We Regret to Inform You…
Sharon April 22nd, 2008
When climate change and peak oil thinkers run out of other things to worry about, there’s always the endless, inevitable debates about whether we are facing a “fast crash” or a “slow grind.” And I admit, I’m worried about my fellow environmentalists – because I think they are about to lose their favorite distraction. When no one was looking, we got an answer. Fast crash wins. And we’re in it now.
Wait a minute, you argue – that’s not right. If we were in a fast crash we’d be well on our way to living in a Kunstler novel. But we’ve still got cars, we’ve got food, things are slowing down, but at worst this looks like a slow grind – but the crazy lady at the blog is saying fast crash?!?!?
Before you argue with me (and you are both welcome and encouraged to), I’d like to post something a bit out of my usual style – it is simply a description of what has happened with food and energy in the last year – that’s all it is. Then tell me what you think – because it wasn’t until I began to write this introduction to the present food situation that I suddenly was struck by the fact that even a fast crash doesn’t always look fast when you live it – new normals arise and it turns out we assimilate faster than we panic.
So here we are – the “We regret to inform you that what you have imagined to be “civilization” is now falling apart” post. See if it strikes you the way it struck me.
I would also note two things. The first is that the general political consensus is that neither the food nor energy crisis will do anything but grow more acute anytime soon – we’re really in the early stages. And that this only covers the first 4 months of 2008.
_______________________________________________________
In early 2008, the world’s food and energy train came off the rails. What was startling was that it didn’t happen either gradually or in a linear way - instead, things simply fell apart at an astounding rate, faster than anyone could have predicted without being accused of lunacy.
It started with biofuels and growing meat consumption rates. They drove the price of staple grains up at astounding rates. In 2007, overall inflation for food was at 18%, which created a new class of hungry, but that was just the tip of the iceberg. In 2008, the month to month inflation was higher than 2007′s annual inflation. At that rate, the price of food overall was set to double every other year. Rice, the staple of almost half the world’s population rose 147%, while wheat grew 25% in just one day. Price rises were inequitable (as was everything else) so while rice prices rose 30% in rich world nations like the US, Haitian rice prices rose 300%.
Haiti was an early canary in the hunger coal mine. Desperately poor, by early 2008, tens of thousands of impoverished Haitians were priced entirely out of the market for rice and other staples, and were reduced to eating “cookies” made of nutrient rich mud, vegetable shortening and salt to quiet their hunger pangs. Women stood on the street, offering their children to any reasonably well fed passerby, saying “Please, pick, take one and feed them.” Thousands of Haitians marched on Port Au Prince, yelling, “We’re hungry.” And indeed, the Haitian government was complicit, allowing food relief to rot on the wharves. But Haiti was just the start.
After riots over long bread lines threatened to destabilize Egypt, the Egyptian government set the army to baking bread for the hungry. Forty nations either stopped exporting grains or raised tariffs to make costs prohibitive. Food prices rose precipitiously as importing nations began to struggle to meet rising hunger. The UN warned that 33 nations were in danger of destabilizing, and the list included major powers including Pakistan, Mexico, North Korea India, Egypt and South Africa. Many of these hold nuclear weapons.
The crisis didn’t stop among the already-poor, however. An article in The Economist reported that the crisis extended well into the middle class – Joanna Sheeran, director of the World Food Project explained, “For the middle classes,…it means cutting out medical care. For those on $2 a day, it means cutting out meat and taking the children out of school. For those on $1 a day, it means cutting out meat and vegetables and eating only cereals. And for those on 50 cents a day, it means total disaster.”
Up to 100 million people who had managed to raise their incomes above $2 a day found themselves inexorably drawn back to the world poverty level, while millions of those who called themselves “middle class” began, slowly, to realize that they were no such thing. Reports noted that many of the supposed middle class in rich world nations were actually the working poor who had overextended their credit to keep up appearances. And the appearances – and credit access – were fraying
In 2007, a major American newspaper reported the growing problem of seasonal malnutrition affecting poor children in the Northern US – the rising price of heating oil meant that lower class families were struggling to put on the table. Hungry, low weight children were unable to maintain their body temperature in chilly houses, and a vicious circle of illness, hunger and desperation ensued. Malnutrition bellies began to be regularly seen by pediatricians treating the urban poor in cold climates.
Shortages were a chronic problem in the poor world, but by early spring of 2008, they began to arrive in the rich world – despite Japan’s deep pockets, a shortage of butter and wheat reminded the rich world of its dependence on food import. Many of the supply problems were due to climate change and energy issues, as Australian dairy farmers struggled with high grain prices and the extended drought that destroyed their pastures.
Following up on anecdotal reports of limits at bulk warehouse stores, in late April of 2008 rationing went official. Many Costco stores were limiting purchases of flour, rice, cooking oil and other staples to avoid shortages – and the stores tracked purchases electronically to prevent customers from visiting other Costco stores. This was the first example of food rationing, but probably not the last – at least one financial analyst was predicting corn shortages in the fall of 2008.
The energy train and the food train were inextricably linked, and indeed directly (as the costs of diesel rose rapidly) and indirectly (rising energy costs created the biofuels boom) drove the food crisis. They were linked in other, complex ways as well – the housing collapse that threatened to plunge Europe and the US into a major depression was in part due to the high costs of commuting from suburban infrastructure. Exurban housing collapsed hardest, while housing closer to cities remained desirable – for a while.
While the food crisis in the poor world made headlines, the energy crisis there went almost unnoticed. <ore and more poorer nations simply could not afford to import oil and other fossil fuels, and began to slowly but steadily lose the benefits of fossil fuels. Nations suffered shortages of gas, electricity and coal. Tajikistan, experiencing a record cold winter found itself with inadequate supplies of heating oil and a humanitarian crisis. South African coal supplies were so short that electricity generation dropped back to intermittency.
Industrial agriculture, described as “the process of turning oil into food” began to struggle to keep yields up to match growing demand. Yield increases fell back steadily, with more and more investment of energy (and higher costs for poor farmers trying to keep yields up). Yield increases, which had been at 6% annually from the 1960s through the 1990s fell to 1-2%, against rapidly rising demand. Climate change threatened to further reduce yields in already stressed poor nations – Bangladesh struggled with repeated climate change linked flooding, the Sahelian African countries with growing drought, China with desertification.
All future indications were that both food and energy supplies would fail to keep up with demand. Unchecked (the only kind we’ve got) climate change is expected to reduce rice yields by up to 30%, and food production in the already starving Sahel is expected to be reduced by half. GMOs, touted as a solution, have yet to produce even slightly higher yields. Arable land is disappearing under growth, while aquifers are heavily depleted – 30% of the world’s grain production comes from irrigated land that is expected to lose its water supply in the next decades.
Meanwhile the costs of fossil fueled agricultural skyrocketed, with Potash rising by 300% in less than a year. What should have been a boom for farmers was actually the beginning of an increasingly precarious spiral of high prices, high indebtedness and market volatility. Agricultural indebtedness rose dramatically.
Meanwhile, the ability of nations to transport food supplies began to be called into question. Early trucker protests were intermittent and largely ineffective, but real predictions of diesel shortages and a shortage of refining capacity made it a real possibility that food might not reach store shelves.
And so how does the story end? If you were reading this in a history book, what ending would you expect to see? Because just because the crash doesn’t quite read like a post apocalyptic novel doesn’t mean that we aren’t the new Po-Apoc (like Po-Mo, only darker) generation.
Sharon
- food , future , natural gas , oil
- Comments(175)
Megan, I feel the same way you do. My husband is taking steps to arm us even more than we were before, which I’m opposed to (and which makes for some interesting debates around the hosue), but I also generally agree with Greenpa’s point. I am personally in the midst of trying to reconcile these two positions, as it sounds like you are, and I must admit it’s difficult. I hope you are able to work it out in a way that you’re comfortable with.
Along these same lines, I would also like to suggest that now, more than ever, is the time to get to know people. This is something that younger generations like mine have blown off in favor of our fenced-in, insulated, no face-to-face contact lives. My husband and I have recently begun learning how beneficial it can be to cultivate real relationships with as many people as possible. We’ve met and gotten to know people whose skills and knowledge are invaluable to us, and often ours are to them.
I believe that this is how we will ultimately survive. The more we really know other people, the more we can pool our skills, knowledge and abilities for the greater good. Plus, while I can’t account for what people might do in a time of crisis, I have to believe that if you know your neighbors well and have a history of working with them rather than against them, it can’t help but slow the rise of violence at least a bit. Don’t wait. Get to know people personally (not online). Find out what they know. SHARE what you know. Help each other out. It’s already paying off in spades for us.
Maybe it’s just the nature of some of the other sites I frequent, but this looks like slow collapse to me! Fast collapse would be, say, EMP taking down the power grid completely, for example. Life as we know it gone within a matter of a couple days or hours.
To me, this is slow. There’s enough time to convince people to plant a few jerusalem artichokes in their gardens this summer. There’s still enough time for folks who are medicine-dependent to realize there’s a problem and learn what herbs can be substituted or perhaps stock up on their particular medicine or make the lifestyle changes that would keep them from having to take medicines at all. There’s still bikes in the store, and folks can still buy one. There’s time to chop wood and get that old woodstove hauled back in from the shed and set up before winter.
Jase, are you really trying to say that an incompetent or fanatic, or simple lack of maitainance can’t take down a nuclear plant? It’s well worth remembering that the nuclear plant accidents we have had were caused by people doing stupid stuff. What happens if the nuclear maintanance guys decide they’d rather go grow food so they can eat than keep the power plant up and running? Electricity’s not the only problem, after all, fuel for transportation is, too. I don’t think anyone here is advocating more coal-burning plants, but I do think we should think about decommissioning the nuclear plants we have and the best, fast, safe way to do so if need be (and maybe post the instructions in large type by the front doors): I’ve seen somewhere recently that within seven to fifteen years of no/insufficient maintanance they would start having issues. No, I don’t have a cite. They’d still be doing better than the average car at that rate, though.
Megan, most of the world is already that way. Just we privilaged first-worlders haven’t had to deal with it recently. The bad guys may want your stuff, or maybe they’ll just want you. Personally, I’d rather shoot the aspiring rapist/torturer, but then I have children, and judging from the first hand accounts of civil wars/revolutions I’ve heard, the monsters don’t get any nicer with time, so I look at that possibility as not just protecting my kids, but protecting everyone else’s kids. Maybe they just want your stuff this time, but is it worth risking if you can stop them before they go further?
The quickest way to solve the global food crisis is for those in the first-world economies to significantly reduce their egg, dairy and meat consumption. There is enough grain to go around for six and a half billion people – but if several billion of those people take seven pounds of grain and produce one pound of meat, then there isn’t enough to go around.
Will a person in the first-world give up meat so someone on the other side of the planet can eat? Not likely.
Hoarding by grain-exporting countries, pillaging of third-world cities, followed by the breakdown of the global supply chain is the likely scenario. Peak oil won’t be necessary for the fall – simple fear and greed in the face of an easily-remedied food shortage will do the trick.
Tara,
You hit it right on the nose! I’m already doing just that. I love my neighbors. LOVE them. We all help each other out and freely share our tools, lend things, help fix cars, and keep an eye on each other. I live in one of the most active neighborhoods in my town as far as community awareness and such, in a really great town. I think that is why I said what I did. If MY area is resorting to guns and violence, it’s really the end of all things. Living to see harm come to my neighbors or my community would be so devastating to me, I just can’t imagine it and don’t want to. I’d rather be the first to go. Cowardly? Probably.
One more peep on the nuclear thing, then out, for me.
The major mistake all engineers make is “no, that wasn’t an engineering problem- it was human incompetence.”
Yes? Your building still fell down. Because one of the design parameters didn’t fit the real world. WHICH INCLUDES INCOMPETENT HUMANS – always.
Are you telling me Chernobyl was the last time anyone will do anything incompetent?
For very specific example: US Navy- screwed up
This story- where the regular inspections of a nuclear reactor on board a sub were- NOT DONE- for months- then records were FAKED – then covered up- then the cover up covered up – did not hit the news really big. But if the US Navy can’t run reactors right- just how eager are we to have civilians in Serbia- etc- running them? For hundreds of years?
It’s not the physics – it’s the humans.
And breeders make plutonium. I know some folks in Pakistan who would love to have it more available.
Love your comment about getting to know your neighbors, Tara. Part of me would love to move to my own 5 acres, but most of me is happy to stay put in my wonderful neighborhood in my small city surrounded by farmland here in Central MN. I think we have the best world! (Though I would love the quiet of country life, I think…)
In our neighborhood, particularly in the few blocks around us, we all know each other by name. We get together regularly for parties, most impromptu like backyard fire evenings, but some are planned and happen annually (4th of July, Fall Potluck, Holiday Progressive Dinner, etc.). We moved into this neighborhood four years ago, and to our amazement these things have been happening here for years. We felt like we’d moved back to “Leave It To Beaver” land! And we thought we were buying the house because we liked the house. Ha! It’s the neighborhood that is the real value.
Other things we do…We informally share ladders and tools and cooking tips. Some neighbors have even had cooking parties in which the hosts demonstrate a favorite family recipe (pizza on the grill, pumpkin pie from actual pumpkins, to name a couple) and the guests make their own. And then everyone eats! One generous neighbor has the “block pick-up truck” that we are all free to borrow. We usually give him a 6-pack of beer after using it for hauling garden stuff or whatever, but he doesn’t care either way. My DH who grew up on a small apple orchard voluntarily prunes neighbors’ trees when they need it. Others watch the kids, or brew the beer or roast the coffee beans, or whatever. None of these things is required here; they just happen because it’s the way it is, the “spirit of the place” as it were.
It truly is remarkable here, and it gives me hope that if our community exists like this, there are others out there and THIS CAN HAPPEN ALL OVER AGAIN! (Sorry to shout–mainly just for emphasis.)
As for a gun, I don’t think you’ll find me with one. Like Megan, I’d rather you just shoot me. However, thinking of my kids…I don’t know what I’d do if they were threatened. I’ll have to keep thinking on it.
Peace, Lisa Z (BTW, I love all these comments today!)
Not entirely, no – the studies have shown that a jetliner couldn’t bust open a containment building, but I will concede that a group of fanatics could somehow fight their way inside, smash everything, and cause a meltdown.
Or they could just fly planes into buildings. That’s both more likely by many, many orders of magnitude and more damaging.
Also, no – the accidents we have haven’t been the result of people doing stupid things. Chernobyl was caused by the fact that the reactor design was – as known even then – almost ludicrously incompetent. It was practically designed to melt down. And Three Mile Island was an accident in a pneumatic line… that ended up with no loss of life or injury. If you’re referring to criticality accidents, well, yes, some people have done incredibly stupid things there. But people doing stupid things is nothing new – farmers get crushed thawing silos or poisoned by fertilizer, people walk into open elevator shafts. It’s part of life.
Again, why on earth would anyone think of decommissioning nuclear reactors? They work. They are currently in operation. They are cheap, clean and safe. We need such electricity now more than ever.
As for maintenance, what are these ‘issues’ you refer to? Without that it’s meaningless. Moreover, New York City would flood and start to literally fall apart on the same timespan without maintenance, with assuredly more drastic consequences, so you need much more context.
Greenpa – Your fire burned out of control and torched a forest! It was obviously defective in design, thus we must ban all fire! I mean, gosh – pointy sticks could hurt someone, they could fall on them or throw them at people. Better ban those too…
See any point previously made on the benefits versus costs, taking into account timeframes and probabilities.
First – unless you have data otherwise, it appears that there was no danger present. Second, holding up ‘Serbia’ as an example is ridiculous. You might as well look at (again) fire and say, “Well, if we give a flaming torch to a two-year old something bad might happen, so we better not.” It’s an illogical straw man.
And lastly, nuclear proliferation is one of the biggest straw men of them all. First, there are enough nuclear weapons floating around from the Soviet breakup that it’s not a new concern. Second, it takes a hell of a lot more to build a supercritical bomb than just a hunk of metal. You’d get more bang out of conventional bombing techniques or bioweapons. And lastly, MOX fuel and fast neutron reactors *do* reuse plutonium. Breeder reactors are just one link in the fuel cycle chain.
Bear in mind, too, that getting to know people doesn’t have to be limited to those in your neighborhood! Just in the last six or eight months, we’ve cultivated many worthwhile relationships with people that are some distance away – some as much as 50 or 60 miles. Don’t be afraid to get more personal with people you think you’ll never see again – that person you bought something from on craigslist, for example, maybe be a wealth of knowledge. Or, you may have something they need. We’re finding that as we seek out resources for gardening, raising livestock, sourcing local food, making veggie oil fuel, etc., we meet people circumstantially that it pays to stay in touch with!
So I went up to help my mom and sister at Sam’s club today—I really hate that place but that’s another issue. Anyway, the Sam’s club in Hickory, Nc is limiting customers to 4 units of bulk rice—Units were in 20lb or more. Thought it interesting.
Lisa Z – “As for a gun, I don’t think you’ll find me with one. Like Megan, I’d rather you just shoot me. However, thinking of my kids…I don’t know what I’d do if they were threatened. ”
Yep, that’s the problem. Two things-
I totally agree about neighbors. They’re critical, and will save your butt.
They also, inevitably, plug you into the wider community- they know, and blather with, people you don’t. Hence, news spreads.
It can be VERY useful for the local community to know you have good weapons. It will slow down the scum, a little.
And it WAS, as it turned out, “neighbors” who stole our pickup after the flood last fall. Not ALL of them are your buddies!
Might have helped if more people in the local area thought we were cranky and ready to shoot.
This stuff is not fun. But think of the kids. Talk to your family.
Practical solutions have to take into account human beliefs, even irrational human beliefs.
Americans are not going to give up meat, egg, and dairy quickly. It is too engrained in our culture. You can slowly chip away at the culture and bring more and more people over to the vegetarian or low-consumption side. But there is not the political will, unity, or agreement to change things quickly. It may be that Americans will not be able to afford much meat, egg, and dairy, and will have to do without whether they want it or not, as Cuba found involuntary vegetarianism in the 90s. But that is likely to make them status symbols and symbols of better times, and to increase longing for them. Trying to convince people to voluntarily reduce consumption of meat and dairy, or prepare them for involuntary shortages is sane, making plans that start “if all Americans just gave up meat and dairy…” is not. It is wishful thinking rather than planning.
The same is true of nuclear power. Too many Americans oppose it, whether for good reasons or bad reasons is irrelevant, there is simply not the political will to create a massive nuclear power plant building program in the US any time soon. Americans are more familiar with the downsides of nuclear power than the downsides of not having as much electricity as they’d like. We can argue which of these is worse, (certainly I’d rather like on a Amish farm lacking electricity than in the Chernobyl zone of exclusion, but that’s me) but that doesn’t change the fact that America does not have the political will to create a large scale nuclear program at this time. And it doesn’t even look like we are close to enough political will for that to me. “If America just began building nuclear power plants as quickly as possible” … is not planning, it is wishful thinking. “If our accounting rules were changed so that people bore the real environmental consequences of their choices on their balance sheets …” then things would be much better in many subtle ways, but we aren’t close to that either. “If (insert your favorite highly unlikely solution), then (things would be much better)” is often true, even though it is also irrelevant, and distracting from genuine pragmatic planning for coping with problems. It is worth occasionally mentioning these longshot possibilities in case they become plausible someday, and we can debate their merits if they ever become likely enough to worry about, but too much emphasis on them is usually a distraction. Or at least that’s how it seems to me.
-Brian M.
The community-building aspect of the future is an interesting conundrum to me. It seems like a good idea, and yet what I know about my neighbors doesn’t make me want to endear myself to them in any way. I live in a very mixed neighborhood that is partially gentrified, with an odd combination of garden-growin’ treehuggers and SUV-lovin’, high-life-livin’ consumerists. If they have to be part of my own personal Monkeysphere, I’m not sure what to think about that with regard to the future. Perhaps the best I can do is keep on trying to lead an environmentally responsible life in some meager way and engage in a little viral social change. Inspiring a neighborhood seems like a safer security option than arming myself against a mass of people I can’t hope to overcome no matter how many bullets I buy. There is always someone bigger and stronger and more weaponriffic than you are. Spending the rest of my life in some kind of bunkerhunker? No, don’t think so.
Jase, I happen to agree with your analysis regarding nuclear power, although I’d like to see it used in combination with multiple energy-producing technologies that take personal homes off the grid and encourage reduced power use overall. We waste energy because it’s easy to do so. If every household was responsible for producing the power it used, I think that would bring about some much-needed lifestyle changes. Large-scale power produced by nuclear plants could be focused on essential services, mass transportation and the like, which require a far greater energy input than can currently be provided by other technologies.
And you know, Jase, I’d swear that you and I know each other. The anonymity of the net and all of that, but if you were a maker of a certain beverage moving to a certain state that came to a certain couple’s holiday party and partook mightily of a cheese board, well, then we do. And if you’re not, then . . . I guess we don’t!
The biggest trouble in our world is our system of education. For the last 25 years we have forced our young to regard work as an evil to be avoided at all cost (robots) hence practical thinking has vanished. Also the thousands of unnecessary law obligations to suit an extreme minority has dumbed down populations to the point where individual responsibility has all but been forgotten.(sue everyone in favor of self)
Climate change or not, the decisions made by the mega rich to get control of yet more money for no other reason than the THRILL OF THE KILL, lost sight of the fact that nature abhors force.
Man is a lazy animal and for thousand of years has striven to make anyone else a slave so they can live without work.
The endless wars creating weapons so one can kill from a distance without being seen are devoting more resources to death than to life and no one that I know of is opposing this.
Note the success of Hillary Clinton after telling everyone she will obliterate Iran if …….)
It is obvious that the collective death wish is in play here. (if you have to die,why not have some fun killing others before their time)
This is true for the individual as well as a collection of individuals called a nation.
In the final analysis we are all dancing to the moods of King SOL the all seeing eye.When it gets tired of all the needles slaughter, it heats up a little and most of us will die so have fun killing your neighbour for a mouthful of food.
Ren Berghuis
First of all, dismissing something by saying that for ‘good reasons or bad reasons’ people don’t like it is ridiculous. Would you react the same way if a majority of Americans had shrugged at conservation and left the lights on, the faucet running, and all bought Hummers? The goodness or badness of the reasons is irrelevant, eh?
There’s a distinct difference, too, between longshot possibility as in ‘one in a million chance’, and longshot possibility as in ‘this will absolutely work if we do it, but nobody will want to.’ Nuclear power is the solution. It is plausible, deployable, economical, ecologically sound, and effective today, right now.
Thus the very first thing I said about calling the elected officials, writing them to support nuclear power. Dismissing it because a contingent of ignorant people – as you yourself called them in so many words, saying that they aren’t familiar with the fundamental facts of the issue – doesn’t like it for flawed, emotional and sensationalistic grounds is a Pyrrhic triumph of irrationality and cowardice over any hope for a better tomorrow.
I spoke with one of the managers in the Leesburg VA Costco this afternoon. The Costco stores in Virginia are now rationing rice but have not started rationing flour, cooking oil, or other foods yet. Our store had four pallets of 50 lb and 25 lb bags of rice that were about 1/3 to 1/2 full.
But is that rationing because they don’t have rice and don’t foresee getting any more, or because people are panicking and buying rice because they think there’s a panic? Everyone wants to get theirs, you know? Heaven forfend that anyone in this country is ever told they can’t have something! I live in hurricane country and you should see what people will buy when the media ramps up and starts freaking people out. Every time, I pity the store managers that have to deal with the crazy-eyed, shrieking animals that, at any other time, would be perfectly normal customers. What do you mean I can’t buy Spam????
Four pallets of such huge bags of rice! How long would that have sat in your Costco unsold if there had never been a vague article in some obscure newspaper saying that someone else said a store in their area was rationing, and that story got sent zinging around the InterTubes? Just wondering.
I found this today … a top headline on the CBC news site (that’s Canadian Broadcasting Corporation).
http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2008/04/23/worldvision-cut.html
Quote:
World Vision says soaring food costs will force it to cut 1.5 million people from the roster of 7.5 million it fed last year, one-third of them children who rely on the organization’s aid to survive.
The rising cost of oil and fertilizer, more fields being used to produce corn for ethanol, drought in Australia and changing food consumption patterns have all contributed to the current crisis, Toycen said.
[...] Sharon Astyk: It’s Official, We Are Now in a Fast Crash Scenario http://sharonastyk.com/2008/04/22/we-regret-to-inform-you/ [...]
Yes, Chernobyl had design issues, but wasn’t it a human pulling out the things that dampened the reaction that was the direct cause of the meltdown? It’s been about twelve years since I was studying up on Chernobyl, and it’s not data I use daily, but that’s my recollection.
It’s not that I couldn’t start a forest fire with a match, it’s that the forest fire can’t possibly release the same sort of contamination, effecting the same sort of area with the same sort of long term effects. When a forest fire burns out, that’s it, stuff starts growing again as soon as it rains. Radiation lingers a long time.
You compare to New York in terms of maintanance, what makes you think NYC will exist in its present form ten years from now? As fuel prices climb, it is more expensive to deliver food to the city. It is also more expensive to produce the food–not only fertilizers and pesticides, but tractor fuel, airplane fuel, etc. Seed for most farms is delivered from elsewhere. People will leave the city, in hopes that there will be food elsewhere.
Nuclear power plants will not and cannot replace the fuel infrastructure. Maybe if we’d built them back in the sixties and gone for electric transportation, but it’s a little late now. We don’t have the infrastructure for electricly powered transportation, and we don’t have the time to build it.
Why would one think about how to shut the power plants down? They are all getting older. Things that are older are more prone to mechanical failure. We had an electrical outage due to a transformer failure last winter–power was out for a day while the power company brought in a new transformer from wherever they keep them at. What if you have a part go bad in a power plant, any part, and there’s no fuel for the truck to bring in the replacement part from where it happens to be? Eventually you’ll go through whatever spares are locally stored, after all, given enough time. Or what if the storage space has been looted and the spare part damaged? If the plant’s partially or completely computerized, you do know the lifespan of a hard drive, right? And all the other computer components? We’re not talking decades, here. (How EMP hardened are nuclear power plants, anyway?)
Why should the information on how to shut it down be widely diseminated among the populations near the plant or placed prominently in the plant? Because if we have any pandemic or epidemic, we could very easily loose the people who right now have this information stored in their brains (or even if the guy who knows how happens to be insulin dependent or warfarin dependent or what-have-you and the shipment is a few days too late). I don’t think it’s as simple as pushing an ‘off’ button, though if it is then we should certainly tell people. If there’s no food delivered to the area around the plant, and it’s not growing enough to sustain its population, then the folks who work there will leave.
I think you’re thinking that with sufficient nuclear power life as we currently experience it in the US will continue. And there’s a point at which it perhaps could have done so. Those of us who would consider turning off the nuclear plants are simply those who think we have passed that point in time, that it is just too late, that the combination of other factors–petroleum, wheat blight, economics, political machinations, the list is just about endless–has taken us too far down another path, and that there are no longer the resources to go back and choose a different road. (And of course those who think that nuclear is too dangerous a power to have in human hands in the first place favor closing the plants.)
People are so scared they are talking seriously about nuclear power and violence! I’m scared too; but I wish to point out that there are so many things we don’t need, that doing without these needless things would be enough to greatly soften the “collapse.” Some examples: When I was a child there was very little air conditioning, a huge energy drain. We were used to it –no problem. The Amish live without electricity or fossil fuels and I’m sure many enjoy life. Our current way of life is just not necessary. Before the industrial revolution people lived full, interesting and reasonably well fed lives. Better fed, indeed than many of our obese but malnourished Americans today.
The problem is not technical, but cultural. We can create a culture that is cooperative, practical and enjoyable. People are so afraid of losing hospitals and medicines. Keep in mind that both of these kill as well as cure. My mom died of a superbug caught in a hospital. We all must surrender to death eventually. It’s more important that children don’t starve than that we have plenty of CAT scans happening (which can cause cancer from the radiation). A cultural choice: (See if you feel shocked by this simple thing.) We can grow poppies and make tea to ease the worst of what disease brings, so fear not. There is also the rest of the huge natural pharmacy in herbal knowledge. Most of the diseases treated “industrially” are preventable: diabetes, cancer, heart disease. We stopped hearing about carcinogens about 20 years ago because they are impossible to avoid in normal modern life.
We are confronting a time of cultural and, for some, physical death and rebirth. This cycle is a normal part of life, in small and large ways. If you’ve ever been “mortified” (embarrassed) by something you did or said (we all have), finding yourself wrong in some way, you have experienced a little death and rebirth. Everyone wonders what can they do? The answer is: There is so much to learn and do! Stockpiling and gardening are good. But for what purpose ultimately? To survive just a little bit longer? Yes, in order to build new skills and knowledge to share. Our strong, brave young people are dying in a stupid war because they need jobs, a sense of belonging, structure, challenge, and meaning –something to live and die for. Let’s give them something else to believe in, to work on, to belong to, to live and die for!
As a species, we may perish from global warming. If so, so be it. Surrender in embracing reality is a beautiful, dignified choice. One thing for sure, linked as we are right now, we are confronting crisis as one world, as a species in its entirety. This is new. We are like someone headed for rock bottom in some kind of negativity. I hope and trust that, as a species, we will do the classic 180 degree flip into positivity –a cultural golden age. Yes, much will die. That’s utterly inevitable at this point, even desireable in some aspects. However, what will live? What do we love the most? Let’s stockpile that.
Shandy, not just obscure–I’ve seen articles about it on CNN, FOX, and the WSJ.
I do think people are buying who normally wouldn’t just because they saw it on the news. I hope some of my relatives are, anyway. I normally buy in those big sizes, but then I come from blizzard country, and a lot of folks do that round these parts. No Costco here, either, though.
Shandy and BoysMom, there didn’t seem to be a lot of folks trying to get to the rice, more folks walking by with perplexed expressions and asking what’s up with the rice? As I looked around me at the checkout most folks were buying things like disposable plates, cups, chips, and toilet paper. Oh, candy, lots of box mixes, etc. Shopping seemed down thru out that town and the malls had much fewer visitors then comparable days.
WHERE THERE IS NO INSIGHT, THE PEOPLE PERISH!
There are simply too many humans trying to survive on a planet of limited space and limited resources. Praying to the almighty male sky-god man in the dictatorship of heaven will NOT save us from being more clever than wise. Our very survival will depend on abandoning dogma and tribe-all-ego arrogance… and replace these vectors of ignorance and fear with common sense.
BoysMom, I hear you; I’ve seen the articles, too. But it you trace them back, they all have the same root in one short article in something called the New York Sun. That’s exactly what I’m talking about; the internet has an amazing power to take one thing and balloon it to an amazing level through nothing more than the power of repetition. If everyone is saying it, it must be a big deal.
But there is eye-witness Lisa seeing people wondering what the heck the big deal is. Which has to make you wonder if, as far as this moment in time goes, it really is a big deal in a country where people are not, in fact, living on a bowl of rice a day.
I’m not sure where I’m going with this, except to say that I tend to be cautious when the media get excited about something. I had an interesting conversation in Northern Ireland once about “riots” and our perception of what Americans thought Northern Ireland was like. A very perceptive Belfast man pointed out a simple truth–if you fill your camera frame with the faces of six unruly protesters, it looks like a LOT of protesters. See, they’re everywhere (in this frame). Belfast is full of rioters! But is it? Not so much. I guess I’m saying I’m prepared to be prepared, but I’m not prepared to freak out just because CNN has hit it’s daily doom button.
Its! Its daily doom button! Ugh, I’ve committed one of my own pet peeves! How embarrassing.
I wonder if human beings don’t learn to consider sustainability in their behaviour but the hard way – after the catastrophe.
In fact there seems to be sort of a castastrophe-prevention dilemma, that prevents a more intelligent way action.
A well known example is Katrina vs. New Orleans: It was well known in detail that the city was threatened and what to do about it. And this was also several times on the media.
But building dams etc. was considered “too expensive” so the projects stayed on the waiting file – until Katrina came.
Another example is the water problem in Mexico – closely linked to the present food problems. Some 17 years ago I did some groundwater research in the Guanajuato basin and I was quite surprised to find that in the basin’s center each year the water table was about one(?) meter lower. This was due to overproduction, as agriculture, industry and people consumed more water than was fed back by rainwater.
The water authorities already knew about the issue, but other experts obviously didn’t as they still were puzzled about the area’s “strange” hydrogeology.
Furthermore big parts of the groundwater and surface water was highly contaminated. Everybody seemed to know about it, but this was taken for granted.
A few years later I heard that the authorities were creating a commission (with a nice long name) in order to tackle this bunch of problems.
Do you think that 17 years later the problem is solved? No. Now Mexicans are learning the consequences of unsustainable water management the hard way:
In many places farmers now have to drill hundreds of meters to get their water. And in some places this water is thousands of year old and actually too salty and contaminated to be used – although people continue to use it (watch out for irrigated food from Mexico!).
Do you think that now the authorities are concious of the issue? Wrong again. Recently someone complained at the responsible state water commission about the increasing water scarcety and referred to a study the commission had issued ten years ago, describing the problem in detail. But the commission`s general secretary replied she didn’t know such a study.
Meanwhile the problem cannot be hidden any more, as more and more people are complaining – and now the authorities are beginning to react.
Now they have started to say: “We regret to inform you…”
Jase,
I agree with Bryan that saying we should start a large scale nuclear plant building program in this country is mostly just wishful thinking. It simply isn’t going to happen for a number of reasons, public opinion (whether you feel those against are informed on that opinion or not matters not one bit – public opinion rules pretty much on everything and takes a long time to change) and lack of capital for funding these immensely expensive project are the two biggest problems I see.
Further, when you are talking about cheap nuclear energy – “too cheap to meter” I believe was the mantra once upon a longago, wasn’t it? – I don’t think you are counting all the costs. For instance, uranium mining and enrichment is a very costly process that has already left a number of highly toxic “superfund sites” littered throughout the country. I think persuading people to allow several more of those superfund sites to set up in their backyard, so to speak, would be a little difficult. And while we’re on the subject, I don’t believe your figure for waste generation includes the huge amount of waste generated by the whole nuclear materials procurement and refinement process from mine to power plant, just that created by the working reactors, right? If so, then it’s not at all a true picture of the actual amount of radioactive waste that would need to be dealt with.
I am doing some research on the issues you’ve raised, as I’m a bit on the fence over some of it – but I warn you, I’m definitely a tough sell on the so-called “cheapness” of nuclear energy. I used to live not too far from a nuclear power plant – Rancho Seco – in the early 1980s. That plant was off more than it was on, and it’s lifetime output was only 39% of what was projected at the beginning. If it had any effect on local utility rates, it was to raise them! The plant was actually closed nearly 20 years early – in part because it totally failed to live up to its promised potential and during its lifespan wasted an awful lot of time and money.
Frankly, we don’t have a lot of either time or money left to waste. Now, I would hope that the plants being proposed today are a lot more efficient and a lot more reliable than that one, but since I haven’t verified this, I will hold my opinion on it for now. But I don’t think the issue of the advisability of starting up a large scale nuclear energy program in the time we have left to work with is as simple a decision as you seem to be making it out to be.
P.S. to Jade – thanks, and likewise!
BoysMom – Not quite. Not only was the reactor designed with a large positive void coefficient – meaning that as the coolant started to boil, the reaction increased – but the design of those very control rods was such that SCRAMming the reactor and fully inserting all of the rods… actually increased the reaction rate. It was ‘human error’ in the same way that building your house on the edge of a cliff and then walking off the edge one morning – the real problem wasn’t your moment of inattention, it was that the structure was improperly designed from the beginning.
The point with the match analogy is that yes, of course, all technologies have possible downsides – but we don’t ban matches because a) as you said, the consequences of a forest fire aren’t that bad, and b) the odds of that happening are even lower. Well, a nuclear accident like Three Mile Island was safely contained and all of the lingering radiation that was released – it amounted to maybe three years worth of natural background. And the odds of such a failure with a modern nuclear reactor are far, far lower.
We absolutely have a window of opportunity to build nuclear reactors. The talk is about massive emissions cutbacks and increases in efficiencies over the next few years – well, nuclear reactors can be built in the same period. As for transportation issues, first, if the transportation infrastructure goes that far south all of modern civilization will collapse. Food, fossil fuels, all of it – saying that nuclear reactors will fail along with all of modern civilization doesn’t really mean much.
As for EMP, sigh… If nuclear weapons (the only current way to generate a meaningful EMP of the type you seem to be referring to) are ever detonated over the mainland US, again – that will be the sort of issue that trumps and moots all others.
If you honestly think that nuclear power is too dangerous for people, then you might as well go and spit in Prometheus’ face. It’s the same as if you think that it’s too late to build more reactors and support our infrastructure – you’ve given up on the future of human civilization.
Sharon – How does talking about nuclear power indicate a state of fear? Nuclear power is being advocated because it is the solution, not because of some fear. You could argue that, sure, it’s being advocated out of fear of not enough energy, but then, you would have just eaten dinner out of ‘fear of going to bed hungry’, and you would have woken up this morning out of ‘fear of staying in bed’.
The only thing I am afraid of in this regard is that shortsighted, craven, irrational and ignorant environmentalists will succeed in snuffing out the nascent promise of human society.
Diabetes? It isn’t solely a lifestyle condition. Cancer? It existed before ‘modern living’ and it will exist after. Heart disease? That was there too, and still will be. Herbal medicines? Ridiculous – they will not take the place of modern medicine, because they cannot.
Surrendering to human extinction in the face of global climate change is the ultimate form of cowardice. Collapse and destruction is not to be accepted, embraced, or condoned. Raging against the dying of the light isn’t some random line of verse, it is the utter heart and soul of the human condition.
Idaho Locavore – Mining sites on the ground, in one location, as opposed to the much, much larger amounts of pollution pumped directly into the atmosphere by fossil fuel plants?
“Those of us who would consider turning off the nuclear plants are simply those who think we have passed that point in time, that it is just too late, that the combination of other factors–petroleum, wheat blight, economics, political machinations, the list is just about endless–has taken us too far down another path, and that there are no longer the resources to go back and choose a different road.”
BoysMom, exactly. I think we don’t have enough time and resources left to actually build a new system of that magnitude, get the bugs out of it, and make the significant changes to the infrastructure that would be necessary to fully utilize it.
Thirty, twenty – heck, even ten years ago – it might have been a different story. But now we are operating in a blown economy – at least for the short term if not much longer – and the fossil fuels that are absolutely necessary at every level to fuel construction are rapidly increasing in price to infinity and beyond. This makes it pretty much impossible to determine exactly how much a program of this sort would actually cost to implement over the decade or more it would take to finish. That, in turn, will make it just that much harder to find funding for it in an economy that is, at the moment, pretty seriously strapped for capital.
“Idaho Locavore – Mining sites on the ground, in one location, as opposed to the much, much larger amounts of pollution pumped directly into the atmosphere by fossil fuel plants?”
Jase, one location? We have one location that can supply enough uranium for a whole fleet of new nuclear plants?
You keep using the pollution cost of existing coal power plants as an argument for constructing nuclear power plants. Unless I am mistaken, we are not talking about whether to construct *either* new coal plants or new nuclear plants here. That is a totally different subject. We are discussing whether a large scale program of nuclear power plant building to *augment* our available energy is the right thing to do with our limited money in the time we still have left.
If you keep bringing this up as an arguing point because your premise is that we could, in the time remaining, completely replace all the currently operating coal plants in the country with nuclear as well, then, my friend, I’d have to say you really are dreaming big!
“Surrendering to human extinction in the face of global climate change is the ultimate form of cowardice. Collapse and destruction is not to be accepted, embraced, or condoned. Raging against the dying of the light isn’t some random line of verse, it is the utter heart and soul of the human condition.”
Jase, have you ever considered that there might be other ways to live besides how we live now that will also give humankind a good quality of life? Giving up on nuclear energy does not mean we are giving up on civilization, humanity, or on having a good life. Humans are nothing if not adaptable. I personally don’t believe that “Homo electris fossilfuelis” is the pinnacle – or will be the end – of human evolution and civilization.
“One location?” No. Note the plural of ‘sites’. The point is that a mining site is a localized impact, as opposed to an atmospheric one.
“We are discussing whether a large scale program of nuclear power plant building to *augment* our available energy is the right thing to do with our limited money in the time we still have left.”
Which it absolutely is. The points of comparison to coal plants are to hopefully – and this is an apparently futile hope – get people to realize that nuclear plants are far, far better than the coal plants that we’ve had for years without the same sort of ignorant, knee-jerk reaction.
“Jase, have you ever considered that there might be other ways to live besides how we live now that will also give humankind a good quality of life?”
Yes, and historical evidence suggests otherwise.
“I personally don’t believe that “Homo electris fossilfuelis” is the pinnacle – or will be the end – of human evolution and civilization.”
Exactly, and I wholeheartedly agree. You do realize that nuclear fuel isn’t a ‘fossil’, right? The point is that we have to get beyond fossil fuels, to nuclear, now while we still can. It’s an airplane taking off like in Flight of the Phoenix – we’re at the point where we have to make the final push through or else all the previous striving will be for naught.
The comments are getting long so I’ll be brief (maybe):
1) Defending yourself and family, has anyone looked at non-lethal means? Why does it always have to be about guns? I’m going to look into those, but a dog is a good start.
2) Nuclear. I am reminded of a popular saying an old boss liked, “Don’t confuse me with the facts, my mind is made up.” Jase has made good points, and nuclear generation is safe, especially in Canada with the CANDU reactors. Of course, ‘Mericans won’t use them because they are not made in America. But, the larger point has been made that even a crash program of nuclear plants won’t solve the problem. I suggest both sides of the issue read this first:
http://www.theleaneconomyconnection.net/nuclear/index.html
You see, I was agnostic about nuclear energy until reading this report. The long and short of it is we will be at Peak Uranium in a short while anyway – short enough to impact economic feasibility of present projects. Again, I highly recommend ALL read this report.
The problem won’t be nuclear or coal, but natural gas. A 3 min. look at Laherrerre’s graph for N. American natural gas production will illustrate the death blow if we don’t start making changes yesterday. I’ll save you the math, but the graph means the U.S. will have a 10% electricity shortfall by 2020 based on current production. That’s a lot of windmills.
3) I believe the issue about the new nuclear power plant proposal in a western province (its Alberta by the way) started this whole fracas. There could be other ways of supplying power if we could go full out with run-of-river hydro development in BC. But, again the eco-nazis are making a stink and getting the press. I use that emphatically because these people have no perception of basic physics and math and use propaganda as facts. The only energy development they will endorse is angels dancing on the head of a pin. We are going to object our way into the dark ages. Of course, we won’t be able to deliver the power because a whole new group will object to the transmission lines.
We can’t have it both ways – decide.
The “kum-by-ya” moments are over folks. Sitting around the campfire holding hands and wishing and believing are not sound plans. Sounds more like the quickest way to roadkill to me.
If the grid falters we are in a bad situation. I’ve tried some mental exercises about the impacts if the U.S. grid went down and I could only get to a few days. After that, its chaos and anybody’s guess. Why was I contemplating such a thing. Well, telling you this will probably get a bullet in my brain, but I figured out how to take down the grid relatively easy and it will stay down for weeks and months. That’s one reason why I’m back in Canada. I’m not going to tell you how obviously, but I think readers of this blog, or Sharon, should try the exercise and see what they come up with about losing all electricity for a couple of weeks or months. How do we bootstrap this back up? Where will the people and resources be when we can start operating again (if ever)? Will there still be a recognizable Republic?
That’s why I don’t worry about terrorist bombings or planes hitting nuclear plants (and Jase is right BTW), they would be minor event compared to taking down the grid. But I do find it frustrating that in the absence of facts, we live in a culture where believing is more important than knowing.
“Surrendering to human extinction in the face of global climate change is the ultimate cowardice.”
Jase, are you saying that not accepting nuclear power is the ultimate cowardice?
Global climate change is coming about because of human industrial and technological civilization which nuclear power represents its horrendous pinnacle.
To me and to many the ultimate cowardice is for humans not to realize the folly of industrial/technological civilization and the folly of the existence of nuclear weapons and nuclear power.
To live simply, to live in harmony with nature, to feel and realize our interconnectedness with all life, to decline techno-fixes and accept the fact that our civilization has failed all life on Earth, would be the beginning of wisdom for our decadent and arrogant Western Civilization. Sadly, now exported worldwide.
Will humans collectively come to this realization before it’s too late? Perhaps, but probably not. There is no precedence for the collectivity of humans to seek or pursue wisdom. Some individuals will, however.
~Vegan
“1) Defending yourself and family, has anyone looked at non-lethal means? Why does it always have to be about guns? I’m going to look into those, but a dog is a good start.”
Yes, dogs (we have three) and copious amounts of pepper spray are already on my list of deterrents. I am open to more ideas.
I am reading the link you provided. I already had heard some about the “peak uranium” issue before, but I was making allowance for the possiblity that the article I read was wrong.
Jase, yes, I know nuclear energy isn’t itself a fossil fuel. However, it takes fossil fuel to make a nuclear plant – a lot of it. I can’t imagine a nuclear plant is going to ever be able to just begat another nuclear plant without that fossil fuel input until we can come up with the technology necessary to dig big holes, mix tons of concrete, ship thousands of metric tons of supplies across the country and smelt large amounts of metals and parts using nothing but electricity.
As for your argument concerning historical evidence consider this: Try non-linear thinking. Even if all else fails, we are not limited only to going backwards into darkness.
VERY GOOD ARTICLE.
I remember the oil shocks of the 1970s and the gloom and doom fear about the end of our culture.that was a political not geological shortage and many of us really did believe that it was the end; temporary as it was .
I am afraid that his coming crash is going to be permanent,.
Unlike the 1970s, today we have India and China trying to bring their societies up to what America and Europehave been enjoying for over a century.Dont the get it that that is not possible.?
Don’ t we get it that our economy is in free fall.//? It is not linear, however.
Some aspect of our economy have been on the edge for decades. inner cities, health care, the old living in nursing homes, air pollution since the 50s. It is just not going to happen all at once….. this is not a movie…. It has been happening for years.
Ask the elders that you know.
Raymond
~Vegan, see my first comment about “evolve or die”. That is exactly what will be required, harmony and interconnectedness. Unfortunately, getting there will be the difficult part and who knows how die off, or disease, hunger and destruction will happen in the meantime. I am Shiva, the destroyer of worlds.
The underlying point Jase is trying to state is the existing system won’t go under without a fight. It will be the drowning victim that drags the rescuer under in a flailing panic. As much as we wish things were different, the reality is there are going to millions and billions of people that are going to have the usual human needs.
With our population density, we depend highly on using large amounts of free energy (that which can be applied to work) to drive our way of life. Sure, we can change back to an agrarian society, but the standard of living (I know an oxymoron for some people) will reflect that industry and energy use.
Those reading this blog may be the cursed enlightened ones. We are bedeviled by knowledge others do not have. I hope to be brave enough to do what some of you here have done. My wife is game for it to some degree, but she grew up with that in rural Jamaica and she isn’t so keen to return to that living.
As we meander through the food self reliance, organic sustenance, and preparations keep in mind there are millions and millions on this continent that probably haven’t seen a live cow. Those are the ones with guns that worry me. They are not going to give up their “non negotiable” way of life easily.
What are we going to do with them? Throw some bib overalls on them, show a few reruns of Green Acres and then get them busy on the farm? Don’t see that happening. The problem is immense when you take a look down a Manhattan or Chicago street. When the time comes we are going to be a lot less environmentally concerned, hell bent on turning up an energy source we can and hope for better weather the next day. You can bet on it.
Thanks Sharon! You must be one of the most insightful commentators currently posting to the web, I think.
Let’s all just agree that Jase, like many other nukies, has this irrational bee in his bonnet on the subject, and maybe it’s just best not to engage with it, shall we. Look how it’s distorted what otherwise has been a really good comments bash. If we’re lucky, the next decade or so will simply prove that we’re incapable of taking the nuclear insanity much further, because of unbuckable restraints which we won’t be able to get around, even if we want to. But you never know. There seem to be no limits to the hubris of techno-eega-beevas with the bit between their teeth. Anyway, with luck, the crashes will kill the nuclear madness.
Look into Livestock Guardian Dogs (see Robert Denlinger’s Denstar Farm site, and the LGD-L list for example) for information on SERIOUSLY good home/livestock/family protection. Speaking from long experience I can tell you that two are much more than twice as formidable than even one, and that’s formidable enough to begin with. My guys are Turkish Shepherds (Anatolians). Also highly recommended are Pyreneans, Kuvaszok, and Caucasian Ovcharkas, just like Robert uses. “They are dogs, Jim, but not as we know them……”
The Ruth-Stout-style mulch on my raised beds is just now starting to put up its green, sky-food-harvesting antennae, in this last couple of days. All around here too, in Britain, people are starting to make food gardens. Obviously, lots of folk are sensing that something’s up, and that this is a sound response, even if – because of the dereliction of duty of the corporate media and clueless politicians – they have no clear idea yet why this should be. Evolve or die? Yes! A now-critical imperative for humankind. I suspect that we will do it.
I’m going to stay out of the nuclear argument, and I’m even going to stay out of the ‘defend yourself’ discussion (although, having been raised with guns around, I have no problem with owning and even using one). What I would like to address is something that has been mentioned a couple of times above here. I’ve seen the same fallacy in print over and over, and I don’t suppose it’s going to do much good to address it here, but at the same time, I can’t just let it pass without comment.
I’m assuming that probably most of you are more or less urban? I know Sharon lives in the country (I’ve known her for quite a few years on a couple different forums, and greatly appreciate her intelligent and astute writing!), but perhaps many of you were raised in towns and cities. So there are some things that you don’t realize about raising food. As a country person who was raised on a farm, I’d like to try to clear this up.
You talk about how desirable it would be to eliminate all meat, dairy, and eggs from the human diet, that if we did that, we could feed more people adequately with the crops we grow, instead of feeding the crops to animals and then their products to people. It is likely that the American diet could stand to have animal products reduced somewhat, without most of us suffering much for it.
I’m not going to defend factory-farming, confinement raising of pigs and poultry, or feedlots. I think there are serious problems on a lot of levels with those models of ‘farming’. And, that is where most of the grains and soybeans you are concerned about are going.
However.
There is a LOT of land in this world which will not grow crops. Period. Perhaps the Laplanders and the Eskimo peoples could start growing wheat on their lands above the Arctic Circle? Won’t work. I’m from Alaska originally, by the way, so that’s an area I know a bit about — my folks homesteaded there in 1959, raising dairy cattle, hay, potatoes, and barley. We were well south of the Arctic Circle. North of it, you can’t grow much, if any, of those things. So the Laplanders raise reindeer, and some Eskimo do now, also (in college, my first room-mate was the daughter of an Eskimo reindeer herder). If you look farther south, there is a lot of land that can’t be irrigated economically, so it’s range land suitable only for cattle and sheep (who, when managed properly, actually improve the land they are on — and most of them are managed properly nowadays). In any climate you’ll find land that is too steep to cultivate, suitable only for pasture or a woodlot. There are also corners of fields, rocky ground, and other ground which is not at all suitable for cultivated crops, but which is well suited to pasturing livestock.
If you insist that livestock not be produced on that land, then you are not increasing the world’s food supply, you are DECREASING it. Furthermore, properly managed livestock will improve the soil, adding fertility as they graze. Given the costs of manufactured fertilizers, manure is going to become increasingly valuable. Yes, compost is nearly as good as manure, but how is a farmer supposed to make enough compost for an entire farm, especially if machinery is not longer available? It’s all I can do to make enough for my garden in the backyard. An essential of restoring and maintaining good soil health is crop rotation. One of those rotations ought to be, on any well-managed farm, a few years of a pasture lea, or semi-permanent pasture. That’s even on good land that is capable of producing grains or soybeans for human consumption. Even if you are farming organically, naturally, sustainably — doing everything right — your soil will be in better health if it is rotated through several years of NOT being cultivated.
Furthermore, it is very practical for a family even on a small lot to raise a few chickens for their own eggs (and occasional chicken soup), or keep a few cages of rabbits for meat. Both animals can be fed with what you can grow or gather, adding most of the kitchen scraps and left-overs to the chickens diet. They don’t need grain, other than maybe a handful of scratch for the chickens. And the small amounts of protein they will add to your diet will greatly reduce the difficulty of growing a complete, healthy diet in your own yard. There are some added benefits: manure for the garden, rabbit pelts which can be turned into garments, feathers for pillows. (Chickens are also great entertainment, which is not to be sneezed at in a future TV-less world.) Chickens can help clean up insect pests, too.
You see, it’s actually much easier, and better, to raise livestock on a family scale, rather than on a factory scale. The waste becomes an asset rather than an environmental problem. There’s no transportation issues. Their food is mostly stuff you’d have to get rid of anyway, and doesn’t deprive anyone of their next meal.
The last thing I offer is this: don’t uncritically believe everything you read. Just because someone says that we need to get rid of all livestock and all eat nothing but plant foods, that doesn’t necessarily mean that they know what they are talking about. Getting rid of all livestock would do irreparable harm to ecosystems, to farms, and to people who depend on the products of livestock in areas where other foods will not readily grow. If you personally want to be a vegan, that’s fine. But please don’t impose that choice on other people against their will! And next time you hear someone spout that silly line about getting rid of livestock in order to feed their food to people, please correct their misinformation — don’t just let it pass. Even if you don’t personally eat animal products.
Thank you.
Kathleen
Kathleen, I agree with much of your post. We’re still eating some meat, but we’re moving to local free range and grass fed chicken, beef and lamb in order to have healthier meat grown in “happier” settings that isn’t being overly fattened by being stuffed with grain that could be fed to people. We pay more for it, but we now eat far less of it, which saves us money on groceries overall and is healthier for us. Much of this area, as you’ve stated, is of the type of land that is best used as pasture anyway, there are local families that want to make a living farming and need support, so it’s winwinwin all around.
I think part of the reason you haven’t seen much being said about the “go vegan” arguments lately is that it’s already been addressed so many times in the past on this and most other blogs, so people who have been reading for a while just tend to pass it over instead of engaging in yet another round of debate on the subject.
http://www.reuters.com/article/businessNews/idUSN2232840220080422?feedType=RSS&feedName=businessNews&rpc=23&sp=true
So in light of this conversation is this article something to worry about or is it a case of the media hyping up an issue into a problem? What are the critical questions someone should ask to inform themselves and act accordingly? Thanks:>
Roads, Bikes, Hoes, and Potatos
In addition to our doom and gloom list we will all have to add the deterioration of the worlds roads as asphalt prices rise with oil prices. That chunk of asphalt in front of your house is about 15 percent crude oil and your county can’t afford to replace it. Go down and look at the agenda for your city or county council and in there somewhere is going to be a report on how they can’t fix all the roads that need fixing.
Consider converting you main means of transportation to a bicycle with an electric boost. Cargo modifications like the Xtracycle or longtail bikes like the Surly “Big Dummy” are being developed to get you and your groceries where they need to go. Be wary of bike trailers as it is hard to get a trailer to dodge potholes.
Hoes are the most basic and useful of farm implements. I’m not talking your swan head how but an “american pattern” hoe that has a a heavy seperate head with a ring and sturdy handle that you can replace. Find one and buy it if there is any chance of doing serious food gardening.
Potatoes are the easiest way to grow your own food on the smallest space. Also potatoes can ride out trouble mid season and still give you something to eat. Corn disturbed before it is ripe and dry is ruined but a hailstorm on a potato crop just gets you smaller potatoes. Potatoes planted in a ring around your lawn could mean several weeks food if things get tight.
Watch the climate news carefully. Things are changing very, very fast.
A couple of people who’ve posted express and interest in “saving civilization” and avoiding another “Dark Ages.” What we have going on here is not “civilization.” This thing we think of as civilization, that some seem interested in saving, is an abomination–militaristic, violent, earth-destroying, and humanity-destroying. It makes people coarse and ignorant–and poor and dependent.
Prosposing to preserve all this with nuclear power seems a little misguided.
I’d say we’re in the Dark Ages.
Kathleen, as Idaho Locavore says, we’ve collectively found it about as easy to convince the vegans as it is to convince Jase.
I just moved from a town at 7100 feet. What grows there? Rhubarb, rose hips, and lettuce, without a green house. And lots of beef cattle. 28 days average frost free. Without the livestock I don’t reckon anyone would live there except the folks working on the natural gas wells. But that’s another 18K people or so spread out across that county that probably won’t starve no matter what, just get awfully sick of eating beef.
I’m not a farm girl, but I am a small town girl–the sort of small towns that have moose on Main street regularly, that is. I don’t know about others here–I recollect that Greenpa and I got into it elsewhere with some folks that thought large wild predators might make good neighbors, so he must be pretty rural, right?
I’m looking into chickens right now: when we can get some wire fencing I know someone I can get a layer or two from. We’ve got a poisoned soil issue (a chemical called Curtail, nasty stuff), so gardening for the next couple years may have to be largely container/raised beds with purchased soil. If we stay in this rental that long, that is.
Pangolin, better than potatos are Jerusalem Artichokes, sometimes called Sunchokes. They’re a member of the sunflower family, if you’re not familier with them, have the kind of starch that isn’t bad for diabetics when fresh harvested, and happen to be famous for producing even in Eighteen-Hundred-And-Froze-To-Death.
Pangolin, bikes with “extras” are definitely part of our plan. This summer I’m outfitting my mountain bike with an electric assist, plus side baskets and paniers for hauling back Farmer’s Market finds.
I’m actually looking forward to it – I need the exercise (just don’t want to blow my middle-aged knees out on our hills here) and looking forward to being able to more often keep the car parked in the garage.
I’m hoping to outfit a bike for my hubby as well, but we’ll see if he wants that. Everyone’s bikes will have extra parts and such put away on the shelf, for just in case.
Lisa,
Gosh, that’s a tough one. I’ll give you my rambling two cents worth and you can do with it as you like.
Higher prices are not necessarily signs of scarcity, especially considering what the stock and commodity markets are doing right now to fuel wild speculations and screw up normal demand and supply. But actual shortages – well, that’s a different beast altogether. I’d look into it a bit further before panicking (or even before I started “plan”-icking) to see if you could find some independent verification of what was said about shortages in the article.
But the disturbing thing, to my mind, about the actual rye shortages mentioned in the article (if true) is rye is a grain that can be substituted for wheat for many uses. It actually was sometimes encouraged in the past to grow in wheat fields for that reason – if the weather for the wheat crop was bad that year, the rye crop which was hardier could still be used to help make up the difference come harvest time.
So, if there truly are wheat shortages later in the year, a shortage of rye now means that is one less grain that can be used to make up some of the potential shortfall. Adding in what looks to be a short supply of rice shaping up and either a price-rationed supply of corn or an outright shortage because of ethanol brewing, then we would now have four major food grains in danger of failing to meet world wide food demand – all in one year.
So yeah, I think that’s a serious concern.
Idaho locavore, the rye shortages are true:
http://www.reuters.com/article/ousiv/idUSN2232840220080422
Get ready for more expensive beer, among other things.
As to the nuclear issue discussed by everyone so…. extensively, there is strong evidence of Peak Uranium, and the arguments about the fossil fuel inputs at every step of the process of plant construction and fuel acquisition are valid. They also make estimates practically impossive and effectively worthless. The fuel issue can be sidestepped with breeder reactors, but I don’t think there are any operating commercial designs. The US had a single operating commercial breeder reactor in the 1960s, Enrico Fermi Plant #1 in Monroe, Michigan. It melted down within 18 months of beginning operations due to a design flaw (ironically enough, a metal plate that was supposed to help prevent the formation of a critical mass if the core ever melted down is what caused the disaster). The failure is documented in the book “We Almost Lost Detroit”. I don’t have a lot of confidence in our ability to crank out a breeder design quickly enough, and that doesn’t even address issues like the potential theft of fissonable material.
Nuclear power not only isn’t the answer, it causes more problems – it’s too energy dense. Basically, any energy source can be used as a weapon, and the more energy dense the source, the more dangerous it is, and the easier it can be misused. (and the more dangerous it is when unleashed through incompetence)
As for defending one’s self, those of you who don’t wish to use firearms – I highly recommend you take a gun safety class. Learn how to safely disarm a firearm. Choosing the path of peace is fine and honorable, but at some pint in your life, you may be faced with a situation involving someone armed with a gun. Learn how to safely unload, safety, and maybe even dissasemble various firearms. It’s not difficult, and it could save your life or someone else’s.
I think this might be my second post here – I don’t really contribute, but I’ve been reading off and on for a while. Sharon, keep up the great work and the fantastic posts, and everyone, keep doing what you’re doing to soften the landing for yourselves and your communities, whatever you consider your “community” to be. Thanks for making me think!
regards,
matt picio
bike advocate
portland, or
Beer is mostly made from barley (unless you have some sort of strange American beer made from rye, which wouldn’t surprise me :-/) so unless we hear about barley stocks running low you don’t have to worry
Also, real whisky is made from barley, so no worries there!
But it’s scary to hear about rye shortages even if there is no scarcity of rye in Europe as far as I know. It’s a traditional staple in northern Europe – think dark sourdough rye bread with butter, mmm! Rye and barley will grow in much poorer conditions than wheat so that’s what has kept Scandinavians going for centuries – that and turnips
Maybe I should plant some rye…
In the meantime we need to build the alliances to fight this:Climate crisis—urgent action needed now!Statement initiated by participants in the Climate Change|Social Change conference, Sydney, Australia, April 11-13, 2008