I have looked through the thread of articles re peak oil, but can't find a thread talking about what individuals are doing to prepare. If there is one that I haven't yet found, please point me in the right direction. So, are you making changes to your land/location/etc specifically because of peak oil? Do you find that generally people around you (ie family, friends) think you're crazy for even considering doing things differently because of your knowledge of the energy situation? What things are highest in your priorities regarding personal changes? I constantly feel pulled in two directions with this - I want more land and less debt, and would really like to prepare a place that would have room for my extended family for if the crisis really gets bad, but don't want to be far from extended family with increased cost of travel if they refuse to ever budge from their comfy abodes. Fiona
Hi Fiona & everyone, My personal preparation comes down to a couple of main things; 1. Trying to learn about growing our own food as much as possible. I've set a goal of growing 50% of our own food. Not sure if it is achievable or not, but it is great to have a target to work towards. Food security is absolutely vital post peak. 2. Reducing debt. Especially the mortgage. Any debt may be crippling post peak. I've been working towards these goals over the past few months and have been able to get a 'booming' vegie garden and mini orchard started in a short time. The mortgage continues... Peak needs to hold off for quite a while yet!
Our (my) prep involves short term and long term (gradual) things. The first was learning how to grow our own food, in a way that is unreliant of petrochemicals etc. Learning how to be more sustainable, and how to think differently about consumption, and life in general. We're also trying to get rid of our debt. Our situation sucks because we can't afford to buy (loan or outright) so we are at the mercy of landlords. I REALLY want to buy land and build a house and all the rest but that's a future possibility, not a probability. Learning new skills. Building up networks of people, friends, etc. Sussing out the best places to be in a few years time. We're not really hardcore preparing, like with a bunker or lots of canned food or anything, we're making little changes and always remaining aware of what the future may hold.
Strategic geographical relocation is a good start ! Howdy Fiona, and others The solution(s) are very complex; but the answer is simple. It involves carving out a special group of like minded individuals that will commit to pooling all their resources. This means everything!! Especially money & savings. As a community (you can achieve in 5 yrs what would ordinarily take a lifetime to accumulate and/or build). :arrow: Form a trust (see chapter *14 PERMACULTURE: Designers Manual) as to ensure everyones hard effort/savings are used for a common goal and future business development/direction/inheritance: land, housing, food, transport etc. This "special group, or rather community" must seek to cooperate towards these exact goals every step of the way ! It's nearly always foolish to go it alone, doing it yourself is very near impossible.:cry: So in a nutshell... your future (anyone else reading this) is explaining to others the benefits of all the above; by sharing "costs". MOST of everyones problems start with money or the lack of it - You can see this all around if you just look closely, but denial prevents "any" action. Personal debt is like an anchor in the 21st century. My advice (if you can) is start a small scale type "family/community" localised credit union in your region (or join an existing one) then.. get others involved - for all your sakes. It' really is s the best way. Don't let the banks control your finances, interest rates are illegal anyway ! Use barter & services credits/exchange systems (LETS). Remember, moving forward, is by moving together. It doesn't have to perfect/big to succeed - just more than 1 (family). Research/visit what other communities are setting up around you, then get to it; start one up or join into one. I take seriously your Q: what are others doing to prepare post peak oil ?? :idea: The people that KNOW are relocating. Building local regional economies (ie: LETS, working bees) & placing these communities in a strategic geographical location with their finger on the pulse/study/research/networking - that's the truth !!! Finally... don't waste time with people that can't see what your trying to achive or worse: criticise you for being forward thinking - leave 'em behind and march forward with what you know needs to be done inside your own heart and; by the way good luck & best wishes If you build it they will come :wink:
My partner and I recently bought 50 rural acres- thus far all of our efforts have been in making the small run-down farmhouse on it habitable and observing the land and thinking about how to most effectively put parts of it into production for our own sustenance. The interesting thing is that no-one that we talk to really thinks we're crazy. Most are envious (and we respond with, "hey, you could/should do the same thing!") and almost everyone, whether they've even heard of peak oil or permaculture, etc. expresses sharing a feeling that "something not good is going to happen..." It's a little creepy- like everyone has already accepted something terrible is going to occur, but throw up their hands and say "Waddaya gonna do about it?" Hopefully we'll show 'em some things and get some of them started before it's too late! And hopefully we'll have enough space to accomodate everyone we know when it all hits the fan!
Well good luck to you all....I've spent a lot of effort over the last few years trying to interest others in a shared self sufficent lifestyle...not any sucess...got abused once for actually wanting others to contribute financially to the project....and lots of suspicious "Whats in it for you" "How much are you making out of this". Still love the concept but am reluctantly thinking we will have to experience greater disasters before it becomes a reality. Cathy
G'day Fiona, I'm sure I've written about this in a few other threads, but I may as well add my thoughts again here rather than trawl through the archives searching. I think debt is the biggest thing to take care of - having none being ideal, otherwise as little as possible. Another thing to consider along these lines, is how your immediate family currently gets its income. Whether or not that source of income is from an industry likely to be directly affected by Peak Oil is an important question. For example, tourism, leisure, non-essentials, transport, finance, real estate and many other industries are very likely to be facing hard times and downsizing of staff in the not too distant future. Having a very secure income not likely to be affected by a serious economic downturn is a big bonus if that income is really essential. IMO, relocation has to take into account both Peak Oil and Climate Change. As I've said before, there are two schools of thought on relocation in preparation for these changes. One is that being in a low density population area will lessen the potential of becoming caught up in possible violence, rioting, theft etc due to a drastic shortage of 'essential' materials (what is 'essential' for some differs for others). The other is that a high density population area will have the skills base and potential for cooperation that more low density, remote places won't, and be therefore better placed to convert urban areas to productive areas capable of sustaining a large amount of people. Having done a fair bit of research, both academic and at a personal level, on 'crowd mentality' and individual reactions in times of great stress...without going into great detail, I tend more toward the former view. Obviously gaining skills like growing and preserving food, animal husbandry, energy production etc are important if you intend to maintain a degree of self-sufficiency - which is highly advisable IMO. Sometimes just having the confidence to believe that over time you can be successful at all these things is more than half the battle. I strongly agree with Tom and Cathy that developing a small, mostly or entirely self-sufficient community of people with similar aims is the best strategy, but as Cathy says, it's often a lot easier said than done as any or all of the differences in people's income levels, capital on hand, desired and current location, personal philosophies, personalities, aims etc can make joining together problematic. It shouldn't be as difficult as it is in reality, but unfortunately it often is. Regarding family, IMO it depends how strongly you believe that Peak Oil (likely combined with Climate Change) will have a drastic effect on the economy both at the local, national and global levels. If you do strongly believe that, then IMO the best thing you can do for your family is what you suggested about preparing a place with the potential to carry them all in hard times. The belief that the economy will crash to some degree, IMO includes within it the belief that people will have to be far more self-sufficient. If the "comfy abodes" that your extended family currently live in are not likely to allow them to achieve this, then you can be fairly confident they'll view your effort to provide such a place as much more attractive than where they are. It may cost a bit more to travel in the short term, but if it ends up costing much more, then more than likely we've already reached a tipping point where your decision to relocate is paying off and will increasingly do so into the future. A few phone calls from them about food shortages and exorbitant prices while you're well on the way to food security...relocating for them will begin to make a lot of sense...particularly if you've already paved the way.
As usual, lots of food for thought. Jez, I've read lots of your posts in the peak oil articles thread - lots to think about. I have read and read on this - internet info and books - and I know that no one can really tell me an exact answer to this next question, but I'd still be interested in opinions. How long do you think it would be before we reach a stage where food and everything else is that expensive that current "non-believers" (or at least, people who aren't interested in action now) would be convinced enough to move? How long do you think until things will really reach crisis? If society does go a bit crazy with looting and other society breakdown, how long do you think until that is likely to happen? Fiona
I'd be interested to hear other's opinion on this too....have known people 30yrs ago who were "survivalists" as the term was used then....holding large quanties of long life food, and guns....lot's of guns. They are still waiting for the break-down of society. For ourselves we are more planning for a self sufficent retirement and a little thought that if the proverbial hits the fan my kids and extended family will have a safe haven. But according to the survival manuel even here we are too close to a major centre and not far enough off the main road...but most people think we are out bush...45mins from Orange, NSW about 4hrs from Sydney. Cheers Cathy
Which survival manual is that Cathy? If it's American remember American geography/topography is very different to ours. Except for certain areas (Nevada, California etc) they don't have the harsh climate/bush conditions that we have. In a drought, it would be very difficult for the average city Australian to trek on foot outside the surbuban sprawl. Petrol makes it easier but we're running on the theory that petrol is scarce when people become nomadic desperados. I prefer the idea of the low density population area, but not isolated out bush. I read an account from an Argentinian about the issues surrounding their societal upheaval, and one issue for isolated homesteads was brutal home invasions. You have no neighbours in shouting distance. And guns, well they are available in Australia mostly to the criminal element. So the thought of bunkering down and shooting all trespassers doesn't work for most of us. I would love to form an intentional community, but while a lot of my friends love the idea they aren't prepared to actually do it yet.
Now’s the time to brace yourself for major price hikes in food, as peak grains join the lineup of lifestyle-changing events along with peak oil and peak water. Unless this year’s harvest is unexpectedly different from six out of the last seven years, the world’s ever-decreasing number of farmers do not produce enough staple grains to feed the world’s ever-increasing number of people. That’s been a crisis of quiet desperation over the past decade for the 15,000 people who die each day from hunger-related causes. It’s about to cause a problem for people who assumed that the sheer unavailability of food basics, usually seen as a problem of dire poverty, would never cause a problem for them. Whenever there’s a shortfall in the amount of food produced in any given year, it’s possible to dip into an international cupboard or “reserve” of grains (wheat, rice and corn, for example) left over from previous years of good harvests. Tabs have been kept on the size of that reserve by the U.S. Department of Agriculture since the end of World War 11. Few people looked at these tables until Lester Brown cried the alarm a few months ago, a short while after Darin Qualman, brilliant researcher with Canada’s National Farmers Union, one of the few farm organizations which thinks agriculture policy should be about feeding people, not finding new ways to raise commodity prices by getting rid of farm surplus. The world’s grain reserve has been dipped into for six of the last seven years, and is now at its lowest point since the early 1970s. There’s enough in the cupboard to keep people alive on basic grains for 57 days. Two months of survival foods is all that separates mass starvation from drought, plagues of locusts and other pests, or wars and violence that disrupt farming, all of which are more plentiful than food. To put the 57 days into geopolitical perspective, China’s shortfall in wheat is greater than the entire wheat production of Canada, one of the world’s breadbaskets. Since the World Trade Organization prohibits government intervention that keeps any items off the free trade ledger, there’s no law that says that Canadians, or any other people, get first dibs on their own food production. To put the 57 days in historical perspective, the world price for wheat went up six-fold in 1973, the last time reserves were this low. Wheat prices ricocheted through the food supply chain in many ways, from higher prices for cereal and breads eaten directly by humans, to the cost for milk and meat produced from livestock fed a grain-based diet. If such a chain reaction happens this year, wheat could fetch $21 a bushel, again about six times its current price. It might fetch even more, given that there are two other pressing demands for grains that were not as forceful during the 1970s. Those happy days pre-dated modern fads such as using grains as a feedstock for ethanol, now touted as an alternative to petroleum fuels for cars, and pre-dated factory barns that bring grains to an animal’s stall, thereby eliminating farm workers who tended livestock while they grazed in fields on pasture grasses. Via https://energybulletin.net/21815.html
G'day Fiona, As you say, it is incredibly tough to give a credibly accurate timeframe for when a 'crisis point' will come. There's so many different contingencies involved that it's really an impossible calculation to nail down without a crystal ball. Some say we may be looking at a 2008-10 timeframe before peak, others produce data which strongly suggest we have already peaked - global oil production actually fell this year for the first time in history. Another factor is that the longer a virtual 'production plateau' (which we may well have reached) is maintained via technology and desire to meet obligations, the steeper the eventual descent. Certainly North Sea and Australian production (both areas with highly sophisticated extraction) among others, bear out this theory...longer plateau, steeper decline...but all falling within the bounds of Hubbert's Curve. My personal opinion is that we are almost certainly likely to see major economic changes before 2010 - quite probably earlier...and not just due to Peak Oil. As Rob has posted, we are already in a period of grain shortage similar to when grain prices multiplied sixfold in the early 70's...so climate change, agricultural failure/lack of viability, reallocation of food production areas for fuel, and purely political effects will almost certainly compound the problem...to what extent on any front, is literally anybody's guess. But as Tom said earlier, I wouldn't recommend waiting around until the time when it becomes obvious crisis is at hand. Perennial plantings are a major element of genuine food security, and there's no shortage of desirable, appropriate species which take years to develop - aside from finding the capital, time and effort to actually develop an entire thriving system...especially if there's a learning curve involved. A whole stack of different events, some individually, others cumulatively, could bring crisis on in a matter of days or weeks. Perhaps unlikely, but a long way from impossible. Everything from food, to energy, to economic, to political relations is stretched to breaking point...it's just a question of when and how badly it will break due to cumulative factors - 'the perfect storm' if you like. G'day Anastasia, IMO, if we get to a point in parts of Australia where people are forming bands to raid homesteads, you can be sure that this will be due to them having forcibly gained control to some extent over the necessary fuel resources. If this did happen, more than likely it would involve maximum return for effort on the part of those involved...least use of precious fuel for maximum return. IMO, this would involve raiding in food production areas closest to cities or major settlements. In small, isolated areas - again, IMO - there's far more chance of the necessary community bonding, allowing for a full community reaction which strives for whole community solutions. People know one another and are already dependent on each other's cooperation to some degree, there's more chance of a few being able to positively influence and teach others, plus you're already all in the same small, isolated boat. Without knowing the specific incident(s) you're referring to, I would suggest that the analogy of Argentina is not really that applicable to Australia. In Argentina there is a long history of entrenched classes - the landed gentry and the virtual peasant class. We're talking about a massive difference in wealth and property. In remote Australia, the differences of class and wealth are much different to that of Argentina and South America taken as a whole. I wouldn't make an argument for Australia being the oft touted 'classless society', but certainly the difference is much smaller between what classes (in rural areas at least) we do have here. We don't have a numerically large, well defined, easily organised, significantly opressed underclass. We've fallen in love many times over with properties up for sale in South America. To be honest, the only thing which has prevented us from packing up and going (mostly for financial, cultural and 'adventure'...:lol:...reasons), is the difference in long term safety between Australia and South America. IMO, Australia is as well placed as anywhere on earth to avoid significant violence in coming years/decades. In the long term, despite our numerous, massive mistakes and total lack of vision, we will probably - taken on a global scale - still in the end work out to be 'The Lucky Country.'
Here's my two cents...... I think the trick is to keep going with what works for you and your family. You are the inspiration for change for those around you. Permaculture works for me and I am making it work in the township I rent my little house in. I travel to work, but that work involves teaching people how to make their own suburban house and garden become self sufficient. The families I teach and work for will inspire those around them when the time comes. They pay me to do this as I am running a small business in permaculture consultancy, design and training. Keep going, keep learning when you need to upgrade your skills, keep growing your own food, saving your own water, saving your own seed. But remember to trade, barter or give away that knowledge and produce to your community. Most of all keep positive that what you are doing with permaculture is a way that will work thru any crisis. That was the initial motivation for it's inception 30 years ago. For me permaculture has never been exclusive but totally inclusive. It means community to me. It means my survival in my community with my community. Now is a perfect time to step up to the task of encouraging others to think differently and behave in a way that works for our planet by being an example of change. When you can say it doesn't cost me anything ( in dollars ) to grow my own food, drink my own water...then your neighbour is going to ask how do you do that and can you help me do it too? What will you say? Kathleen
Thinking more about the comments here on location, and whether remote or city is safer, would it follow that perhaps the outskirts of the city, where there are people with acres, a nice community feel, but its only about an hour's drive into the city (currently!) would be very unsafe?? These are areas where people could easily do alright in terms of producing their own food and working together as a community, but could also be fairly easily accessible to others, and an obvious target if looking for supplies.
It seems the basic answer is the stronger and more unified the community around you is the closer you would want everone to be. A group of 20 suburban houses could quickly be turned into a defendable compound if the need arose and if the need did arise then the more people you had working on the inside for the community the better. For my part I'm sorting out my own house but I can see the interest of those living in the houses around me. Once I have my own placve working well I will try and organize the street and council to improve the verges on the surrounding streets. The aim is to increase the feeling of local community by getting people involved and getting to know people. Once that's going I'll try and form a group to start a community food garden in a park at the end of the street. These are long term plans but according to the peak oil click there's 29 years for me to sort things out ;-)
Yep, that's exactly what I meant Fiona - the sort of properties you describe would represent the 'easiest pickings' if a major economic collapse occurred and banditry did become common. But that's just my take on things. Personally, to me those sort of properties are a case of paying a lot more for less - perhaps ultimately, to put yourself in the situation where you stand a greater chance of being at risk than you would in a more isolated area. I must stress again, this is just my opinion and not intended to upset anyone.
Hi, Rather than planning for a future where we have to protect our own backyards, I want to be part of a community that is preparing for more locally grown food supplies now. I have a copy of the Power of Community and show to that to as many people as I can. My local permaculture group - which usually has about 10 people turn up for meetings - had more than 80 people turn up for a screening of the movie. We'll show it again early next year. People are interested and looking for safe solutions. Here on the Sunshine Coast we are attending meetings to protest against the use of good farming land near Yandina being used as a bio reactor by the local council. We want to push the message that the land must be kept free for food growing in the near future. We are also meeting with the local state govt member to discuss strategies for sustainability in our region. This is the future I want to be a part of. If things go the other way and we have to be 'on guard' defending our vegies - well just shot me, take the food and compost me - I don't want to be part of that. Sonya
Go Sonya, Yep if life is so bad someone is going to shoot me for my vegies I don't want to be here either...but in the mean time I'll keep on going doing my bit for community as I find it. Cheers Cathy
Yeah, I completely understand your views Sonya and Cathy. At the same time, if someone asks a question, I try to give as honest an answer as possible which outlines all possible scenarios - good or bad. For a young family with small children to consider, living where violence is less likely is often a factor in decision making. I hope that my reasoning about relatively remote areas would be taken as one likely way for those concerned about it to avoid the possibility of violence, not as some sort of 'survivalist manifesto' for an inevitable future. I do feel that if people don't work to make cities and suburbs more sustainable in terms of at least food production (as part of the first step), there will be major repercussions - so I applaud what you're doing in that regard Sonya. I also feel strongly that we as a people (and Permaculture practitioners) should embrace the towns and settlements of remote and rural Australia. Speaking personally, I'd rather work at a manageable level in smaller, more remote towns - where a handful of individuals can make a genuine, sizeable impact within the timeframe available. IMO, there's much more possibility to make the smaller places sustainable than trying to win over a significant enough number of the 17-18 or so million people living on or around the urban coastal fringe. It's not that I don't support those who make the choice to remain in urban areas - quite the opposite. More a case that for me, as an individual, the greater affordability, chance to make a bigger impact towards whole community sustainability, and the fact not enough people are doing it, all swayed our decision towards a smaller, more remote area. Having made that decision, I feel obliged to reveal the reasoning behind it when the topic is raised...all just my personal perspective.
Yes, easy access to cheap transport is a negative factor in building and sustaining the feeling of community. The area where my father grow up is 110 miles via road from a state capital. When he was young and car and travel were relatively more expensive there was almost no farm thief and farmers left gate unlocked. By the 70's, improved roads and cheaper cars/travel meant that there was enough thief and damage going on that farmer had to start locking gates. Much (but not all) of this anti-social activity was attributable to easier access from the state capital. Weekend city shooters and alike. Sonya and Cathy, compared to the first half of C20, the current communities we live in are violent. Arr, the good old freedom & security paradox! Gnoll110
