podcasts.  These present and explain a view of the world which is (to my mind) more consistent with reality and reassure me that I am not alone.

However, if you don’t have access to these alternative information sources, and all you have is the mainstream narrative, I can see how someone might have a vague feeling that something is wrong and that something bad is going to happen without being able to articulate what it is, and that these (normal) feelings might be misdiagnosed as “generalized anxiety disorder” or “depression” and treated with pharmaceuticals. 

I spend most of my days in my medical office moving pixels around a computer screen and ordering tests and referrals, but I can see that in the future, this may not be a viable business model and that something more hands-on may be required.  I have therefore assembled a library of information about how to deliver babies, pull teeth, set fractures and perform all sorts of other medical procedures which were familiar to our predecessors but which we have largely lost the skills to do.  I wonder if I will ever be called upon to use them.

And finally, following the airline principle of “put on your own oxygen mask before helping others”, I have been paying attention to personal and family preparation.  I have found the advice offered by the survivalist community helpful.  I don’t agree with all survivalist philosophy (for example, I am not planning to collect an arsenal of guns), but many of the principles they advocate make good common sense, for example, having backup sources of food, water and energy for heating and cooking in case your primary sources fail, paying off your debts, and keeping some cash on hand in case the banking / credit card system fails.

I have been involving my children (aged between 6 and 12) in simple and fun vegetable gardening projects, on the basis that in the latter part of the 21st century, obtaining food may become more important to survival than having a university degree, so they might as well learn the basics now.  My 12 year old has surprised me by telling me that she thinks that because of coming food shortages, there will be far fewer people at the end of the 21st century than there are now.  This isn’t because I have told her – she just figured it out for herself.  If a 12 year old can figure this out, maybe when our politicians grow up they will be able to do it too.

Thursday 10 October 2013

exactly!

Post Carbon Institute Calls on Environmentalists to Embrace Post-Growth Economics Wednesday, 09 October 2013 11:00 By Candice Bernd, Truthout | Report
  • Rob Hopkins.Rob Hopkins, founder of the Transition Network. (Photo: Transition Network / Flickr)A new policy paper from the Post Carbon Institute, a nonprofit think tank, argues the environmental movement must embrace what the authors have deemed a "new normal" of declining economic growth while building solidarity with the so-called new economy movement, emphasizing community-based, sustainable solutions in an era of globalization.
The paper, "Climate After Growth," was cowritten by Post Carbon Institute’s executive director, Asher Miller and Rob Hopkins, founder of the Transition Network, which supports community-led responses to climate change and helps to build strong, sustainable local economies.

The paper hopes to put to rest the false dichotomy between the imperative of economic growth over environmental protection once and for all by making the case that the over-arching paradigm of economic growth is coming to an end in any case, regardless of the ongoing climate crisis.

"There’s an opportunity for environmental groups and others to offer up an alternative, and that alternative, we argue, could be emphasizing community resilience," Miller told Truthout. "If we can address climate issues while improving quality of life, we can build resilience, which we need to do; we can reduce our dependence on fossil fuels; and we can offer up a different way of creating goods and well-being that aren’t relying upon globalized [economic] growth."

By community resilience, Miller and Hopkins are referring to the ability of a community to "bounce back from disruption to a normal state of being," according to the paper. The amount of resilience in a community is defined by the amount of change the community can undergo and still retain its basic structure, the degree to which the community can self-organize and the ability of the community to build the capacity for learning and adaption.  

The authors argue the concept of community resilience will become more popular as environmental shocks to economic systems and local communities become more commonplace heading into another new normal - an era of frequent extreme weather events caused by climate change.

The authors don’t believe that any meaningful climate policy can be enacted while elected officials continue to prioritize economic growth above all else, and they also doubt that government efforts to stimulate the economy can be successful because there has been a more fundamental shift in the global economy.

Miller and Hopkins argue that without programs like the Federal Reserve’s quantitative easing, the US economy would be in a "tailspin" and that the argument between austerity or stimulus as a means of getting back to sustained economic growth is now beside the point:
Unfortunately, it’s taking more and more debt to create each dollar of growth in the US - from $1.74 in the 1970s to $5.67 in the 2000s. The World Economic Forum projects that global credit will need to nearly double by 2020 - from $109 trillion in 2009 to $213 trillion - just to maintain the current, low level of GDP growth.
How long can this be maintained before the other shoe drops - massive defaults, lending dries up, or "haircuts" become mandatory? In September 2013 William White, the former chief economist of the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) - famous for being the only head of a major global institution who foresaw the 2007/2008 global banking crisis - warned that exuberance in the credit markets "looks to me like 2007 all over again, but even worse." According to the BIS, the share of "leveraged loans" (those used by the weakest borrowers) has jumped to 45 percent of all loans - 10 percent higher than in the peak of the bubble in 2007 to 2008.
A major reason the US economy can never get back to an era of sustained growth in the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is because we have come up against the end of the era of cheap energy.
As the authors cite, oil fields are declining at an average rate of 4 million barrels per day, which must be replaced each year just to maintain current levels of oil production. Those traditional oil fields are being replaced with expensive and risky forms of extraction, such as hydraulic fracturing and deepwater drilling to reach less conventional forms of energy such as shale gas and Canadian tar sands.

"What we’re putting out to environmental NGOs . . . is that we don’t necessarily expect people to change their strategies or change their communication. What we want is just for them to try to internalize these new realities and recognize that whether or not they’re talking about the end of economic growth publicly, that is what we’re dealing with."

Miller and Hopkins hope the small, but growing, new economy movement can get a boost from the well-established environmental movement in what they see as a practical path forward in a hectic future that will be defined by the "new normals," which the authors have outlined in the paper.
The ongoing divestment campaign, which pressures universities, churches, cities and business leaders to divest their stock holdings from the top 200 fossil fuel companies, was an example the authors mention of a way the environmental movement could build the connection between strong local economies and sustainability issues. The divestment campaign has been championed by 350.org and student leaders on college campuses across the nation.

The authors suggest that the campaign could not only urge leaders to divest their shares from the fossil fuel industry, but reinvest those shares in community resilience efforts, such as community-owned renewable energy projects, which need the capital.

"It is more resilient and creates a benefit for communities when there’s renewable energy projects that are on a smaller-scale; they’re distributed, they’re owned by the community and they’re appropriate to that ecosystem, the ecology of the community that they’re in," Miller said.
But the reinvestment strategy is just one small step in connecting the environmental movement to efforts to create resilient local economic measures. The burgeoning community resilience movement is still working to build its capacity and network, according to the authors.

But what could really give the new economy movement the platform it needs to be successful, the authors say, is for leaders in the climate justice community to acknowledge the "elephant in the room" - that the economic growth paradigm is coming to an end in the 21st century. 

Friday 13 September 2013

omega mail


The Daily Mail, to those of you that don't know it, is a rather bland comic for adults with learning difficulties. It rarely resorts to using words of more than one syllable, and paints a peculiar view of the world which seems to have absolutely no relation to reality. It's policy is socialism, intolerance and ignorance, and it embraces these concepts with an enthusiasm that is breathtaking.

It detests its readers. It considers them to be stupid and scared. It assumes they never interact with the world beyond twitching the curtains.

And what a world it paints! Criminals (usually foreign) lurk in every corner, the country has lost its way, politicians merely exist to make things worse, teenagers and the workshy are stealing their money ... and they are coming for you! Every real and imagined danger is built up to hysterical daftness, they want you to stay indoors and never go out.

Frightening people is what they do. But they frighten about all the wrong things. The things people SHOULD be frightened about they pretend isn't happening.

Their latest mad stunt is to claim that the world is COOLING down. This is based on a purely spurious figure (for ONE summer!!) that suggests the Arctic ice cap isn't melting quite so quickly as it has been, to them this means that we are heading to another Ice Age!! This rubbish is actually published by them, who knows, some people may even believe it!

Of course none of this stops the ice melting. Whilst the area of ice may be a little larger than last year, it's volume continues to decline. It has been doing that for years.

Now think about this. One (false) reading and the Mail immediately jumps to the conclusion that the world is cooling. Yet years of figures going the other way is irrelevant. You couldn't make it up!

Thursday 12 September 2013

chutney first!

 
A few months ago we bought an expensive tomato plant (£4.99!) which was on a grafted root 'for higher yield'. For the first week or two we thought we'd been sold a dummy as it really struggled, but
soon it flourished and now has about 400 fruits - small plum tomatoes. The trouble is they were ripening faster than we could eat them so we needed a solution. Chutney! I've never made chutney (or anything else much) before, but I thought I'd give it a try.

Growing your own is only part of the process of becoming food self sufficient. You also need to know how to preserve stuff to get you through the winter. Pickling, drying, storing, smoking ... chutney. And the time to learn is now, so you can keep practising until you get it right! And of course if it goes wrong for now at least there's always the local shop to buy from ...

 
I picked 750g of the tomatoes, all the red ones in fact.

 
Chopped 'em.

 
Then to our cooking apple tree that's fruited for the first time this year, and picked 5.



Peeled!
 
 
Supermarket ingredients added! Raisins, muscovado sugar, green pepper, onion and cyder vinegar.

 
Boil for 40 minutes - great fun!

 
Then into the Kilner jar!
 
Success - and if I can do it anyone can!

Wednesday 11 September 2013

more energy wasted ...

 
There's no real argument over fracking. It is simply an act of desperation that governments are hoping will muddy the energy waters (in more ways than one) whilst using up scarce energy resources even more quickly.
 
I've never heard so much bullshit about anything - which suggests that governments worldwide are REALLY scared, for why else would they do this?
 
Fracking WON'T add a single litre of energy to world supplies, it will REDUCE what remaining energy there is. Why? Simple, fracked oil and gas is a last resort. Had it ever been a sensible energy source it would have been exploited decades ago. We are WASTING good energy to get at BAD, it makes no sense at all. The amount of conventional energy used to get this stuff out will, when all the transportation, equipment, policing, production and infrastructure investment energy costs are taken into account (which would be ZERO if we left the muck in the ground) far exceed any actual product that is got out. Basically fracking is a vanity project only viable in an age of easy and cheap energy, it would die an instant death in a world where net energy (EROEI) is a widely understood concept.
 
Fracking WON'T reduce the cost of energy. It will increase it. The costs in both money and energy of drilling at Balcombe have been enormous and not a single drop of oil or gas has been produced - and NEVER will be! Even if some wells do produce oil and gas they will simply be sold on the world market which is currently seeing conventional oil and gas deplete, ALL energy costs are tied to the cost of oil in any case. To suggest that some sort of bucolic socialist patriotic autarkhic secondary market in fracked oil and gas will develop (British gas and oil for British volk!) just shows how out of touch with reality Cameron and our government are. They take us for idiots. Daily Mail and Sun readers may be, but the rest of us aren't!
 
Fracking WILL damage communities, water supplies, food supplies, air quality and social relations.
 
Fracking WILL increase the cost of energy and the speed of climate change. It will also deplete energy sources more quickly.
 
The question has to be asked - what is so wrong in the world that any government or company would consider exploiting this wasteful, expensive, polluting muck?



Friday 30 August 2013

hands up who likes things!

The high price of materialism

shopping carts
Photo: HelloImNik/Flickr.
A war on climate change is a war on materialism, plain and simple. The carbon pollution spewing out of our power plants and tail pipes is a natural byproduct of the monstrous engine of economic growth we have built, an engine that exists solely to satisfy the demand our materialism creates. Indeed this demand is so great that if everyone in the world lived like Americans, we’d need 4 whole Earths worth of stuff to satisfy it. Yet despite the absurdity in that statement, that’s exactly what’s happening as other nations race to emulate our lifestyle of ravenous consumerism. Therefore taming this beast is absolutely crucial in the fight against climate change.
And yet, it’s sometimes difficult to even see consumption as the problem, since in the moment buying things feels so good! It doesn’t help that everywhere we look there’s advertising, that siren song of consumption, reinforcing our baser instincts. We see these messages of Eat! Buy! Consume!  on television, on websites, public bathrooms and even our children’s schools. It is baked in to the very fabric of our society, so much so that we hardly notice it any more. Beyond mere purchases, this drumbeat of materialism also influences the way we organize our lives. We make fundamental life decisions about where we live, where we work, what we do, and how we raise our children, all to maximize income so we can buy more stuff — because that’s what our culture teaches us to value.
The following video (5:37 long), for which this post is named, does a brilliant job of explaining all of this with visual flair:

To one degree or another, we’ve all internalized this narrative of “achieve a better life through buying things.” No one is immune, it’s our culture…as much a part of our daily lives as the air we breathe or the water we drink.
The irony is that this narrative is demonstrably false. This cultural story about happiness gets told to us every day, yet no matter how hard we try it always fails us. Research consistently shows that income raises happiness up to a point (about $75,000), but after that makes no appreciable difference, and can even go down. Depression, anxiety, and substance abuse are all more prevalent in the rich. So when you think about the happy life you’ll have and who you should emulate, don’t think of Johnny Wall Street, think of Mort the Mailman.
Scientific studies show that materialism:
But there’s good news for sufferers of acute materialist syndrome: it will soon end! Consumerism will disappear for the simple reason that it’s unsustainable — and things that are unsustainable eventually stop.
The bad news is: we’re not ready for it. Western civilization is built on this story of consumerism…as this story begins to break down, so too will the societal systems we’ve built on top of it. Rewriting our entire cultural narrative and devising new systems for economics, governance and energy would be a great challenge even in quiet times. And unfortunately the next few decades will be anything but quiet, filled with turmoil and suffering brought on by climate change.
history
If you have the time, I highly recommend this video as well, which puts the whole thing in a more historical context (click image to watch).
Lest you begin to despair, there is one more bit of good news: we know how to fix this problem. Humans are a social species: it’s never been our goods that made us happy, but rather our relationships with other people. Again science has produced mountains of data proving this, but do you really need it? Deep inside we already know. After all, what is watching an idiotic sitcom compared to watching your children play? What’s better, the envy your new purse inspires or having people respect you for who you really are?
The end of consumerism will be the birth of a new age of human social connectedness, because at the end of the day that’s what really makes us happy.
Reposted from original article at Science Pope.
- See more at: http://transitionvoice.com/2013/08/the-high-price-of-materialism/#sthash.uLghhQOt.dpuf