Hello

[wander]

I have been lurking this site for quite a while. A coworker recommended this site to me, and I've been reading a lot of the threads with quite a bit of interest.

I'm not really a self-sufficient person, and really don't have time for any of that, as my wife works the evening shift and I work a day shift and we've got 2 toddlers running around. The most I've done is stored away some food in a makeshift pantry in my office at home, probably about 2-3 months worth of emergency rationing type of food (flour, salt, sugar, rice, beans, etc) and about 3-4 weeks of regular food which I rotate out. I've learned a ton from this site on storage, so thanks for all that. I've got a bit of camping stuff packed away, but I haven't used it in a long time.

Anyway, I feel like I've been living in a dream until this whole financial crisis hit. A few of my friends and family are unemployed now, and have been for some time. My job is fairly secure, at least for the time being, and so is my wifes (unless the healthcare system is nationalized, then she may have problems). Anyway, talking about it all with my coworker, he gave me a few internet sites to visit (this one included), and I came across this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-QA2rkpBSY. I really feel this put it all into perspective for me, it seemed like this whole this is just a consequence of a combination of enormous problems converging into one single point in time: peak oil (I see that referenced a lot), baby-boomer retirements, and the beginnings of a global movement towards tyranny from liberalism. It seems this whole thing really started about 5 or 10 years ago, and the world is really feeling it all just now.

Where I work I get a lot of info flowing through my email box, mostly news relating to my field of expertise, regulatory changes, and other informational things. Most recently I recieved a notification of a Homeland Security exercise that will be conducted on July 29th, lasting about 2 weeks. I was invited to participate, which I declined as I don't have the time or inclination to work with DHS. They seem too much like the begining of the Nazi party to me. It's called "HSEEP 2009", and here is the homepage: http://hseep.dhs.gov. It's pretty benign, but I don't like the idea of FEMA evolving into DHS (guys with automatic submachine guns and black uniforms).

Anyway, I guess that's my say.
wander

[opsec]

Glad you finally decided to surface and by all means do feel free to jump into threads. This HSEEP 2009 is interesting. We need more people posting things like this so we can all have better situational awareness.

[Atash Hagmahani]

Hello. Welcome aboard. Sorry for the SNAFU that delayed your arrival.

"Self-sufficiency" is relative. The important things are to have plans in place for the possibility of long-term unemployment (you'll notice that this is a hot topic on this website) and for the occasional systemic crisis, which could be anything from a hurricane with minimal or no help from the outside (Katrina), to a banking "holiday".

Don't worry about exponential functions. Real-life problems don't involve exponential functions, except briefly. We're not really hip-high in dinosaurs or cockroaches or even humans, and we never will be. Interestingly, populations are always at near steady-state, but never AT steady state. That is almost statistically impossible. Instead, you are ALWAYS oscilating slightly between overpopulation and extinction. A slight tip too far one way or the other, will produce the effect. Overpopulation is always cured--birth rates fall and death rates rise. It is impossible to expand past the "carrying capacity" of the system. Underpopulation too is quickly cured by extinction and replacement with another species.

Petroleum depletion IS a real problem, and there is no easy solution. The problem has to do with "inflection points". When you've been going in one direction for a long time (increasing use of, and dependency on, petroleum), it is hard to turn the system around.

The current food supply was influenced by something called "the green revolution", which involved the use of fertilizers, "hybrid" crop seed, tractors (fueled with petroleum), herbicides and pesticides, and that sort of energy-intensive thing. I would add "globalization", since by moving commodity crops and produce around the world has the effect of canceling out both famines and bumper crops.

I can not see any possible way of keeping the "green revolution" going when the petroleum runs short. All the "magic bullet" solutions seem to have showstopping obstacles in their way.

Going into system failure while the economy is sick is a mixed blessing. On the one hand, it's getting harder and harder for us to save away a little something for the future. On the other hand, at least it has slowed down the waste and overconsumption that were going on, plus now we are in a frame of mind to take it more seriously.

[wander]

Hello. Welcome aboard. Sorry for the SNAFU that delayed your arrival.

No problem, I can be a bit over assertive so I hope I didn't bother you with the email.

Don't worry about exponential functions. Real-life problems don't involve exponential functions, except briefly. We're not really hip-high in dinosaurs or cockroaches or even humans, and we never will be. Interestingly, populations are always at near steady-state, but never AT steady state. That is almost statistically impossible. Instead, you are ALWAYS oscilating slightly between overpopulation and extinction. A slight tip too far one way or the other, will produce the effect. Overpopulation is always cured--birth rates fall and death rates rise. It is impossible to expand past the "carrying capacity" of the system. Underpopulation too is quickly cured by extinction and replacement with another species.

The point of the talk in that link is that we are in the upward direction of population levels, which has good benefits/side effects - babies, prosperity, medicine, peace. There will be a downward direction, which is sometime in the future, and has nothing but negative side effects - death, infertility, disease, war. In the up direction there is more positive than negative and the down directions there is more negative than positive.

When I was growing up, I observed that every year could be named based on the huge boom in some animal or insect. One year there was a boom in miller moths, so much so that they made indoor motion sensors worthless for burglar alarms. One year we had a boom in giant grasshoppers, another year was a boom in japanese beetles, another was deer flies, another was gnats, and so on. I figured that for every boom in population there was a subsequent crash in population. That's what's happening to us. Boom followed by crash.

But you are right, there will never be a forever expansion of any population... but to think it's good to have a 1.5% to 3% annual growth in anything is just demonstrating the lack of understanding of exponential functions.

Petroleum depletion IS a real problem, and there is no easy solution. The problem has to do with "inflection points". When you've been going in one direction for a long time (increasing use of, and dependency on, petroleum), it is hard to turn the system around.

The current food supply was influenced by something called "the green revolution", which involved the use of fertilizers, "hybrid" crop seed, tractors (fueled with petroleum), herbicides and pesticides, and that sort of energy-intensive thing. I would add "globalization", since by moving commodity crops and produce around the world has the effect of canceling out both famines and bumper crops.

I can not see any possible way of keeping the "green revolution" going when the petroleum runs short. All the "magic bullet" solutions seem to have showstopping obstacles in their way.

Going into system failure while the economy is sick is a mixed blessing. On the one hand, it's getting harder and harder for us to save away a little something for the future. On the other hand, at least it has slowed down the waste and overconsumption that were going on, plus now we are in a frame of mind to take it more seriously.

I'm unsure of the actual status of this, though there seems to be a mathematical concensus that there is perhaps 20-50 years left of oil production if the rate of production continued until there was nothing left. But I doubt that would happen, there would have to be some point when the rate of return would eventually make production ineffective. I don't know what will happen, but I remember Gerald Celente saying something to the effect of, the end is near unless there is a miracle of a discovery akin to fire.

[opsec]

http://www.chrismartenson.com/crashcourse/chapter-17b-energy-budgeting

Wander, check this link out. It address oil production. I can't recommend Chris Martenson's crash course enough.

[Atash Hagmahani]

People who know better than I do think we peaked at 2006. You're right, at some point we hit diminishing returns, and can not harvest some of what is in the "well".

There is also the problem that Matt Simmons has brought up many times, that OPEC rules plus government corruption, resulted in a ubiquitous practice of lying upwards about estimated reserves. Mr. Simmons pointed out that many public and private bureaucracies were making their plans according to numbers that were too-good-to-be-true!

What I suggest is that you make your own plans. I am not where I will probably ultimately end up, but for now it is a reasonable place from which to deal with the current situation, because I could, if necessary, live without a car. Most things we need are walking distance away, and some require a relatively short bus ride.

For most people, the best situation will be in a small to medium-sized town, preferably with a yard (for growing a kitchen-garden), preferably in a climate with plenty of rainfall, preferably in a town that still has some real production, or is at a significant rail or shipping crossroads. Think the way our ancestors thought, and not how modern yuppies think (who tend to gravitate towards "lifestyle communities" that are purely consumptive, with NO local production).

Ironically I might end up dabbling in the biofuel business, but in a country where it is actually possible (that is, you don't put more fuel into growing the crop than you get out of the crop, which is the problem here).

[wander]

opsec, thanks for the link. Chris Martenson's description of the future certainly lays it out for ya doesn't it? Very interesting indeed.

Atash, I am making my own plans, however I don't think that I'll be fast enough... I agree with one of the threads on this site, it seems that 2012 should be the target date. Unfortunately this housing bust killed my ability to sell my house, and turned it upside down. I'll need to work hard over the next few years to pay it down just to break even... then I'll need to sell. Maybe by then things will have turned around but I doubt it. I live in the city, about 20 minutes drive from work though I suspect it would only be a 45-60 minute ride on bicycle. Some of the parts of town I'll go through I might need a bullet proof vest for though.

Ideally I'd like to get out of the city altogether and on a piece of property with at least 5 acres on it. In this state it's doable, if you can find a way to sell. No buyers and values are plummeting. If I can get out of town, I can find a way to make a living in a post-peak era, because I have a lot of general skills.  I don't have much experience gardening, but I do have a good deal of elbow grease and desire... Just no land.

I specifically want to get away from the cities primarily because I feel there is a growing danger of loss of services... namely fire and police. I can protect myself to a much better degree than the cops, but a neighborhood fire unchecked will destroy the city. I see fire departments already taking a hit due to loss of state and city revenue.

The cops around here have stepped up the ticketing to compensate, and raised their fines/fees. I've recieved 3 tickets in the last 3 months, totally around $600 in fines. And I'm a pretty safe driver, they are hitting me for very minor violations... going 32 in a 30, failing to come to a "complete" stop (which evidently is 5 seconds of being stopped to this cop and judge), and speeding in a construction zone (unmarked of course, just a cone on the side of the road). All three judges treated me like a drug dealer, and I told me I'd need to pay $500 bond in order to plead not guilty.

Anyway point being, the states and municipalities are hurting, and I suspect the only thing keeping them alive is police revenue and bailout money (stimulous whatever). The cities seem to be a growing danger right now.

[wander]

opsec, I've watched the Crash Course video, and been reading the articles posted (without paying a subscription)... Fascinating. This guy really seems to know a lot without being a conspiracy nut. If everything he's saying is accurate (which I don't have a doubt), we are truely in for a bumpy ride over the next 20 years.

Particularly this thread (just the free version): http://www.chrismartenson.com/martensonreport/coming-collapse

Standing in the way of our taking actions are our beliefs, which we have formed over a lifetime of observation. For example, if I show someone forty-two very compelling graphs of Peak Oil, but the person remains unconvinced (as evidenced by their lack of action), I invariably find that they hold an underlying belief which is in conflict with the data.  Most often, that belief turns out to be "technology will save us."  This is a powerful belief, because it has been reinforced by a lifetime filled with the most exceptional technological progress ever seen in human history.  So it won't matter if I show that person one graph, or ten, or forty-two, or a hundred.  That stuff is just data.  We take actions based on our beliefs.  But if a belief is in conflict with data, the belief wins every time.

I cannot agree more. I find myself completely at odds with the data. On the one hand, it just doesn't seem that a drastic change can happen... on the other hand I can't see any way around it. I find myself angry for having been duped by society into beliving that more and more consumption/dependence and less and less conservation/self-reliance is a good thing.

What is more, taking the view that this comfortable world we live in isn't going to last is regarded as "eccentric". Taking it any further than just thought (ie preparing) is regarded as "crazy" or a "nut job".

I am an avid Prison Planet listener. Alex Jones is probably one of the most dedicated passionate people I've heard. I also think he's a bit delusional. The idea that there is a NWO is just to much to swallow. All these things going on that he blames on a NWO, eugenics, everything that happens seems to be intended to kill us. But his guests are excellent, and he really tones it down with them (unless it's Gerald Celente, then he goes crazy). I realize there are many on this board that don't like him or that radio show... which is unfortunate. It helps me to know that my ideas and thoughts that I came to completely independently are shared nation wide (even world wide).

I watched "The Cube" the other day, and I think it's a great representation of what's going on. In the moive, these people wake up in a big death maze that is made of little 20x20x20 cubes, and they move from cube to cube where there is a trap in each one. The thing they discover is that it was built by accident... so many people were involved without a clear goal that something took shape without any direction or purpose. That's how I feel about where we are now... our leaders are a bunch of blundering career idiots that think they are doing something good (whether for themselves, the planet, or the nation) but they just have no real idea what is actually happening. And since there is a culture of laziness and apathy pervasive throughout this nation, nobody believes it, cares, or is even aware.

Anyway, thanks for a great tip off... that was an excellent website.

[Mike]

Welcome Wander!

...if I show someone forty-two very compelling graphs of Peak Oil, but the person remains unconvinced (as evidenced by their lack of action), I invariably find that they hold an underlying belief which is in conflict with the data.  Most often, that belief turns out to be "technology will save us."

Most people are oblivious to compelling anythings.  What I find interesting is how some individuals come to a new understanding, while most people refuse to change their understanding.

I remember Earthday 1971.  Theories of scarcity made no impact on me.  But in about 2000 I read in Bloomberg's Wealth Magazine and article on Peak Oil and M. King Hubbert.  It was M. King Hubert's methodology that turned me around.

Now, I am not so convinced.  I am not so convinced that it is really a normal curve.  I suspect the downhill side won't be so normal.

[wander]

Now, I am not so convinced.  I am not so convinced that it is really a normal curve.  I suspect the downhill side won't be so normal.

Normal or abnormal in what way?

[opsec]

I find myself angry for having been duped by society into beliving that more and more consumption/dependence and less and less conservation/self-reliance is a good thing.

This isn't your fault. You did what your parents and teachers told you and you absorbed the lies that they needed you to believe in order for them to maintain their own blissful ignorance. Basically, they sacrificed you on the alter of convenience.

What is more, taking the view that this comfortable world we live in isn't going to last is regarded as "eccentric". Taking it any further than just thought (ie preparing) is regarded as "crazy" or a "nut job".

The majority used to feel the same way about anybody who believed the Earth was round. You are ahead of the curve. You recognize the problem and you are taking responsibility for your future. That separates you from the rest of the population. It also makes you a target. Keep your head down, your mouth shut, and your weapons loaded.

In the moive, these people wake up in a big death maze that is made of little 20x20x20 cubes, and they move from cube to cube where there is a trap in each one. The thing they discover is that it was built by accident... so many people were involved without a clear goal that something took shape without any direction or purpose.

You've got me curious. I'm going to watch "The Cube".

[Atash Hagmahani]

A "normal" curve has a "bell shape".

What Mike is saying is that the right side of the function--the part that is post-peak--will not mirror the left side. That is correct, because on the left side of the curve, we were building infrastructure to take advantage of the rising supplies. One the right side of the curve--what?! Infrastructure fails, and so do most people's mental paradigms of "progress"! Infrastructure failures will have downstream effects. On the left side of the curve, if you don't have enough resources to exploit a new resource, wait a while. On the right side of the curve, if you don't have enough resources to exploit a resource, TOO LATE!

It's easier to learn to live with more, than to learn to live with less.

There is also the problem that while you never quite know where the oil wells will be (you take educated guesses) or how big they are, on the left side of the curve, uncertainty was working for you, but on the right side of the curve, it's working against you. On the left side of the curve, you think "great! we didn't know that oil field would be so big!", because you're still working when there is plenty to be found. On the right side, you thing "dang! we didn't think that oil field would run out so soon!".

[opsec]

Think of the Grinch That Stole Christmas. The Grinch pulled everybody's stuff up a long grade that had a sheer cliff at the end. We are at the cliff and about to go over it.

[Eddie]

Think of the Grinch That Stole Christmas. The Grinch pulled everybody's stuff up a long grade that had a sheer cliff at the end. We are at the cliff and about to go over it.

Yes...but there was a happy ending down their in Whoville.... All smiles and big hearts.

[opsec]

I left that part out on purpose.