Tuesday, September 2, 2008

dds 'n Sods:

KAF recommended this: Documentary shows tough reality of doctors in war. (Warning: Not for children or for the squeamish!)

o o o

Cheryl N. sent us yet another raft of economic news and commentary: Stagflation Becoming Economic Reality, FDIC Admits Short-Term Loans Might Be Needed, The Building Storm: Gold, the Dollar and Inflation, WAMU The Killer Bank, US Thrifts Lost $5.4bn in 2Q, Second Largest Ever, Bankruptcy Filings Near 1M in Past 12 Months; Up Almost 30%, Economic Depression: Who Will Suffer Least?,
Credit Crunch: It's Just The Beginning Of The End, Private Foreign Investors Dump US Debt, and Bankruptcies Soar for Senior Citizens. OBTW, in recognition of her many hours of tireless research, I think that it is time that we elevate Cheryl to "Economics Editor", and send her some more free books.

o o o

An friend that is an American ex-pat wrote to ask about the EcoloBlue water generator. Do any SurvivalBlog readers have first-hand experience with one of these? I'm curious about how much current they draw, and their maintenance requirements. If they are indeed practical and low maintenance, then they might make sense for someone that lives in an area with plentiful sunshine (and excess photovoltaic power capacity) and a shortage of drinking water. Buying one of these is beyond my budget, but perhaps not for some SurvivalBlog readers.

o o o

Hurricane Gustav was downgraded to a Category 2 tropical storm, but it still packed a wallop: Hundreds of thousands lose power as Gustav pounds coast


Jim's Quote of the Day:

"Depression, especially in a highly leveraged world that is accustomed to prosperity, would likely result in serious civil strife. Politically, it must be avoided no matter what the economic or financial costs. Despite 'spin-talk' to the effect that the Fed is pursuing a dual mandate to both fight inflation and promote growth, in reality they are simply trying to promote growth pure and simple. This is the reality that few market analysts or journalists dare to mention." - John Browne


Monday September 1 2008

Notes from JWR:

It appears that tropical storm Gustav may be gaining force to hurricane strength, and is aimed at the coast of Louisiana. I trust that SurvivalBlog readers are well prepared and will be able to help out any friends or relatives, and even strangers that are displaced. As a Christian, I believe that charity is not just an arbitrary option depending on our moods. It is our duty.

The folks over at The Oil Drum, have posted some speculation: Hurricane Gustav, Energy Infrastructure, and Updated Damage Models. If there is indeed damage to the oil industry, we can expect a spike in oil and gasoline prices. Plan accordingly.

I'm pleased to report that I've signed a contract with Ulysses Press of Berkeley, California, to publish a new edition of my novel "Patriots: Surviving the Coming Collapse". It should be available in late 2008 or early 2009. Because of the publisher's quantity discount pricing, the new edition should be much more appealing to retail book dealers. The new edition will be slightly updated, and feature a new cover design. The current edition from XLibris will be available until just before the new edition from Ulysses Press is orderable. (I'll be announcing that in the blog, hopefully in November. Please do not contact the new publisher until then.)

It is gratifying to see that a novel that has been published for 10 years is still selling with such consistency! I wrote the first draft of the novel in the winter of 1990-1991, and that short draft was circulated on the Internet as shareware. I had no idea then that it would have such popularity and longevity!


Letter Re: The Shenandoah Valley as a Retreat Locale?

James:
"Doug Carlton" makes many salient points for those currently searching for retreat locations. Might I add a couple more that helped me in finding our place in southwest Virginia.

For every region of interest to me, I gathered a century worth of census data, available online. If you want to get a good picture of a community, this is an excellent place to start.

Second, I read Mark Monmonier's "Cartographies of Danger." Monmonier is a bit of an odd duck in the professorial geography/mapping community. I have no idea of his world view, but everything he writes is engaging and informative. "Cartographies of Danger" is perhaps unique in the world of scholarship-based publishing in that it a very low political correctness factor. He calls 'em like he sees 'em, including insightful content on social instabilities. Of course, it includes the items you would expect especially the distribution and frequency of natural disaster occurrences that I had not fully appreciated before. All the Best, - Crusher

JWR Replies: Most SurvivalBlog readers are well aware that my view of economics is of the Austrian school. Perhaps less well known is that my view of history is of the geographical determinist school. I've been enthusiastically in that camp for three decades. That viewpoint is part of what has driven my strong emphasis on relocation to lightly-populated regions that are well removed from major population centers and safely away from refugee lines of drift.


Letter Re: Night Operations

James:
Regarding Pete C.'s article on night operations: The great (but now sadly defunct) magazine "Coevolution Quarterly" had a great article about night vision development sometime in the 1980s (I've got a copy of it hanging around here somewhere, if only I was organized enough to lay my hands on it) that gave a brilliant method for training night sight via peripheral vision. The technique involved taking something like a lightweight brazing rod and attaching it [off-center] to the bill of a baseball cap. On the end of the rod, you attached a small white ball or disc, which you focused on as you walked. Finding a clear path on a moonless, lightless night, you put on the cap and focus on the ball/disc and begin walking. I tried this a couple of nights and though it took a while to really get the technique down, when you became adjusted to it, the effect easily rivaled that of artificial night vision devices. Apparently, with a bit of repeated practice, you can do away with the cap and fall right into the "de-focus" that allows or the ready use of peripheral vision for natural, intensified light gathering. Pete C's article reminds me that I need to try this again, and get comfortable enough with it that I can do it at will. Regards, - Hawaiian K.


Letter Re: Amaranth--A Weed You Can Eat

Sir,
I have been organic gardening for 50 years. At one time I had the largest organic produce gardens in northern Ohio. I'm good at it.
Some years ago, some people staying with me asked if they could plant a little Amaranth in one of my gardens. They related how Amaranth may be the most consumed food in human history. It is super productive, and very nutritious. I allowed them to plant some. That was a big mistake.

If you are not really careful to harvest every seed, it will spread like wildfire. Within a year or two, it will be all over your property. If you want weed-free gardens, this is not the plant to encourage. It grows tall and thick, and can and will choke out all your other vegetables. It took me a huge amount of work to get rid of it.

Amaranth is good food, but be careful what you ask for. If you must have it, plant it a long, long way from your other gardens. Harvest every bit. And don't let the birds spread it. - Jim in Ohio


Odds 'n Sods:

Eric sent us this tale of unintended consequences: Wind Energy Bumps Into Power Grid’s Limits

o o o

Some interesting demographics: The study is a bit dated, but a 2001 survey showed Wyoming as the state with the highest rate of gun ownership: The top three states were Wyoming (59.7%), Alaska (57.8%), and Montana (57.7%). Following close behind---all at around 55%--were Idaho, South Dakota, Mississippi and West Virginia. By the way, a neighbor told me that when a gal in Wyoming gets serious about finding a husband, all she has to do is switch her perfume to Hoppes #9, and the bachelors will line up at her door. (For those uninitiated in the shooting fraternity: Hoppes #9 is a rifle bore cleaner with a distinctive smell.)

o o o

Frequent (and copious) content contributor Cheryl N. sent us another big batch of economic news and commentary: New Credit Hurdle Looms for Banks, World Largest Gold Refiner Runs Out, Is Your Bank About to Implode?, FDIC Will Need Half A Trillion Dollars, Surge in US Foreclosures Surge Past Subprimes, Debt Threatens the Entire System, Use of Food Stamps at Farmers' Markets Rise,
and The US is the Next Argentina.

o o o

Safecastle is offering folks a free hardcover copy of James Kunstler's best selling Peak Oil novel, "World Made By Hand" (retail value of $24) with the purchase of a $19 lifetime Safecastle Royal buyers club membership. Or, for those who are already members, the book is free with any purchase of at least $170 (after the club 20% discount). Speaking of Kunstler, SurvivalBlog reader Scott H. pointed us to a an audio interview with him, over at Financial Sense.

o o o

Rand Refinery Ltd., the world's largest gold refinery, ran out of South African Krugerrands after an ``unusually large'' order from a buyer in Switzerland. Hmmmm... Sounds like the smart money is is taking advantage in the recent dip in precious metals prices. Have you? (A hat tip to Kevin A for the the link.)

Jim's Quote of the Day:

"It's fairly clear to see that the [UK] government's figure for the rate of inflation has nothing at all to do with the real increase in our cost of living. The figure is deliberately manufactured in order to crush benefit payments, pensions and workers' pay rises." John Andrews in The Price of Eggs .


Jim's Quote of the Day:

"It's fairly clear to see that the [UK] government's figure for the rate of inflation has nothing at all to do with the real increase in our cost of living. The figure is deliberately manufactured in order to crush benefit payments, pensions and workers' pay rises." John Andrews in The Price of Eggs .


Sunday August 31 2008

Two Letters Re: Amaranth--A Weed You Can Eat

James,
I just wanted to let you know that this plant ([considered] a weed) is usually killed off as a pest, yet is more nutritious then wheat. It grows all over the place and if it was planted on purpose it might help a lot for people looking to survive.

Deane’s site is packed full of plants worth looking in to for food! (A good source of info while the power is up! YouTube really does have everything!)’ - Fitzy in Pennsylvania

James Wesley;

In response to the person setting up a Michigan retreat, I saw mention of Amaranth as one of his grains set aside. Amaranth will grow quite handily as a "weed" in North America, has one of the highest protein contents of any grain (not gluten either, for those that are gluten sensitive) and extremely high content of lysine. It grows rapidly and can have grain heads over 1 kilogram (2.2 pounds) with over half a million seeds therein.

I can think of few choices better suited to unsupervised growing [at an unattended retreat] than Amaranth. - Dave R.


Letter Re: Reusing Restaurant Food Ingredient Containers

Mr Rawles,
I've been thinking a lot about storing food like grains in the olive containers that get thrown out at the restaurant where I'm currently working. There made of what I assume to be food grade plastic (olive storage) and looks like they store about 7-to-8 liters. The lid is made of two pieces and has a rubber seal. If I were to wash these off a bit do you think they would serve as long term food containers?
Thanks, - Paul from Canada

JWR Replies: Those containers should be fine, since they are doubtless made of food grade plastic. Just be sure to inspect the seals to make sure that they are pliable and intact. Most of these olive buckets, barrels and tubs are made of HDPE. Since there is a slight chance of the odors from original contents permeating your grain, I recommend that you thoroughly clean the containers. (Via repeated soaking with hot, soapy water) Also, be sure to use use a mylar liner bag in each container . These liners are available in various sizes from Nitro-Pak. BTW, the same company also has a good reputation as a supplier for freshly-made oxygen absorbing packets that are properly sealed well for shipment.


Two Letters Re: Poor Customer Service From Buckshot's Camp

Mr. Rawles,
I hate to bother you, but thought you might have heard if someone was ill or passed away at Buckshot's camp?
I placed an order which was billed out, and never got it. I have called several times and got the recording, and e-mailed also, but have never heard back from them. This has been since May. I was just wondering if you had heard anything about them, and thought maybe you know someone that may know them. The game trap article in today's blog, brought this up, and I'm just grasping at straws to see if someone knows them. Thanks, - Rod

Dear Mr. Rawles,
I recently ordered a snare kit and DVD on how to use it from Buckshot's Camp online at the beginning of July [2008]. I have yet to receive shipment and have had no response to e-mails or phone calls.

I checked the BBB finally and found that he has an unsatisfactory rating with them. So I wanted to let you and your readers know this since in the past you have suggested him as a supplier of traps and snares. Stay prepared, - Michael in Oklahoma

JWR Replies: Buckshot's Camp hasn't advertised with us since early 2006. I dropped them as an advertiser because of their poor customer service. (BTW, they were one of just two advertisers that I've been forced to remove in the three years that SurvivalBlog has been up and running. All of our other 80+ advertisers have sterling reputations.) I removed my links to Buckshot's Camp in my Links page at the same time.

I'm sorry to hear that you had the order fulfillment problem Bruce Hemming's ex-wife. (She owns the mail order business, as part of their divorce settlement.)

Please pray for Bruce and his ex-wife. They need to reconcile themselves to each other and to their slighted customers. And of course we all need to reconcile ourselves to God.


Odds 'n Sods:

Reader A.M. in Cocoa, Florida sent a link to a very interesting video clip about a solar/hydrogen powered house. Coveting is a sin, but I must admit that I sorely wish that I had his sort of budget.

o o o

Kevin A. recommended a piece of commentary by Darryl Schoon: Don't Cry For Me Argentina... Save Your Tears For Yourself

o o o

Some escalation in the war of words in the nascent Cold War II: Russia Issues warning : Military help for Georgia is a 'declaration of war', and Russia bans poultry imports from 19 U.S. suppliers, and
Russia may cut off oil flow to the West . Thanks to readers KAF, Susan Z., and Mr. X, for the links.

o o o

Derek C. notes that anyone interested in some light game theory reading, might consider a piece from the Cato Institute, on how fiat money emerges from a barter economy. Derek describes it": "The author's (quite intuitive) point is that fiat money comes from convertible paper money, which in turn comes from actual commodity money, which in turn comes from barter. this transference arises because barter is an inherently unattractive form of exchange, because of high transaction and search costs. The article has implications for the re-monetization of precious metal commodities, following an economic collapse."

o o o

Anther Friday, another bank failure: Integrity Bank, in Alpharetta, Georgia. There will be many more bank runs in the next few years, so be ready.


Jim's Quote of the Day:

“And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity.” - I Corinthians 13:13


Saturday August 30 2008

Note from JWR:

Today's blog posts include two letters from "Doug Carlton" Those of you that have read my novel "Patriots: Surviving the Coming Collapse" will recognize this real-life individual as the basis for one of the novel's characters. "Doug" and I attended college and went through ROTC together, back in the early 1980s. He later went on to be a US Army aviator. He now lives in Virginia and works in the transportation industry.


Two Letters Re: The Shenandoah Valley as a Retreat Locale?

Dear SurvivalBlog Readers:

I currently live in Virginia and what Jim said about retreat locale selection is generally accurate. That's not to say "all is lost!". Hardly, there are some advantages you have in our area that I've only found in a couple other places in the US, and you can successfully find a retreat location. You just have to work harder at it. The simple fact that most people live where they do is because it's easier. The more remote locations, and the more secure, tend to be more work to live in. It's all balance and trade off.

Due to the improvements to US17 and the construction of I-66, the area you're in now will be expanding out to the west very soon. Mike knows better than anyone the amount of growth the state has experienced, and Manassas used to be in the sticks just a few years ago. Culpepper/Warrenton/et cetera. were down-right the boondocks, and they will be the next housing area for the Capitol in a decade or so. All of us see the expansion before our eyes.

The biggest problem with the Shenandoah is it's a natural corridor. I-81 and the AT just make it a massive avenue of approach. But within the mountains you can find a place that is indeed suitable. It's just going to take more work. I can't think of too many places as beautiful as that area, and even the I66 corridor is pretty, and simply put you just have to really look hard to find the right place. The farther West you go, and even into West Virginia, the terrain is more favorable, but in the end you just have to make an intelligent decision on the place that's right for you. You can name any area in the country, and with few exceptions you can probably find a decent place for a retreat, and a lot of places to avoid. That goes for West of the Mississippi as much as the East. It's just you have to look harder in the East.

Narrow down your areas to less than just a general region. Do an "IPB". That's "Intelligence Preparation of the Battlefield". Figure out the most likely risks and make a list in priority. It's your priority because it's your list. Take counsel, but it's still your survival, and you're the one who really has the responsibility for deciding what's important and what isn't. Then take a map and make overlays, or just mark the map of areas that are "no-go", like the obvious ones that you can block off as not where you're going. Things like Quantico, DC, etc. aren't probably going to be high on the list of areas for a retreat. Plot the avenues of approach on the map (the refugee flow) and you'll start seeing where to look and where not to look quickly. Once you narrow down the areas, look at resources and plot those. Basically, just take the area and graphically make the process of elimination. What's left is where you should start looking.

You can also take a more "think outside of the box" approach to things. Generally speaking it's simpler to have a "one-size-fits-all" retreat. We'd all love to live at our own ranch and somehow pay bills and live off the grid, yada, yada. Sure. For many of us it's simply not going to happen. We choose, rightly or wrongly to live where we are for a variety of reasons. The choice is ours, as the responsibility is ours and ours alone (not the government's or anyone else's). So if you're stuck in a bad place to begin with, make the most of it.

Take the list of most likely threats and see if there's a way to divide them up. For example Tsunamis, hurricanes, floods, etc. can pretty much be obviated by a retreat in a relatively close position to where you live. It doesn't take much but being inland, with high ground, and a stockpile of supplies to deal with it. Having a "risk specific" retreat complicates things in that you don't have the simplicity of a single place, but you may not really need the place for World War "Z". You are much more likely to need the place that can deal with floods, civil riots in the Capitol, hurricanes, etc. You can easily find a place like that where you desire. Do the same IPB, just base it on a narrower list of risk and you should have a wider area to choose from.

Obviously there are big disadvantages in this. More than one retreat location greatly complicates things. It increases expense, It greatly increases risk because you just might be wrong too in your planning. But sometimes your bomb shelter just can't be proof against a direct hit. There's a risk trade-off in everything.

In my years in Virginia, I've run into several situations were we were either on our own, or it had the potential. Most were Hurricanes, some blizzards, a localized riot or two, a terrorist attack, and the everyday crime/fire/etc that is frankly the most likely and just as destructive to your everyday life. (You do have a fire extinguisher in the kitchen, right?). Odds are pretty high these same things are what I'll face in the future, rather than the ultimate collapse of civilization. So there is a lot to be said about starting small and improving things. A closer retreat can deal with a lot of things you're likely to face. It can also allow you a base to rebuild your residence from if you're house burns down, etc. that's easier to operate out of than one far away. Obviously it would only be a valid locale for a limited amount of scenarios, but the most likely ones.

So think about approaching it in stages. Getting a "good enough retreat" now and a "perfect retreat" later might be a viable way to go. It's far more risky than going all out and doing the "perfect retreat" from the get-go, but the actual risk can only be judged by you for your own situation. You're the only one responsible for yourself...as it should be. Regards, - Doug Carlton


James
I enjoyed your repost of the "Illusion of Isolation" article in reply to Mike's query about the Shenandoah Valley being a good retreat location. My own observation is that the Shenandoah is far too crowded and accessible to the fleeing hordes, many of whom are already there as the northern end of the Valley is already a bedroom community for the "Peoples' Republic of Stalingrad", DC. He really needs to get out farther than is a practical commuting distance from the city. As you note, the East is a challenge because getting a full-tank distance from the city is simply not possible for the most part.

I would recommend that Mike look a little further south and west; south of Harrisonburg or quite a ways west of the interstate. Once you get ten miles back from the interstate it is an entirely different world, and if you get 25 miles west of Staunton and cross over Shenandoah Mountain you will be infinitely better off as you find yourself amongst very self-sufficient folks for the most part. There also are some isolated areas near Winchester at the northern end of the valley, but it has long been an area for weekend/ski getaways for city folk. Recently there was a northern Valley realtor whose sales pitch touted the fact that Winchester, Virginia was outside the "blast zone" for DC. All the Best, - Crusher


Letter Re: Holster, Sling, and Web Gear Recommendations

Jim,
Long before the current trend in drop-leg holsters, we used some in Army Aviation to clear the armor on the seats in some specific aircraft. The one I flew had more armor coverage, and frankly even a drop-leg wasn't going to work, so the shoulder holster was the way to go for me. Tanker wear shoulder rigs, as well as desk jockeys for the very same reason. Your pistol needs to be out of the way to do your primary job. That's the Army though. Just because Big Army does it, or uses it, it doesn't mean it's really a good idea for you as an individual. There's a lot of junk the Army uses to great effect that is just useless for the individual or small-group survivalist. Don't ever base what you need on what you see the Army, or even contractors, using. The missions are entirely different. Buy and use what you need.

That being said, drop-leg rigs are great for wearing directly on your belt, or a dedicated gun belt, along with a knife. If you remember Trasel's post a while back about gear he mentioned keeping your knife, etc. on your trouser belt, so you always have it with you, if you ditch, or just don't have your web gear. Sage advice there. A drop-leg, or even a shoulder rig, does this for you. By using the right holster (that's key there), you can have it attached to your person, and clear your web gear. If you have to ditch your web-gear, your gun and knife are still with you.

While most schools frown on shoulder holsters because of safety concerns, and the complexity of sidearm retention, in many cases it's a good choice. Pilots have used them forever, and it's unlikely you'll face a retention situation in your own cockpit. Same with tankers. I remember a picture of a P-38 pilot in the Pacific that had the usual USGI WWII shoulder rig, with the shoulder strap also going through a mag pouch and survival knife. Not a bad set-up for his use, and worth thinking about for a lot of reasons. Not the perfect rig for a night on the town, but it obviously worked for him. Even what's perfect in a schoolhouse training environment might not be perfect for you. The key is to go with what works for you.

Whatever holster you choose, if you have more than one try to keep to one system. If you're using a Safariland 6004, look at a holster with the self-locking system (SLS) for concealment, or go without [secondary] retention. What you don't want is different retention systems to deal with. Using a 6004 with SLS on your leg, then using a thumbsnap for concealment, and using a level three retention holster for belt use isn't a wise move. [For the sake if kinesthetic memory] you want to make the same movements each time to get the gun out.

Sometimes you can modify stuff to work. The Safariland 6004 is often the subject of some surgery which allows it to ride higher and much more comfortable for many. Sometimes you can get holsters that do many things. The USGI M12 [aka Bianchi UM-84 series] holster can be adapted to many different types of carry. I frankly don't think too highly of that holster, but many think USGI means it's the way to go. They're cheap enough I suppose. I currently use an Eagle brand drop leg that the drop leg flap can fold over so you can use it both as a conventional belt service holster as well as a drop leg. It rides high enough to be out of the way in drop-leg mode, and low enough to clear gear. The full flap, with Fastex fastener means it's secure no matter what I do, and the full-flap velcros out of the way to allow an open top configuration with a thumbsnap retention as well. It pretty much does it all for me from admin to tactical and it's all the same holster, so training is simplified and it's cheaper to buy one good holster than several different ones (though I always seem to buy several anyway). It's doesn't do concealed carry well, but most CCW holsters are either non-retention, or thumbsnap, so again there's nothing to re-learn in a fight.

As for slings, I said before the Israeli type has a lot going for it, and that's what I use. You can beat it in specific tasks with other slings, but for all around lugging a rifle around and still be effective with the sling, they're great.

While I agree on having different sets of web-gear for each rifle, I don't agree on caliber/weapon specific. I think they should be universal for what you're equipped with. That way all that needs to change is the magazines, and not the whole set of web gear. Weapon-specific web gear is too specific, in my opinion. Regards, - Doug Carlton


Odds 'n Sods:

With Gustav Approaching New Orleans Residents Stocking Up on AR-15s and ammo

o o o

KAF sent this: Rat meat in demand as inflation bites

o o o

L.A. Police Gear (a likely new SurvivalBlog advertiser) is having a 10% off sale, for Labor Day Weekend. Enter coupon code "LABOR".

o o o

Kevin A. suggested a background article on economics by Louis Even, titled Guernsey's Monetary Experiment. Here is a key quote: "The issues of national currency by the States of Guernsey caused neither inflation nor idleness. They created activity and prosperity. But these issues did not make any slaves, and that is why the bankers intervened."


Jim's Quote of the Day:

"At this point, our bet remains that the Feds will go to default mode which means cranking up the printing presses into the red zone, letting the dollar move ever closer to its intrinsic value: zero. That they'll follow this route is suggested by two inputs. First, a depreciating dollar means a reduction in the trillions of dollars in obligations now owed by the U.S. government. And, secondly, foreign holders don't vote." - David Galland, as quoted by The Silver Bear Cafe


Friday August 29 2008

Note from JWR:

Today we present another entry for Round 18 of the SurvivalBlog non-fiction writing contest. The contest prizes include:

First Prize: The writer of the best contributed article in the next 60 days will be awarded two transferable Front Sight "Gray" Four Day Training Course Certificates. This is an up to $4,000 value!
Second Prize: A three day course certificate from OnPoint Tactical. This certificate will be for the prize winner's choice of three-day civilian courses.
Third Prize: A copy of my "Rawles Gets You Ready" preparedness course, from Arbogast Publishing

Round 18 ends on September 30th, so get busy writing and e-mail us your entries. Remember that articles that relate practical "how to" skills for survival will have an advantage in the judging.


Night Operations--Gain the Tactical and Psychological Edge, Even Without the Aid of Night Vision Devices, by Pete C.

Sometime in the future, in a post-TEOTWAWKI environment, your retreat group may decide to send out small teams to conduct either reconnaissance or security patrols. They may want to collect information on what is happening at the nearest town or confirm/ disprove the accuracy of any information (rumors) previously attained. Whatever the mission, these teams must function as a cohesive unit every time. Their success or failure will depend on everyone’s ability to operate during darkness or periods of reduced and/ or limited visibility (to include rain, fog, snow, etc.) even if they do not have the aid of night vision devices because of expense, loss, and/or damage.

Psychological Effects
The inability to see well in darkness leads to doubt and increases apprehension. Darkness always brings out an individual’s weakness, especially in lethal situations. It has been demonstrated many times in both military and police situations that if a team member is confused, frightened, or operating in a diminished capacity, the entire team will suffer. This could lead to over-caution, which might make an individual a better target due to slowness or additional time spent being backlighted or silhouetted. The team’s ability to function (and fight) at night is directly related to confidence in individual skills, unit teamwork, and confidence in leaders.
At night, objects or shadows can appear “real”, exaggerated to the untrained mind. These illusions can come from the over-active imagination (and viewing too many horror type movies; which, due to darkness, the imagination cannot separate fact from fantasy. Illusions may also come from:
- Confusion due to an error of the senses: hearing, smell, and sight
- A mistaken impression in the mind (a low tree with no leaves on its branches is a man standing with a rifle, etc.).
- A confused mind and personal fears or phobias (a piece of rope is a snake; a clothesline full of cloths is a group of people, etc.).
As stress increases, individuals may also imagine dangers, causing fear or even panic. Fear can cause uncertainty, which could cloud an individual’s decision-making capability. This is true in all untrained or marginally experienced people. Training will diminish this dilemma (however, to some extent it will always be there); confident in their abilities, individuals and teams will be better prepared for what they may encounter

Physical Factors
Just as darkness affects the mind, it also affects the senses. Maximizing the capabilities of the senses will enhance an individuals ability to move and fight at night. Improving the senses of hearing and smelling requires training; vision is maximized by understanding how the eye operates differently at day and night and how to efficiently use its capabilities.

Hearing: At night, hearing becomes more acute. Several factors contribute to this: increased concentration; sound travels farther in cooler, moist air, and less background noise. Practice and training will help overcome an individual's fear in what they hear at night. Training enables individuals to discriminate multiple sounds, faint sounds, and sound source directions. Below are some examples of sounds that you might encounter and the distances the normal human ear can hear at night:
- Normal Footsteps (20 – 30 meters)
- Footsteps over leaves and branches (60 – 80 m)
- Normal conversation (90 – 100 m)
- Conservation in low voice (35 – 45 m)
- Coughing (55 – 65 m)
- Cocking / loading a weapon (400 – 500 m)
- Motor vehicle movement on a dirt road / highway (500 m / 1,000 m)
- Screams (1,500 m)
- Single rifle shot (2,000 – 3,000 m)
- Automatic weapons fire (3,000 – 4,000 m)
Remember sharp sounds carry much farther, and unnatural sounds are much more easily identified. When patrolling, whenever possible, try to use natural or normal sounds to mask your movement. Move quickly as possible when these sounds can be used to your advantage (e.g., a car drives by, a gust of wind through the trees, etc).
Check team members and equipment for objects, which can make noise. Have member’s jump-shuffle before moving out. Some things to be aware of:
- Loose change or keys in pockets
- Hand guards or sling on weapons
- Loose boot laces
- Loosely attached items, such as flashlights
- Items that “flop” forward when you stoop or bend over
- Water sloshing in a half-full canteen

Smell: Of all the senses, smell is used the least and often ignored. In the movie “Uncommon Valor”, Col. Rhodes (Gene Hackman) tells the team “…we will be eating nothing but Vietnamese food from now on. We don’t want to be tromping through the jungle smelling like Americans”. This was because different diets produce different characteristic human odors. With some training, individuals should be able to easily detect and differentiate between different odors. Additional clues like exhaust from fuel-burning engines, cooking odors, campfire, tobacco and aftershave can linger long enough to signal an individual/ team of possible contact. Below are some examples of odors that you might encounter and the distances the normal human nose can detect them at night:
- Cigarette smoke (150 m)
- Heat tab (300 m)
- Diesel fuel (500 m)

Vision: Vision at night is different from vision during the day. At night, eyes cannot differentiate color, and easily blinded when exposed to light. The color receptors are clustered near the center of the retina, creates a central blind spot, which causes larger objects to be missed as distances increase. Below are some examples of light sources that you might encounter and the distances at which these light sources could be seen at night with the naked eye:
- Lighted cigarette (500 – 800 m)
- Lighted match (1,500 m)
- Muzzle flashes from small-arms weapons (1,500 – 2,000 m)
- Flashlight (2,000 m)
- Vehicle headlights (4,000 – 8,000 m)
While at the retreat, members know that during the hours of darkness, everyone must observe strict blackout rules. Windows, entrances, and other openings through which light can shine must be covered with shutters, screens, curtains, and other special opaque materials to prevent light from escaping. The same is true while out on patrol (e.g. if you need to review a map, use a tactical red lens flashlight (with cardboard filter cutout – to create a smaller beam); be on the ground and under a poncho). If members are lucky enough to have night vision devices, be aware that they can throw off a retro-reflective glow commonly know by soldiers as “cat-eyes” reflection. This glow could be seen by others also using night vision devices. Members should always assume that others, not in the group, have just as much or even more technology as they do.

Relation of Vision to Light and Shadows:
- When light, such as the low full moon is faced vision is decreased.
- When light, such as the high full moon, is behind, vision is increased.
- When light is straight overhead, the effect is neutral. To the patrol looking for a target, both are easily seen when moving, and hard to see when in the shadows or stationary.
- Direct lighting will ruin your night vision.
- It is easy to see looking from darkness into light, but nearly impossible when looking from a lighted area into darkness. (e.g. standing near a campfire).
- When holding a light, you become a long-range target, while you can only see your immediate surroundings.
- Silhouetting an object with light from its rear will clearly define it.
- Camouflaged individuals in the shadows are extremely hard to see, even when moving.
- The smaller the object, the further away it will look. The bigger the object, the nearer it will appear making range estimation difficult.
- Bright objects will seem closer, obscured or dark objects will seem farther away, again making range estimation difficult.

Improving Night Abilities
Awareness: Become in tuned with your surroundings – be able to differentiate between what is normal, and what is not (or being able to notice the absence of normal sights, sounds, objects, or activities). It is also being able to subconsciously catalog the various sounds and have a mental alarm when something is not right. Being aware is something that can be developed through training. Remember, you do not always have to be in camouflage, with weapons or on patrol to conduct training. Some examples of exercises that individuals or a team can practice (day and night) are:
- In either an urban environment or at the retreat, sit quietly and carefully, listen to each and every sound, identify and cataloging each individually, rather than incorporating it into the overall drone creating by the mass of sounds. Be aware of what is natural, or normal, and when the sounds should be heard (e.g., birds singing during the day and not at night). Lock the sound into your subconscious so that you will be able to take warning when their absence is inappropriate, as well as when their presence is normal. When doing these exercises, simply relax, breathe deeply and focus your mind.
- Practice on smelling techniques. Face into the wind, nose at a 45-degree angle, relax, breath normally; then take sharp sniffs, concentrate and think about specific odor.
- Practice moving at night or with a blindfold, becoming aware of texture and feel.
- Practice moving through various terrains, during different times of the day and the year; and in various weather conditions.
- Sit around a moderately normal area, such as dry, short grass (not knee-deep dry leaves) with everyone’s eyes tightly closes, head down. While everyone is concentrating on listening, have one team member try to move toward someone else and try to touch them, without being detected; or place someone in a designated area, and try to move the team to the position without being detected. With practice, members will be surprised not only at how well they can now move more quietly; but also, how good they have become at detecting sounds.
Dark Adaptation: Is the process by which the eyes increase their sensitivity to low levels of light. Individuals adapt to the darkness at varying degrees and rates. During the first 30 minutes in a dark environment, the eye sensitivity increases roughly 10,000 times, but not much further after that time. [JWR Adds: A good diet that has plentiful Retinol (the animal form of Vitamin A) is also important. Just keep in mind that because Vitamin A is fat-soluble, you should not over-dose on Vitamin A. Remember the standard KADE rule for dosing vitamins that are not water soluble!]
- Adaptation is affected by exposure to bright lights such as matches, flashlights, flares, and vehicle headlights; taking 30 - 45 minutes for full recovery.
- Night vision devices can impede dark adaptation; however, if an individual adapts to the dark before donning the device, they should regain full dark adaptation in about two minutes after removing them.
- Color perception decreases during darkness where light and dark colors distinguished depending on the intensity of the reflected light.
- Visual sharpness at night is one-seventh of what it is during the day, this is why individuals can only see large, bulky objects.

Protecting Night Vision: While working and performing tasks in daylight, the exposure to this light will directly affect night vision. Exposure to bright sunlight for two to five hours causes a definite decrease in visual sensitivity, which can also persist for equally as long. During this same time, the rate of dark adaptation and the degree of night vision capability will be decreased. These effects are cumulative and may persist for several days. Therefore, neutral density sunglasses or equivalent filter lenses should be used during daylight when night operations are anticipated.

Night Vision Scanning: Dark adaptation is only the first step toward maximizing the ability to see at night. Night vision scanning enables individuals to overcome many of the physiological limitations of their eyes and reduce the visual illusions that so often confuse them. The technique involves scanning from either right to left (or from left to right) using a slow, regular scanning movement. Although both day and night searches use scanning movements, at night individuals must avoid looking directly at a faintly visible object when trying to confirm its presence.

Off-Center Vision: Viewing an object using central vision during daylight poses no limitation, but this technique is ineffective at night. This is because the eye has a night blind spot that exists during low light. To compensate for this limitation, individuals use what is called “off-center vision”. This technique requires looking approximately 10 degrees above, below, or to either side of an object rather than directly at it. This allows the peripheral vision of the eye to remain in contact with an object. It must be noted that even when off-center viewing is practiced, the image of an object viewed longer than two to three seconds tends to bleach out and become one solid tone. As a result, the object is no longer visible and can produce a potentially unsafe operating condition. To overcome this condition, the individual must be aware of this phenomenon and avoid looking at an object longer than two to three seconds. By shifting their eyes from one off-center point to another, individuals can continue to pick up the object in his peripheral field of vision.

Training: While at the retreat, it is important to set up realistic training scenarios, using role players, and in the terrain, your team is most likely to encounter. Since night operations are a broad topic, covering a full spectrum of many necessary skills, the following minimum things should be evaluated:
- Discipline and teamwork.
- Proper use of cover and concealment (including react to flares - ground/ air)
- Selection of proper positions and routes (geographic study of the terrain to include potential obstacles, natural or man-made)
- Noise and light discipline.
- Team’s ability to follow its plan.
- Use of contingency plans.
- Employment of proper tactics.
- Proper undetected movement
- Traveling formations (file versus wedge)
- Good planning sequence.
- Stealth techniques (night walking, stalking)
- Proper use of camouflage.
- React to unplanned contact (immediate action drills – contact front/ rear; right/ left; ambush, etc.)
- Movement on ridges and hilltops (which lead to detection).
- Abort and rally point exercises.
- Crossing danger areas (roads or open areas).
In addition to t

Tuesday, August 26, 2008

Tuesday August 26 2008

Note from JWR:

SurvivalBlog has now been up and running with daily posts for three full years. I'm pleased to report that there are now more than 5,000 archived SurvivalBlog articles, letters, and quotes of the day. These are all available for free, unlimited access. I hope that you find these resources useful and inspirational. My special thanks to the 2% of readers that have become 10 Cent Challenge subscribers. These subscriptions are entirely voluntary, and gratefully accepted. Your subscriptions and your patronage with our advertisers make it possible for me to continue to publish SurvivalBlog every day, without fail. (I haven't missed a day yet!)

I'm also pleased to report that on a recent Monday (our peak readership day of the week), in a 24 hour period we logged a record 14,212 unique visits, gobbling up 13.25 gigabytes of bandwidth. Your subscriptions are what pays for that daily bandwidth, our hosting fees, domain registrations, and much more. Many thanks for your generous support of SurvivalBlog!


Letter Re: Holster, Sling, and Web Gear Recommendations

Dear Mr. Rawles,
I just read "Patriots" and "Tappan On Survival". Both were greatly helpful and entertaining as well. Can you recommend any type of web gear to have ammo, handgun and rifle at the ready, both at home and on the farm? I see our military forces with all kinds of web equipment configurations, most notable is the hand gun in a thigh mounted holster. Front Sight taught me to shoot from a belt mounted holster and discourages shoulder holsters. It seems to me that a shoulder holster has a place, especially in a vehicle. Any thoughts on tactical rifle/shotgun slings?

Thanks for all you do, - RP

JWR Replies: Like you, I do not advocate thigh-level pistol holsters. These seem to have proliferated in recent years mostly because they look snazzy in SWAT television shows and movies. They are actually quite impractical for just about all situations except rappelling. (Which, if I really correctly is what they were originally designed for.) At thigh-level, a holstered pistol is quite tiring to wear when hiking. They are also slow to access, which increases the time to draw and fire your pistol. My advice is to instead buy a sturdy belt holster, and leave those thigh-level holsters for the Mall Ninja crowd.

I cannot over-stress the following: You must tailor a full web gear rig for each of your long guns. This should include a USGI LC-2 web belt, Y-harness (or H-harness) type padded suspenders, two ammo pouches, a couple of first aid/compass pouches, and a canteen with cover. Granted, you can only carry one long gun at a time, but odds are that you will be arming equipping a lot of family and friends after the Schumer hits the fan. So you will need a set of web gear for each gun. To simplify things, I bought a pile of new nylon sleeping bag stuff sacks in various earth tone colors, and placed a set of web gear and magazines in each of them. I then attached a label card to each sack's drawstring, associating it with its respective gun, for quick "grab it and go" reference.

It is important to think through: how, where, and and when you will need to carry or access your guns on a day-to-day basis. How will you carry in you car, on your tractor, on your quad, or on your horse? How will you carry a pistol if you need to conceal it? How will you carry in foul weather? What will you carry when gardening or during other chores? How and when will you carry accessories such as cleaning kits, bipods, and spotting scopes? What other items will you need to carry in the field that will also need to be kept handy, such as binoculars, flashlights, night vision gear, and GPS receivers?

For holsters, I recommend Kydex Blade-Tech brand holsters and mag pouches. That is what we use here at the Rawles Ranch. And when carrying just a pistol by itself, we use modestly-priced Uncle Mike's black nylon/velcro belts. (They are "Plain Jane", but sturdy and functional.) We do have a couple of leather "Summer Special" concealment holsters made by Milt Sparks Holsters. Their belts and holsters are highly recommended. I've been doing business with them for more than 20 years. They don't skimp on quality. The Milt Sparks belts and holsters range in style and price from utilitarian (like the rough-side out "Summer Special") to some that are downright stylish. (And priced accordingly.) The Blade-Tech holsters inexpensive enough that I put one holster and pistol magazine pouch on each of my sets of my sets of long gun web gear. This makes them much more readily available and eliminates the need to constantly reconfigure rigs, as situations change. Keep in mind that what is nothing more than a time-consuming inconvenience today, could cost be a huge problem en extremis, tomorrow!

I agree that shoulder holsters are undesirable in most situations. They do make sense, however, when you are a car for more than an hour. The bottom line is that if you find yourself removing your belt holster on long drives, then you are probably better off with a shoulder holster in those situations. If you ever have to "bail out" of a car in a hurry, you need to be armed. That means that the pistol has to be attached to your person. And if that means using a shoulder holster for the sake of comfort--despite their drawbacks--then so be it.

For rifle slings, I recommend a traditional two-loop military sling design. They really help steady a rifle for accurate long-range shooting. Attending a weekend WRSA or Appleseed rifle shooting clinic (both highly recommended, BTW) will show you how to properly adjust a two-loop sling for various shooting positions. (Once you've identified your "summer" sling adjustment notches (when wearing just a shirt) for prone and sitting positions, I recommend that using a black magic marker you circle the holes and mark them with a "P" and "Sit" , for quick reference. Draw another line or preferably a "W"--for Winter--at each adjustment, and again a circle around the notch holes, to indicate the longer adjustment needed when wearing a winter coat, a target shooting jacket, or a field jacket. OBTW, speaking of positions: I don't advocate using standing unsupported positions for either hunting or most defensive shooting situations. It takes just a moment to sit down, and just a bit longer to get prone. Not only will you be much more steady (and hence more accurate), but you will also present a much smaller target to your opponent(s). Yes, there are situations where you need to stand (such as when you are in tall brush, or when you are moving tactically), but the general rule is: If the situation allows it, then sit down, or better yet get prone!

For shotgun slings, in my experience a padded nylon extra-long sling (such as an M60 sling) works well. Unfortunately, most shotguns come from the factory with sling swivel studs that are mounted on the bottom of the gun. These are designed for duck hunters, not tactical use. Properly, they should have the front sling swivel mounted on the side, and the rear sling swivel mounted on the top of the stock. This way, when you carry a riotgun with the sling around the back of your neck (to keep the gun handy to come up to your shoulder quickly ) the gun won't flop upside down when you remove your hands. Retrofit your riotguns, as needed, for this configuration.

Locking quick detachable (QD) sling swivels are a must, because there are many tactical situations in which you won't want a sling at all. You need to be able to quickly attach and detach a sling.

For horse or quad (ATV) scabbards, I like the new brown Cordura nylon scabbards that are now on the market. Leather is more traditional, but it takes a painfully long time to dry out, which can induce rust on a gun in short order. Brown nylon won't win any beauty contests but it works. OBTW, buy a couple of spare tie-down straps for each scabbard, to give them greater mounting versatility.

OBTW, dull (non-glossy) olive drab (O.D.) duct tape is your friend. Buy a couple of big rolls of it. It has umpteen uses out in the field. I wrap each of my Y-harness snaps with duct tape, to keep them from rattling or coming loose. It is also useful for toning down any reflective objects. The best field gear is very quiet, very secure, and very unobtrusive. Applying O.D. duct tape helps with all three of those.

In closing, I 'need to add one important point: You can own the very best guns, and have the very best holsters and accessories, but they will be marginal at best in untrained hands. Once you've invested in your first gun, you should follow through and invest in the best training available. I most strongly recommend taking advantage of Front Sight's current "Guns and Gear " offer. I should mention that The Memsahib and I have both taken the Four Day Defensive Handgun course at Front Sight, and we can vouch that it is absolutely top notch. The trainers exude a quiet professionalism that is amazing. There is no shouting, bullying, or theatrical posturing. These folks are the best, and they know how to pass on their knowledge. We saw some shooters that had literally never fired a handgun before walk away at the end of that course with a level of combat handgun shooting proficiency that was better than most police officers! And I learned more about practical pistol shooting in four days than I had leaned in six years as a US Army officer! I guarantee you that the training at Front Sight will not disappoint you. Go for it! If you are serious about preparedness, then you should get the best training available. The Memsahib Adds: There were several women in our class that had never fired a gun before--including one that was attending Front Sight because her life had recently been threatened, and she was being stalked. The Front Sight instructors are exceptional in their ability to work with novice shooters, and were willing to work with students one-on-one, to encourage them.


Four Letters Re: What Will We Eat as the Oil Runs Out?, by Richard Heinberg

Jim:
What scares me [in Heinberg's article] is the use of words like “policy,” “regulations,” “controls,” “comprehensive plan,” etc.
At the least, this is government control of the economy. At the worst, of our personal lives. (Population control.)
He may have some technical points, but he is a bad sociologist. And a bad economist.

A free economy may not be the most efficient, but it works very well when the social side is considered.
There are all ready farmers of multi thousand acre places on the Great Plains, both US and Canada that are growing a few hundred acres of oil seed stock for their own, on farm, bio diesel operations.
Solar heated pig houses have been around for decades.
It is not uncommon for today’s dairy farms to create more electricity than they need with generators running off methane made on site.
I just read a story where a local ice company converted from electric refrigeration to a solar heated ammonia system. His electric bill was virtually eliminated.
All this so Joe Sixpack can get a bag of ice on his way to the lake.

All this is being done by individuals looking at current events, and thinking about the future. On their own.No “comprehensive plan” needed. No government involvement needed. (Or wanted.)

People are not stupid. They can, and do, make mistakes. But in the end, no control has always won out over control.
Do I think we have problems on the horizon? Sure. And I am making plans.
But I do not think running out of oil will be the cause. There are two factors keeping this from happening. First,
People, and companies, are, on their own, starting to conserve and convert.(Wal-Mart, and others, are putting solar panels on their store roofs.)

Second., There are still huge, untapped reserves around the Earth.
To date they have been bypassed for economic and political reasons, but when the price becomes right, those obstacles seem to go away.
According to Paul Ehrlich we all should have starved to death 30 years ago if we didn’t come up with a “comprehensive plan.”
We didn’t, and I don’t know about you, but I weigh about twice what I did 30 years ago. - Ken S.

Jim,
The article by Richard Heinberg was very informative, but after all is said and done the fact remains that the problem is not food production, peak oil, peak water, phosphorous or anything else. Unless population growth is addressed, no amount of organic farming, technology or other methods of increasing production can be anything but a temporary fix.
Thank you for your fine blog. - E.L. in Washington

James:

I am not so sure about the veracity of the two-part article by Richard Heinberg . Let me give you two examples:

On the point of needing fertilizer he wrote:
"The only solution here will be to recycle nutrients by returning all animal and humans manures to cultivated soil, as Asian farmers did for many centuries, and as many ecological farmers have long advocated."

It has been long known that spreading human waste in the field also spreads stomach ailments and other diseases. I would advise thinking about this a bit more
before doing it.

At the end of his article Richard Heinberg mentioned no-interest loans for farm land purchases. Didn't we just see what low interest rates for home loans did? Something like create a bubble in house prices, bubble pops, people lose their homes, banks around the world start failing. God only knows what else is in store for us because of bad monetary policy. And this guy wants to repeat this who thing by putting the same conditions on farm land, the thing that grows our food. - Ben M.

Dear Jim:
Well Richard Heinberg’s article certainly alarmed me, but not in the way he intended!
Yes, Peak Oil is real - but like any other commodity in a free market, shortages produce higher prices. Higher prices produce conservation, substitution, innovation, and a horde of entrepreneurs seeking to profit from the changed economic circumstances by giving consumers better options. No guarantees that our standard of living won’t go down during the transition to other energy sources, but the free (or currently semi-free) market has produced an incredible rise in living standards for a few centuries now (even before oil came on stream).
Richard Heinberg seems blind to the power of the market, and instead worships the power of the state to solve the Peak Oil problem. My jaw dropped when he spoke approvingly of how Cuba’s command economy adapted to the loss of Soviet oil. Yes, let’s just listen to the “experts” and go back to using oxen like the Cubans! Yikes! Somehow I think the human race has the creativity and ingenuity to do a little better than that!
But the biggest clue to his statist mindset - he calls for government subsidies of the “appropriate” solutions. And exactly which "omniscient" bureaucrat or politician figures out the optimal solution(s) to subsidize? To quote Thomas Sowell roughly: “I can’t think of a worse system than having the the people making the decisions be the same ones who pay no price for being wrong.”

How about entrepreneurs with their own money on the line making those decisions? How about consumers, voting with their own money, deciding which of these entrepreneurs profits? You know, the free market system that has the poorest folks in our society living better than the kings of 300 years ago…
Finally, the US government that Mr. Heinberg thinks can make rational decisions currently subsidizes the insane ethanol boondoggle. Many studies indicate ethanol takes more energy in oil inputs than the energy produced as ethanol. So our government subsidizes this energy sinkhole, sucking up scarce grain supplies, and consequently grain prices are artificially high. This is causing malnutrition of some of the poorest people on the planet. Why not even a peep about the reality of government subsidies distorting the market, and the truly evil results.
The sad part is that all the good that comes from his organization (the Post Carbon Institute) and its’ promotion of creative solutions will be overshadowed by the damage done by giving more intellectual support to government intervention.

So, indeed I am alarmed. If the Congress Critters listen to “experts” like this, who are ignorant of free market economics, we will have more boondoggles like the ethanol subsidies. If Peak Oil is a big a problem as he thinks it is, then we can’t afford government “help” misallocating scarce resources into losing propositions - while over taxation and over-regulation strangles entrepreneurs searching for viable solutions. Yours truly, - OSOM


Odds 'n Sods:

New SurvivalBlog reader Brad H. mentioned the old farmer's standby product: Bag Balm. It is a medicated petroleum jelly that is marketed towards livestock but works wonders for dried skin on humans Brad notes: "Working winters in construction, my hands constantly become cracked. After a few days of using the balm, the crack is healed. I also use it for abrasions and small cuts and shortens the healing time. Most Agway [and other feed] stores carry the product."

o o o

Costa Rica Jones flagged this: Diesel-Powered Mitsubishi Racing Lancer Fulfills Every Post-Apocalypse Fantasy Ever, Has 480 Lb-Ft Of Torque.

o o o

Cheryl N. found this: Imminent Bank Failures- Credit Crisis Worst is Yet to Come. And this: Looming Financial Catastrophe: A Real Inconvenient Truth

o o o

Two readers suggested watching Chris Martenson's video primer on Peak Oil.


Jim's Quote of the Day:

"Self-sufficiency isn't a sexy idea. At best, people who say they're interested in being self-sufficient are stereotyped as dour, old-fashioned rural types. At worst, they're seen as fanatical survivalists planning for an apocalypse. Economists also tell us that self-sufficiency is an anachronism. Instead, it is specialization that produces wealth, and economies - including the world economy - produce the most wealth when everyone, including countries, specializes in what they do best and then trades their products for the other things they need. The more specialization, the more connectivity among specialists, and the more trade along those connections, the better." - Thomas Homer-Dixon and Sarah Wolfe, ia a recent Globe and Mail editorial titled "Everything is Not Peachy"


Monday August 25 2008

Note from JWR:

Today, with permission, we present a guest editorial from Vox Day, the editor of the widely-read Vox Popoli blog.


Stock Market Suckers, by Vox Day

Suckers! Many conservatives are aquiver with excitement that George Delano is daring to brave the third rail of American politics, the much-beloved welfare program set up by his philosophical predecessor, FDR. It is true, of course, that Social Security is nothing but a government-run Ponzi scheme, that there is no trust fund, that as an investment it is a complete rip-off, that it rewards white women at the expense of black men and that it is an outrageous violation of the Constitution of the United States of America.

But this does not mean that the Bush administration's plan to allow a modicum of private investment in the stock market is necessarily a winner or even an expansion of individual freedom in America. A single column is not sufficient to address a subject this complex, so I shall simply focus on one erroneous argument that is often used to support the administration's plan, namely, the notion that stock prices inevitably move up over time.

Superficially, this appears to be a most persuasive argument. If one looks back to 1965, which is when 65-year-olds retiring now were first entering the job market en masse, the Dow was around 900. Last Friday, the Dow closed at 10,800, a 12x gain. There can be little question that no Social Security recipient is getting back $12 for every dollar he put into the system, and yet, we must consider the first of several flaws in this crude analysis, namely, inflation.

Of that $12, almost half was nothing but inflation. One 1965 dollar is worth $5.81 now. That phenomenal gain doesn't looks so great now, given that one could do better than half as well just collecting compound interest, even at the miserable interest rates offered in basic savings accounts. But that's not all – it gets much worse.

One of the many dirty little secrets of Wall Street is that the Dow of 1965 is not the Dow of today. In fact, the Dow of 1995 is not the Dow of today, nor is that of 2003, for that matter. This is due to "rebalancing," which is a reconstitution of the index to get rid of companies that are underperforming or disappearing altogether. It is vital to understand this, because no investments are made in indices and relatively few are made in index-matching funds. Most investments are made in the stocks of individual companies and, due to this "rebalancing," the return on the dogs and the bankrupted dead are not reflected in these historical comparisons. Since 1999, seven corporations representing almost one-quarter of the Dow have been dropped and replaced.

The situation is significantly worse with regard to the NASDAQ-100 (NDX), which flip-flops more often than John Kerry running for office. Last year alone, eight companies were kicked out of the showcase technology index – Cephalon, Compuware, First Health Group, Gentex, Henry Schein, NVIDIA, Patterson-UTI Energy and Ryanair. Some of these corporations had been added only recently, and it is even possible for companies to bounce in and out of the NDX as their stock price alternately soars and sinks. For example, Synopsys and Symantec both rejoined the index in 2001 after being previously dropped.

In the last four years, there have been 44 changes to the 100 companies making up the NDX – 1999 was a banner year for such beauty-enhancing alterations, as the addition of 30 new companies helped drive the index to its all-time high of 4,816.35 on March 24, 2000. Despite the rebound year of 2003, and the aforementioned attempts to pretty up the index, the NDX is still down 68 percent since that 2000 high.

And if you'd been unfortunate enough to invest in some of those 30 corporations added in 1999, you'd have done even worse. You'd likely have nothing at all. Global Crossing (GX) was one of those high-flying newcomers – it was dropped by December of the following year and an attempt to see how it's doing on today an online financial site will reveal the following result: "Symbol(s) do not exist: GX."

Yes, and neither does your retirement fund ...

A legitimate historical analysis of any index must account for all of this rebalancing turnover. Unfortunately, the market masters do not make this easy. The NASDAQ even claims not to keep track of this information – it's much more interested in explaining how it is the stock market for the next 100 years, even if its annual rate of 11 percent turnover means it will have fewer original pieces left to it than Cher in a decade, let alone a century.

The ancient Roman saying caveat emptor is applicable to every proposed transaction, but never more so than with regard to the stock markets, where history is rewritten on an annual basis. The Bush administration's plan features a number of questionable assumptions, but its biggest flaw is that its logic is based on a foundation of historical fiction.

About the Author: Vox Day is a novelist and Christian libertarian. Visit his web log, Vox Popoli, for daily commentary and responses to reader e-mail.


Stabilized Gasoline From Three Years of Abusive Storage Performs Well

Jim -
Last week, I rotated some gasoline that was put into storage ont he 1st of March, 2005. It was in plastic fuel cans with Sta-Bil added, per the directions. They sat in a storage garage subject to midwest summer temps for one year, in an un-cooled basement garage the other years. I poured the fuel into a 1/3 tank of gas in my car. No noticeable difference in starting or running of the engine. Almost 3.5 years - not bad - just wish I could have replaced it for te same cost I originally filled the cans for![It was then around $1.95 per gallon.] I did buy on the recent dip to $3.65 per gallon [when I re-filled the cans.]

On another topic: Last week, the home market in KC dropped an average of 1% in just one week. How much longer before the house of cards collapses? - Beach


Two Letters Re: A Do-It-Yourself Denture Adhesive Formula

Jim:
In answer to the recent query in SurvivalBlog about denture adhesives, Sea-Bond is an all natural wafer with [a very long shelf life--] no expiration. It sells for $5.99 for three boxes of 15 wafers each. It is the only thing I could find that would do. I'd stock up on these for long term use. - TD

Mr. Rawles,
This formula comes from a book that I have in my arsenal of survival books, entitled "Formulas, Methods,Tips and Data for Home and Workshop" by Kenneth M. Swezey (I can't tell you how many times over the years we have used it but I had to buy an extra one just in case.)
He states "Most of the proprietary adhesives consist of just one or two common gums or a combination of them, with the addition of a trace of flavor".

Here is his denture adhesive recipe:
Gum-Tragacanth-Powder 3 ounces (available most craft stores for cake decorating/check the grocer aisle in the cake mixes too)
Powdered Karaya gum 1 ounce (health food/herbal/supplement stores)
Sassafras Oil 35 drops (not available anymore because of health concerns and illicit use. Mrs. Foxtrot suggests peppermint oil, it is what she uses for our Toothpaste recipe)

Shake the two powdered gums in a dry wide mouthed bottle until thoroughly mixed. Add the oil and shake again until the oil has blended with the powders. Sprinkle sparingly on the denture and place in mouth.

Best wishes for Reader Bill T. - Mr. Foxtrot

JWR Replies: I've posted this solely for educational purposes. Consult your dentist! Beware of any formulas from old formulary books that pre-date modern food and drug safety regulations. I do not recommend experimenting with any chemicals that will contact human tissue. I'm only presenting this because the topic was in the context of a worst-case societal collapse. If anyone were ever to use such a formula in an emergency, then they should first test a very small contact area, both to test the adhesive's its strength, and for gum or other tissue irritation. In this instance, it is quite important that if it is a partial denture that you make sure that it would not "over bond" or inadvertently bond to your teeth or other dental work!

Peppermint oil is a great essential oil to keep on hand. It is particularly useful for settling stomach upsets. (Just one drop on your tongue will do.) However, be forewarned that it is highly aromatic, so just few drops would probably suffice for the four-ounce formula that you cited.

As I've mentioned before, old formulary books are worth collecting. One of my favorite formulary reprints is Kurt Saxon's book: "Granddad's Wonderful Book of Chemistry"--primarily a reprint of the classic formulary "Dick's Encyclopedia", circa 1872. Saxon also assembled a dictionary of old fashioned chemical terms and synonyms and included it in the front of his reprint. This is worth its weight in gold. (Having an old formulary is great, but if you don't know that "oil of mirbane" is now called nitro-benzene, then a lot of formulary knowledge verges on useless.) Kurt has some far-out political beliefs which, as a Christian, I find abhorrent. (Kurt Saxon is both an atheist and a eugenicist.) But if you skip past those rantings, all of his books are great references. I've heard that a few of his hard copy books are now out of print, but that they are all still available on CD-ROM.

OBTW, if you search through used book stores, you will occasionally find other old formulary book from the late 1800s. Buy them when you find them. They are treasure troves of useful arcana!

Special notes of caution on home chemistry:
Use extreme care whenever working with chemicals--even when doing something as basic as making soap. Always wear full goggles, long sleeves, and gloves. Always work in a well-ventilated area. Wear a respirator mask, when appropriate. Always keep an A-B-C fire extinguisher handy. Keep an emergency eyewash bottle handy. When working with a chemical that could burn your skin, be prepared with a bucket of water (if appropriate) or the appropriate neutralizer. Never use any of your regular kitchen utensils, containers, or measuring instruments when working with chemicals. (Have a dedicated set, and clearly mark them as such!) Never work alone. Study reactivity tables, and always keep them in mind. Whenever working with anything flammable or potentially explosive material, always work with minute quantities for your experiments. Keep in mind that 19th Century safety standards were considerably more relaxed than today's, so old formularies often omit safety warnings. Always remember that exposure to some substances such as lead, mercury, and carbon monoxide are insidious and cumulative. FWIW, I'm not putting forth all these strong warnings simply to cover my assets from a lawsuit. I really sincerely mean them, since I've "been there, done that". As an over-exuberant teenage chemistry hobbiest I caught my hair on fire a time or two.


Odds 'n Sods:

FerFAL (SurvivalBlog's correspondent in Argentina) recently posted some interesting comments on resisting violent crime, in his personal blog

o o o

The WRSA has another "Grid-Down Medical Course" scheduled in Everett, Washington, September 12th to 14th. Their training is inexpensive, and highly recommended.

o o o

Pauly from Canada recommended the National Geographic documentary "Guns, Germs, and Steel" to add some historical perspective to Richard Heinberg's recent article.

o o o

Update: I spoke too soon yesterday when I mentioned that Detroit's Big Three Auto makers are courting Congress for a $25 billion bailout. "Photo Tom" sent this: GM, Ford Seek $50 Billion From U.S., Double Request


Jim's Quote of the Day:

"We are not only headed for a Depression, but a violent Depression that will be far worse than [the one that started in] 1929. Some experts believe the United States will fall into the chaos, bedlam and anarchy that tore apart Yugoslavia. I am not going that far, but I know our morals and ethics are not the same as they were in 1929. Moreover, we are a far more violent society and totally dependent upon a well oiled system for delivery of food and basic services." - Mike Morgan


Sunday August 24 2008

Note from JWR:

Today we present the conclusion of a lengthy and scholarly guest article from Richard Heinberg, the author of eight books, and a Research Fellow of PostCarbon.org. (Part 1 was posted on August 23, 2008.)


What Will We Eat as the Oil Runs Out? (Pt. 2) , by Richard Heinberg

Impact of Biofuels

One factor influencing food prices arises from the increasing incentives for farmers worldwide to grow biofuel crops rather than food crops. Ethanol and biodiesel can be produced from a variety of crops including maize, soy, rapeseed, sunflower, cassava, sugar cane, palm, and jatropha. As the price of oil rises, many farmers are finding that they can produce more income from their efforts by growing these crops and selling them to a biofuels plant, than by growing food crops either for their local community or for export.

Already nearly 20 percent of the US maize crop is devoted to making ethanol, and that proportion is expected to rise to one quarter, based solely on existing projects-in-development and government mandates. Last year US farmers grew 14 million tons of maize for vehicles. This took millions of hectares of land out of food production and nearly doubled the price of corn. Both Congress and the White House favor expanding ethanol production even further - to replace 20 percent of gasoline demand by 2017 - in an effort to promote energy security by reducing reliance on oil imports. Other nations including Britain are mandating increased biofuel production or imports as a way of reducing carbon emissions, though most analyses show that the actual net reduction in CO2 will be minor or nonexistent.14

The US is responsible for 70 percent of world maize exports, and countries such as Mexico, Japan, and Egypt that depend on American corn farmers use maize both as food for people and feed for animals. The ballooning of the US ethanol industry is therefore impacting food availability in other nations both directly and indirectly, raising the price for tortillas in Mexico and disrupting the livestock and poultry industries in Europe and Africa.

Grain, a Barcelona-based food-resources NGO, reports that the Indian government is committed to planting 14 million hectares with jatropha for biodiesel production. Meanwhile, Brazil plans to grow 120 million hectares of fuel crops, and Africa up to 400 million hectares. While currently unproductive land will be used for much of this new production, many millions of people will be forced off that land in the process.15

Lester Brown, founder of the Washington-based Earth Policy Institute, has said: "The competition for grain between the world's 800 million motorists, who want to maintain their mobility, and its two billion poorest people, who are simply trying to survive, is emerging as an epic issue."16 This is an opinion no longer being voiced just by environmentalists. In its twice-yearly report on the world economy, released October 17, the International Monetary Fund noted that, "The use of food as a source of fuel may have serious implications for the demand for food if the expansion of biofuels continues."17 And earlier this month, Oxfam warned the EU that its policy of substituting ten percent of all auto fuel with biofuels threatened to displace poor farmers. Jean Ziegler, a UN special reporter went so far as to call the biofuel trade "a crime against humanity," and echoed journalist George Monbiot's call for a five-year moratorium on government mandates and incentives for biofuel expansion.18

The British government has pledged that "only the most sustainable biofuels" will be used in the UK, but, as Monbiot has recently noted, there are no explicit standards to define "sustainable" biofuels, and there are no means to enforce those standards in any case.19

Impact of Climate Change and Environmental Degradation

Beyond the push for biofuels, the food crisis is also being driven by extreme weather events and environmental degradation.

The phrase "global warming" implies only the fact that the world's average temperature increase by a degree or more over the next few decades. The much greater problem for farmers is destabilization of weather patterns. We face not just a warmer climate, but climate chaos: droughts, floods, and stronger storms in general (hurricanes, cyclones, tornadoes, hail storms) - in short, unpredictable weather of all kinds. Farmers depend on relatively consistent seasonal patterns of rain and sun, cold and heat; a climate shift can spell the end of farmers' ability to grow a crop in a given region, and even a single freak storm can destroy an entire year's national production for some crops. Given the fact that modern agriculture has become highly centralized due to cheap transport and economies of scale, the damage from that freak storm is today potentially continental or even global in scale. We have embarked on a century in which, increasingly, freakish weather is normal.

According to the UN's World Food Program (WFP), 57 countries, including 29 in Africa, 19 in Asia and nine in Latin America, have been hit by catastrophic floods. Harvests have been affected by drought and heatwaves in south Asia, Europe, China, Sudan, Mozambique and Uruguay.20

Last week the Australian government said drought had slashed predictions of winter harvests by nearly 40 percent, or four million tons. "It is likely to be even smaller than the disastrous drought-ravaged 2006-07 harvest and the worst in more than a decade," said the Bureau of Agriculture and Resource.21

In addition to climate chaos, we must contend with the depletion or degradation of several resources essential to agriculture.

Phosphorus is set to become much more scarce and expensive, according to a study by Patrick Déry, a Canadian agriculture and environment analyst and consultant. Using data from the US Geological Survey, Déry performed a peaking analysis on phosphate rock, similar to the techniques used by petroleum geologists to forecast declines in production from oilfields. He found that "we have already passed the phosphate peak [of production] for United States (1988) and for the World (1989)." We will not completely run out of rock phosphate any time soon, but we will be relying on lower-grade ores as time goes on, with prices inexorably rising.22

At the same time, soil erosion undermines food production and water availability, as well as producing 30 percent of climate-changing greenhouse gases. Each year, roughly 100,000 square kilometres of land loses its vegetation and becomes degraded or turns into desert, altering the temperature and energy balance of the planet.23

Finally, yet another worrisome environmental trend is the increasing scarcity of fresh water. According to United Nations estimates, one third of the world's population lives in areas with water shortages and 1.1 billion people lack access to safe drinking water. That situation is expected to worsen dramatically over the next few decades. Climate change has provoked more frequent and intense droughts in sub-tropical areas of Asia and Africa, exacerbating shortages in some of the world's poorest countries.

While human population tripled in the 20th century, the use of renewable water resources has grown six-fold. According to Bridget Scanlon and colleagues, writing in Water Resources Research this past March 27, in the last 100 years irrigated agriculture expanded globally by 480 percent, and it is projected to increase another 20 percent by 2030 in developing countries. Irrigation is expanding fastest in countries such as China and India. Global irrigated agriculture now accounts for almost 90 percent of global freshwater consumption, despite representing only 18 percent of global cropland. In addition to drawing down aquifers and surface water sources, it also degrades water quality, as salts in soils are mobilized, and as fertilizers and pesticides leach into aquifers and streams.24

These problems all interact and compound one another. For example, soil degradation produces growing shortages of water, since soil and vegetation act as a sponge that holds and gradually releases water. Soil degradation also worsens climate change as increased evaporation triggers more extreme weather.

This month the UN Environment Program concluded that the planet's water, land, air, plants, animals and fish stocks are all in "inexorable decline." Much of this decline is due to agriculture, which constitutes the greatest single source of human impact on the biosphere.25

In the face of all these daunting challenges, the world must produce more food every year to keep up with population growth. Zafar Adeel, director of the International Network on Water, Environment and Health (INWEH), has calculated that more food will have to be produced during the next 50 years than during the last 10,000 years combined.26

What Is the Solution?

International food agency officials spin out various scenarios to describe how our currently precarious global food system might successfully adapt and expand. Perhaps markets will automatically readjust to shortages, higher prices making it more profitable once again to grow crops for people rather than cars. New designer-gene crop varieties could help crops adapt to capricious climactic conditions, to require less water, or to grow in more marginal soils. And if people were to simply eat less meat, more land could be freed up to grow food for humans rather than farm animals. A slowdown or reversal in population growth would naturally ease pressures on the food system, while the cultivation of currently unproductive land could help increase supplies.

However, given the scale of the crisis facing us, merely to assume that these things will happen, or that they will be sufficient to overcome the dilemmas we have been discussing, seems overly optimistic, perhaps even to the point of irresponsibility.

One hopeful sign is that governments and international agencies are beginning to take the situation seriously. This month the World Bank issued a major report, "Agriculture for Development," whose main author, economist Alain de Janvry, appears to reverse his institution's traditional stance. For a half-century, development agencies such as the World Bank have minimized the importance of agriculture, urging nations to industrialize and urbanize as rapidly as possible. Indeed, the Bank has not featured agriculture in an annual report since 1982. De Janvry says that, since half the world's population and three-quarters of the world's poor live in rural areas where food production is the mainstay of the economy, farming must be central to efforts to reduce hunger and poverty.27

Many agencies, including the INWEH, are now calling for an end to the estimated 30 billion dollars in food subsidies in the North that contribute directly to land degradation in Africa and elsewhere, and that force poor farmers to intensify their production in order to compete.28

In addition, there are calls for sweeping changes in how land use decisions are made at all levels of government. Because soil, water, energy, climate, biodiversity, and food production are interconnected, integrated policy-making is essential. Yet policies currently are set by various different governmental departments and agencies that often have little understanding of one another's sectors.

Delegates at a soils forum in Iceland this month took up a proposal for a formal agreement on protecting the world's soils. And the World Water Council is promoting a range of programs to ensure the availability of clean water especially to people in poorer countries.29

All these efforts are laudable; however, they largely fail to address the common sources of the dilemmas we face - human population growth, and society's and agriculture's reliance on fossil fuels.

The solution most often promoted by the biggest companies within the agriculture industry - the bioengineering of crops and farm animals - does little or nothing to address these deeper causes. One can fantasize about modifying maize or rice to fix nitrogen in the way that legumes do, but so far efforts in that direction have failed. Meanwhile, and the bio-engineering industry itself consumes fossil fuels, and assumes the continued availability of oil for tractors, transportation, chemicals production, and so on.30

To get to the heart of the crisis, we need a more fundamental reform of agriculture than anything we have seen in many decades. In essence, we need an agriculture that does not require fossil fuels.

The idea is not new. The aim of substantially or entirely removing fossil fuels from agriculture is implicit in organic farming in all its various forms and permutations - including ecological agriculture, Biodynamics, Permaculture, Biointensive farming, and Natural Farming. All also have in common a prescription for the reduction or elimination of tillage, and the reduction or elimination of reliance on mechanized farm equipment. Nearly all of these systems rely on increased amounts of human labor, and on greater application of place-specific knowledge of soils, microorganisms, weather, water, and interactions between plants, animals, and humans.

Critics of organic or biological agriculture have always contended that chemical-free and less-mechanized forms of food production are incapable of feeding the burgeoning human population. This view is increasingly being challenged.

A recent survey of studies, by Christos Vasilikiotis, Ph.D., U.C. Berkeley, titled "Can Organic Farming Feed the World?", concluded: "From the studies mentioned above and from an increasing body of case studies, it is becoming evident that organic farming does not result in either catastrophic crop losses due to pests nor in dramatically reduced yields..."31

The most recent publication on the subject, by Perfecto et al., in Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems, found that "Organic farming can yield up to three times as much food on individual farms in developing countries, as [conventional] methods on the same land..."32

Moreover, is clear that ecological agriculture could help directly to address the dilemmas we have been discussing.

Regarding water, organic production can help by building soil structure, thus reducing the need for irrigation. And with no petrochemical runoff, water quality is not degraded.33

Soil erosion and land degradation can be halted and even reversed: by careful composting, organic farmers have demonstrated the ability to build humus at many times the natural rate.34

Climate change can be addressed, by keeping carbon molecules in the soil and in forests and grasslands. Indeed, as much as 20 percent of anticipated net fossil fuel emissions between now and 2050 could be stored in this way, according to Maryam Niamir-Fuller of the U.N. Development Program.35

Natural gas depletion will mean higher prices and shortages for ammonia-based nitrogen fertilizers. But ecologically sound organic-biological agricultural practices use plant and manure-based fertilizers rather than fossil fuels. And when farmers concentrate on building healthy topsoil rich in beneficial microbes, plants have reduced needs for nitrogen.36

The impending global shortage of phosphate will be more difficult to address, as there is no substitute for this substance. The only solution here will be to recycle nutrients by returning all animal and humans manures to cultivated soil, as Asian farmers did for many centuries, and as many ecological farmers have long advocated.37

What Will Be Needed

How might we actually accomplish this comprehensive transformation or world agriculture? Some clues are offered by the example of a society that has already experienced and dealt with a fossil-fuel famine.

In the late 1980s, farmers in Cuba were highly reliant on cheap fuels and petrochemicals imported from the Soviet Union, using more agrochemicals per acre than their US counterparts. In 1990, as the Soviet empire collapsed, Cuba lost those imports and faced an agricultural crisis. The average Cuban lost 20 pounds of body weight and malnutrition was nearly universal. The Cuban GDP fell dramatically and inhabitants of the island nation experienced a substantial decline in their material standard of living.38

Several agronomists at Cuban universities had for many years been advocating a transition to organic methods. Cuban authorities responded to the crisis by giving these ecological agronomists carte blanche to redesign the nation's food system. Officials broke up large state-owned farms, offered land to farming families, and encouraged the formation of small agricultural co-ops. Cuban farmers began employing oxen as a replacement for the tractors they could no longer afford to fuel. Cuban scientists began investigating biological methods of pest control and soil fertility enhancement. The government sponsored widespread education in organic food production, and the Cuban people adopted a mostly vegetarian diet out of necessity. Salaries for agricultural workers were raised, in many cases to above the levels of urban office workers. Urban gardens were encouraged in parking lots and on public lands, and thousands of rooftop gardens appeared. Small food animals such as chickens and rabbits began to be raised on rooftops as well.

As a result of these efforts, Cuba was able to avoid what might otherwise have been a severe famine.

If the rest of the world does not plan for a reduction in fossil fuel use in agriculture, its post-peak-oil agricultural transition may be far less successful than was Cuba's. Already in poor countries, farmers who are attempting to apply industrial methods but cannot afford tractor fuel and petrochemical inputs are watching their crops fail. Soon farmers in wealthier nations will be having a similar experience.

Where food is still being produced, there will be the challenge of getting it to the stores. Britain had a taste of this problem in 2000; David Strahan relates in his brilliant book The Last Oil Shock how close Britain came to political chaos then as truckers went on strike because of high fuel costs. He writes: "Supermarket shelves were being stripped of staple foods in scenes of panic buying. Sainsbury, Asda, and Safeway reported that some branches were having to ration bread and milk."39 This was, of course, merely a brief interruption in the normal functioning of the British energy-food system. In the future we may be facing instead what my colleague James Howard Kunstler calls "the long emergency."40

How will Britain and the rest of the world cope? What will be needed to ensure a successful transition away from an oil-based food system, as opposed to a haphazard and perhaps catastrophic one?

Because ecological organic farming methods are often dramatically more labor- and knowledge-intensive than industrial agriculture, their adoption will require an economic transformation of societies. The transition to a non-fossil-fuel food system will take time. Nearly every aspect of the process by which we feed ourselves must be redesigned. And, given the likelihood that global oil peak will occur soon, this transition must occur at a forced pace, backed by the full resources of national governments.

Without cheap transportation fuels we will have to reduce the amount of food transportation that occurs, and make necessary transportation more efficient. This implies increased local food self-sufficiency. It also implies problems for large cities that have been built in arid regions capable of supporting only small populations from their regional resource base. In some cases, relocation of people on a large scale may be necessary.

We will need to grow more food in and around cities. Recently, Oakland California adopted a food policy that mandates by 2015 the growing within a fifty-mile radius of city center of 40 percent of the vegetables consumed in the city.41

Localization of food systems means moving producers and consumers of food closer together, but it also means relying on the local manufacture and regeneration of all of the elements of the production process - from seeds to tools and machinery. This again would appear to rule out agricultural bioengineering, which favors the centralized production of patented seed varieties, and discourages the free saving of seeds from year to year by farmers.

Clearly, we must also minimize indirect chemical inputs to agriculture - such as those introduced in packaging and processing.

We will need to re-introduce draft animals in agricultural production. Oxen may be preferable to horses in many instances, because the former can eat straw and stubble, while the latter would compete with humans for grains. We can only bring back working animals to the extent that we can free up land with which to produce food for them. One way to do that would be to reduce the number of farm animals grown for meat.

Governments must also provide incentives for people to return to an agricultural life. It would be a mistake to think of this simply in terms of the need for a larger agricultural work force. Successful traditional agriculture requires social networks and intergenerational sharing of skills and knowledge. We need not just more agricultural workers, but a rural culture that makes farming a rewarding way of life capable of attracting young people.

Farming requires knowledge and experience, and so we will need education for a new generation of farmers; but only some of this education can be generic - much of it must of necessity be locally appropriate.

It will be necessary as well to break up the corporate mega-farms that produce so much of today's cheap food. Industrial agriculture implies an economy of scale that will be utterly inappropriate and unworkable for post-industrial food systems. Thus land reform will be required in order to enable smallholders and farming co-ops to work their own plots.

In order for all of this to happen, governments must end subsidies to industrial agriculture and begin subsidizing post-industrial agricultural efforts. There are many ways this could be done. The present regime of subsidies is so harmful that merely stopping it in its tracks might be advantageous; but, given the fact that rapid adaptation is essential, offering subsidies for education, no-interest loans for land purchase, and technical support during the transition from chemical to organic production would be essential.

Finally, given carrying-capacity limits, food policy must include population policy. We must encourage smaller families by means of economic incentives and improve the economic and educational status of women in poorer countries.

All of this constitutes a gargantuan task, but the alternatives - doing nothing or attempting to solve our food-production problems simply by applying mere techno-fixes - will almost certainly lead to dire consequences. All of the worrisome trends mentioned earlier would intensify to the point that the human carrying capacity of Earth would be degraded significantly, and perhaps to a large degree permanently.42

So far we have addressed the responsibility of government in facilitating the needed transformation in agriculture. Consumers can help enormously by becoming more conscious of their food choices, seeking out locally produced organic foods and reducing meat consumption.

The organic movement, while it may view the crisis in industrial agriculture as an opportunity, also bears an enormous responsibility. In the example of Cuba just cited, the active lobbying of organic agronomists proved crucial. Without that guiding effort on the part of previously marginalized experts, the authorities would have had no way to respond. Now crisis is at hand for the world as a whole. The organic movement has most of the answers that will be needed; however, its message still isn't getting through. Three things will be necessary to change that.

  1. The various strands of the organic movement must come together so that they can speak to national and international policy makers with a unified voice.
  2. The leaders of this newly unified organic movement must produce a coherent plan for a global transition to a post-fossil-fuel food system. Organic farmers and their organizations have been promoting some of the needed policies for decades in a piecemeal fashion. Now, however, there is an acute need for a clearly formulated, comprehensive, alternative national and global food policy, and there is little time to communicate and implement it. It is up to the organic movement to proactively seek out policy makers and promote this coherent alternative, just as it is up to representatives of government at all levels to listen.
  3. I have just called for unity in the organic movement, and to achieve this it will be necessary to address a recent split within the movement. What might be called traditional organic remains focused on small-scale, labor-intensive, local production for local consumption. In contrast to this, the more recently emerging corporate organic model merely removes petrochemicals from production, while maintaining nearly all the other characteristics of the modern industrial food system. This trend may be entirely understandable in terms of the economic pressures and incentives within the food industry as a whole. However, corporate organic has much less to offer in terms of solutions to the emerging crisis. Thus as the various strands of the organic movement come together, they should do so in light of the larger societal necessity. The discussion must move beyond merely gaining market share; it must focus on averting famine under crisis conditions.

Richard Heinberg: Conclusion and Footnotes

To conclude, let me simply restate what is I hope clear by now: Given the fact that fossil fuels are limited in quantity and that we are already in view of the global oil production peak, we must turn to a food system that is less fuel-reliant, even if the process is problematic in many ways. Of course, the process will take time; it is a journey that will take place over decades. Nevertheless, it must begin soon, and it must begin with a comprehensive plan. The transition to a fossil-fuel-free food system does not constitute a distant utopian proposal. It is an unavoidable, immediate, and immense challenge that will call for unprecedented levels of creativity at all levels of society. A hundred years from now, everyone will be eating what we today would define as organic food, whether or not we act. But what we do now will determine how many will be eating, what state of health will be enjoyed by those future generations, and whether they will live in a ruined cinder of a world, or one that is in the process of being renewed and replenished.

About the Author

Richard Heinberg is one of the world's foremost Peak Oil (oil depletion) educators and is a Research Fellow of Post Carbon Institute. He is the author of eight books including The Party’s Over: Oil, War and the Fate of Industrial Societies (New Society, 2003, 2005), Powerdown: Options and Actions for a Post-Carbon World (New Society, 2004), and The Oil Depletion Protocol (New Society, 2006).

Heinberg is a journalist, educator, editor, lecturer, a Core Faculty member of New College of California where he teaches a program on “Culture, Ecology and Sustainable Community,” and a Research Fellow of the Post Carbon Institute. He is widely regarded as one of the world’s foremost Peak Oil educators. His monthly MuseLetter has been included in Utne Magazine’s annual list of Best Alternative Newsletters. Since 2002, he has given over three hundred lectures on oil depletion (“Peak Oil”) to a wide variety of audiences—from insurance executives to peace activists, from local and national elected officials to Jesuit volunteers. Richard is married to horticulturist/herbalist/massage therapist Janet Barocco; they live in a suburban house retrofitted for energy efficiency and food production.

Footnotes:

  • 1. See Fernand Braudel, The Structures of Everyday Life (New York: Harper & Row, 1982)
  • 2. See Vaclav Smil, Enriching the Earth: Fritz Haber, Carl Bosch, and the Transformation of World Food Production (Boston: WIT Press, 2004)
  • 3. David Pimentel, "Constraints on the Expansion of Global Food Supply," Kindell, Henry H. and Pimentel, David. Ambio Vol. 23 No. 3, May 1994. The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences. http://www.dieoff.com/page36htm
  • 4. See also Roger D. Blanchard, The Future of Global Oil Production: Facts, Figures, Trend and Projections (Jefferson, North Carolina: McFarland, 2005)
  • 5. Longwell, "The future of the oil and gas industry: past approaches, new challenges," World Energy Vol. 5 #3, 2002 http://www.worldenergysource.com/articles/pdf/longwell_WE_v5n3.pdf
  • 6. Energy Watch Group, "Crude Oil - The Supply Outlook," http://www.energywatchgroup.de/fileadmin/global/pdf/EWG_Oilreport_10-2007.pdf
  • 7. "Oil Supplies Face More Pressure," BBC online, July 9 2007 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6283992.stm
  • 8. Energy Watch Group, "Coal: Resources and Future Production" (April, 2007). http://www.energywatchgroup.org/files/Coalreport.pdf
  • 9. John Vidal, "Global Food Crisis Looms as Climate Change and Fuel Shortages Bite," The Guardian, Nov. 3, 2007 http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2007/nov/03/food.climatechange
  • 10. Jacques Diouf quoted in John Vidal, op. cit.
  • 11.http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2007/nov/03/food.climatechange
  • 12. http://www.fao.org/docrep/010/ah876e/ah876e00.htm
  • 13. Peter Apps, "Cost of Food Aid Soars As Global Need Rises, Reuters, October 16 http://africa.reuters.com/top/news/usnBAN648660.html
  • 14. See Jack Santa Barbara, The False Promise of Biofuels (San Francisco: International Forum on Globalization, 2007)
  • 15. Vidal, op. cit.
  • 16. Lester Brown quoted in Vidal, op. cit.
  • 17. "IMF Concerned by Impact of Biofuels of Food Prices," Industry Week online, October 18, 2007, http://www.industryweek.com/ReadArticle.aspx?ArticleID=15197
  • 18. Ziegler, quoted by George Monbiot http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2007/11/06/an-agricultural-crime-against-humanity/
  • 19. Monbiot, op. cit.
  • 20. Vidal, op. cit.
  • 21. Vidal, op. cit.
  • 22. Patrick Déry and Bart Anderson, "Peak Phosphorus," http://energybulletin.net/33164.html
  • 23. http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=39083
  • 24. "Agriculture Consuming World's Water," Geotimes online, June 2007 http://www.geotimes.org/june07/article.html?id=nn_agriculture.html
  • 25. "Unsustainable Development 'Puts Humanity at Risk'," New Scientist online, October 17 2007, http://environment.newscientist.com/article/dn12834
  • 26. "Between Hungry People and Climate Change, Soils Need Help," Environmental New Service, August 31, 2007, http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/aug2007/2007-08-31-03.asp
  • 27. Celia W. Dugger, "World Bank Puts Agriculture at Center of Anti-Poverty Effort," New York Times, October 20, 2007, http://www.nytimes.com...
  • 28. Stephen Leahy, "Dirt Isn't So Cheap After All," http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=39083
  • 29. Ibid.; http://www.worldwatercouncil.org
  • 30. See, for example, William M. Muir, "Potential environmental risks and hazards of biotechnology," http://www.biotech-info.net/potential_risks.html
  • 31. http://www.cnr.berkeley.edu/~christos/articles/cv_organic_farming.html
  • 32. (vol 22, p 86) University of Michigan, July 10, 2007
  • 33. "Organic Agriculture," FAO report, 1999, http://www.fao.org/unfao/bodies/COAG/COAG15/X0075E.htm
  • 34. Ibid.
  • 35. "Between Hungry People and Climate Change, Soils Need Help," Environmental New Service, August 31, 2007, http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/aug2007/2007-08-31-03.asp
  • 36. FAO, op. cit.
  • 37. F.H. King, Farmers of Forty Centuries: Organic Farming in China, Korea and Japan, (New York: Dover Publications, 1911, ed. 2004)
  • 38. The story of how Cuba responded to its oil famine is described in the film, "The Power of Community," http://www.powerofcommunity.org
  • 39. David Strahan, The Last Oil Shock (London: John Murray, 2007), p. 15
  • 40. James Howard Kunstler, The Long Emergency (Nerw York: Atlantic Monthly Press, 2005)
  • 41. Matthew Green, "Oakland Looks toward Greener Pastures," Edible East Bay, Spring 2007, http://www.edibleeastbay.com/pages/articles/spring2007/pdfs/oakland.pdf
  • 42. Peter Goodchild, "Agriculture In A Post-Oil Economy," 22 September, 2007

Odds 'n Sods:

The latest news is that Detroit's Big Three Auto makers are courting Congress for a $25 billion dollar bailout. This will make the $1.2 billion in loan guarantees to Chrysler in 1979/1980 seem small, by comparison. Just as I had warned, the Mother Of All Bailouts (MOAB) continues to expand in both size and scope. It seems that Congress knows no bounds when it comes to plunging their hands into our wallets.

o o o

Cheryl N. flagged this: US Still Naked to EMP Threat

o o o

Cheryl also sent us this raft of economic articles and commentaries:
Another Friday, Another Bank Closing (#9-Columbian B&T of Kansas), Sterling Tumbles as UK Economy Grinds to a Halt, Goldman Sachs Research Says Half the World Economies Are In Recession or on the Brink, The Silver's So Cheap It's Practically Free, The Final Fate of Fannie and Freddie, and The Gold Rush Is Still On.

o o o

Farmer's Almanac Says Cold Winter Ahead

o o o

Tamiflu Resistance at 100% in Australia and South Africa (for the H1N1 virus)


Jim's Quote of the Day:

"The US economy is crumbling because the way we conduct the activities of daily life is insane relative to our circumstances. We've spent sixty years ramping up a suburban living arrangement that has suddenly entered a state of failure, and all its accessories and furnishings are failing in concert. The far-flung McHouse tracts are becoming both useless and worthless in the face of gasoline prices that will never be cheap again. The strip malls and office "parks" are following the residential real estate off a cliff. The retail tenants of all those places are hemorrhaging customers who have maxed out every last credit card. The lack of business is now leading to substantial layoffs. The airline industry is dying and will probably cease to exist in its familiar form in 24 months. The trucking industry is dying, threatening the entire just-in-time distribution system of things that even people with little money to spend still need, like food.
These conditions will now get a lot worse, no matter whether the banks continue to conceal their problems. All of it leads to an inflection point that coincides with the November election. By then, I expect that quite a few banks will be toast, job layoffs will rise spectacularly, foreclosures and bankruptcies will be raging across the land, and homeowners north of the magnolia belt will be shattered by the cost of staying warm this winter." - James Howard Kunstler


Saturday August 23 2008

Note from JWR:

Today we present part one of a lengthy and scholarly guest article from Richard Heinberg, the author of eight books, and a Research Fellow of PostCarbon.org. Part two will be posted tomorrow.


What Will We Eat as the Oil Runs Out? (Pt. 1), by Richard Heinberg

The first dilemma consists of the direct impacts on agriculture of higher oil prices: increased costs for tractor fuel, agricultural chemicals, and the transport of farm inputs and outputs.

The second is an indirect consequence of high oil prices - the increased demand for biofuels, which is resulting in farmland being turned from food production to fuel production, thus making food more costly.

The third dilemma consists of the impacts of climate change and extreme weather events caused by fuel-based greenhouse gas emissions. Climate change is the greatest environmental crisis of our time; however, fossil fuel depletion complicates the situation enormously, and if we fail to address either problem properly the consequences will be dire.

Finally comes the degradation or loss of basic natural resources (principally, topsoil and fresh water supplies) as a result of high rates, and unsustainable methods, of production stimulated by decades of cheap energy.

Each of these problems is developing at a somewhat different pace regionally, and each is exacerbated by the continually expanding size of the human population. As these dilemmas collide, the resulting overall food crisis is likely to be profound and unprecedented in scope.

I propose to discuss each of these dilemmas briefly and to show how all are intertwined with our societal reliance on oil and other fossil fuels. I will then argue that the primary solution to the overall crisis of the world food system must be a planned rapid reduction in the use of fossil fuels in the growing and delivery of food. As we will see, this strategy, though ultimately unavoidable, will bring enormous problems of its own unless it is applied with forethought and intelligence. But the organic movement is uniquely positioned to guide this inevitable transition of the world's food systems away from reliance on fossil fuels, if leaders and practitioners of the various strands of organic agriculture are willing to work together and with policy makers.

Structural Dependency

Until now, fossil fuels have been widely perceived as an enormous boon to humanity, and certainly to the human food system. After all, there was a time not so long ago when famine was an expected, if not accepted, part of life even in wealthy countries. Until the 19th century - whether in China, France, India or Britain - food came almost entirely from local sources and harvests were variable. In good years, there was plenty - enough for seasonal feasts and for storage in anticipation of winter and hard times to come; in bad years, starvation cut down the poor, the very young, the old, and the sickly. Sometimes bad years followed one upon another, reducing the size of the population by several percent. This was the normal condition of life in pre-industrial societies, and it persisted for thousands of years.1

By the nineteenth century a profound shift in this ancient regime was under way. For Europeans, the export of surplus population to other continents, crop rotation, and the application of manures and composts were all gradually making famines less frequent and severe. European farmers, realizing the need for a new nitrogen source in order to continue feeding burgeoning and increasingly urbanized populations, began employing guano imported from islands off the coasts of Chile and Peru. The results were gratifying. However, after only a few decades, these guano deposits were being depleted. By this time, in the late 1890s, the world's population was nearly twice what it had been at the beginning of the century. A crisis was in view.

But crisis was narrowly averted through the use of fossil fuels. In 1909, two German chemists named Fritz Haber and Carl Bosch invented a process to synthesize ammonia from atmospheric nitrogen and the hydrogen in fossil fuels. The process initially used coal as a feedstock, though later it was adapted to use natural gas. After the end of the Great War, nation after nation began building Haber-Bosch plants; today the process yields 150 million tons of ammonia-based fertilizer per year, producing a total quantity of available nitrogen equal to the amount introduced annually by all natural sources combined.2

Fossil fuels went on to offer other ways of extending natural limits to the human carrying capacity of the planet.

In the 1890s, roughly one quarter of British and American cropland had been set aside to grow grain to feed horses, of which most worked on farms. The internal combustion engine provided a new kind of horsepower not dependent on horses at all, and thereby increased the amount of arable land available to feed humans. Early steam-driven tractors had come into limited use in 19th century; but, after World War I, the effectiveness of powered farm machinery expanded dramatically, and the scale of use exploded throughout the twentieth century, especially in North America, Europe, and Australia.

Chemists developed synthetic pesticides and herbicides in increasing varieties after World War II, using knowledge pioneered in laboratories that had worked to perfect explosives and other chemical warfare agents. Petrochemical-based pesticides not only increased crop yields in North America, Europe, and Australia, but also reduced the prevalence of insect-borne diseases like malaria. The world began to enjoy the benefits of "better living through chemistry," though the environmental costs, in terms of water and soil pollution and damage to vulnerable species, would only later become widely apparent.

In the 1960s, industrial-chemical agricultural practices began to be exported to what by that time was being called the Third World: this was glowingly dubbed the Green Revolution, and it enabled a tripling of food production during the ensuing half-century.

At the same time, the scale and speed of distribution of food increased. This also constituted a means of increasing human carrying capacity, though in a more subtle way. The trading of food goes back to Paleolithic times; but, with advances in transport, the quantities and distances involved gradually increased. Here again, fossil fuels were responsible for a dramatic discontinuity in the previously slow pace of growth. First by rail and steamship, then by truck and airplane, immense amounts of grain and ever-larger quantities of meat, vegetables, and specialty foods began to flow from countryside to city, from region to region, and from continent to continent.

The end result of chemical fertilizers, plus powered farm machinery, plus increased scope of transportation and trade, was not just an enormous leap in crop yields, but a similar explosion of human population, which has grown over six-fold since dawn of industrial revolution.

However, in the process, conventional industrial agriculture has become overwhelmingly dependent on fossil fuels. According to one study, approximately ten calories of fossil fuel energy are needed to produce each calorie of food energy in modern industrial agriculture.3 With globalized trade in food, many regions host human populations larger than local resources alone could possibly support. Those systems of global distribution and trade also rely on oil.

Today, in the industrialized world, the frequency of famine that our ancestors knew and expected is hard to imagine. Food is so cheap and plentiful that obesity is a far more widespread concern than hunger. The average mega-supermarket stocks an impressive array of exotic foods from across the globe, and even staples are typically trucked or shipped from hundreds of miles away. All of this would be well and good if it were sustainable, but the fact that nearly all of this recent abundance depends on depleting, non-renewable fossil fuels whose burning emits climate-altering carbon dioxide gas means that the current situation is not sustainable. This means that it must and will come to an end.

The Worsening Oil Supply Picture

During the past decade a growing chorus of energy analysts has warned of the approach of "Peak Oil," the time when the global rate of extraction of petroleum will reach a maximum and begin its inevitable decline.

During this same decade, the price of oil has advanced from about US$12 per barrel to nearly $100 per barrel.

While there is some dispute among experts as to when the peak will occur, there is none as to whether. The global peak is merely the cumulative result of production peaks in individual oilfields and whole oil-producing nations, and these mini-peaks are occurring at an increasing rate.

The most famous and instructive national peak occurred in the US in 1970: at that time America produced 9.5 million barrels of oil per day; the current figure is less than 5.2 Mb/d. While at one time the US was the world's foremost oil exporting nation, it is today the world's foremost importer.

The history of US oil production also helps us evaluate the prospects for delaying the global peak. After 1970, exploration efforts succeeded in identifying two enormous new American oil provinces - the North Slope of Alaska and the Gulf of Mexico. During this period, other kinds of liquid fuels (such as ethanol and gas condensates) began to supplement crude. Also, improvements in oil recovery technology helped to increase the proportion of the oil in existing fields able to be extracted. These are precisely the strategies (exploration, substitution, and technological improvements) that the oil producers are relying on to delay the global production peak. In the US, each of these strategies made a difference - but not enough to reverse, for more than a year or two at a time, the overall 37-year trend of declining production. To assume that the results for the world as a whole will be much different is probably unwise.

The recent peak and decline in production of oil from the North Sea is of perhaps of more direct relevance to this audience. In just seven years, production from the British-controlled region has declined by almost half.

How near is the global peak? Today the majority of oil-producing nations are seeing reduced output: in 2006, BP's Statistical Review of World Energy reported declines in 27 of the 51 producing nations listed. In some instances, these declines will be temporary and are occurring because of lack of investment in production technology or domestic political problems. But in most instances the decline results from factors of geology: while older oil fields continue to yield crude, beyond a certain point it becomes impossible to maintain existing flow rates by any available means. As a result, over time there are fewer nations in the category of oil exporters and more nations in the category of oil importers.4

Meanwhile global rates of discovery of new oilfields have been declining since 1964.5

These two trends (a growing preponderance of past-peak producing nations, and a declining success rate for exploration) by themselves suggest that the world peak may be near.

Clearly the timing of the global peak is crucial. If it happens soon, or if in fact it already has occurred, the consequences will be devastating. Oil has become the world's foremost energy resource. There is no ready substitute, and decades will be required to wean societies from it. Peak Oil could therefore constitute the greatest economic challenge since the dawn of the industrial revolution.

An authoritative new study by the Energy Watch Group of Germany concludes that global crude production hit its maximum level in 2006 and has already begun its gradual decline.6 Indeed, the past two years have seen sustained high prices for oil, a situation that should provide a powerful incentive to increase production wherever possible. Yet actual aggregate global production of conventional petroleum has stagnated during this time; the record monthly total for crude was achieved in May 2005, 30 months ago.

The latest medium-term report of the IEA, issued July 9, projects that world oil demand will rise by about 2.2 percent per year until 2012 while production will lag, leading to what the report's authors call a "supply crunch."7

Many put their hopes in coal and other low-grade fossil fuels to substitute for depleting oil. However, global coal production will hit its own peak perhaps as soon as 2025 according to the most recent studies, while so-called "clean coal" technologies are three decades away from widespread commercial application.8 Thus to avert a climate catastrophe from coal-based carbon emissions, our best hope is simply to keep most of the remaining coal in the ground.

The Price of Sustenance

During these past two years, as oil prices have soared, food prices have done so as well. Farmers now face steeply increasing costs for tractor fuel, agricultural chemicals, and the transport of farm inputs and outputs. However, the linkage between fuel and food prices is more complicated than this, and there are other factors entirely separate from petroleum costs that have impacted food prices. I will attempt to sort these various linkages and influences out in a moment.

First, however, it is worth taking a moment to survey the food price situation.

An article by John Vidal published in the Guardian on November 3, titled "Global Food Crisis Looms As Climate Change and Fuel Shortages Bite," began this way:

Empty shelves in Caracas. Food riots in West Bengal and Mexico.

Warnings of hunger in Jamaica, Nepal, the Philippines and sub-Saharan Africa. Soaring prices for basic foods are beginning to lead to political instability, with governments being forced to step in to artificially control the cost of bread, maize, rice and dairy products.

Record world prices for most staple foods have led to 18 percent food price inflation in China, 13 percent in Indonesia and Pakistan, and 10 percent or more in Latin America, Russia and India, according to the UN Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO).

Wheat has doubled in price, maize is nearly 50 percent higher than a year ago and rice is 20 percent more expensive...

Last week the Kremlin forced Russian companies to freeze the price of milk, bread and other foods until January 31...

India, Yemen, Mexico, Burkina Faso and several other countries have had, or been close to, food riots in the last year...

Meanwhile, there are shortages of beef, chicken and milk in Venezuela and other countries as governments try to keep a lid on food price inflation.9

Jacques Diouf, head of the FAO, said in London early this month, "If you combine the increase of the oil prices and the increase of food prices then you have the elements of a very serious [social] crisis..." FAO statistics show that grain stocks have been declining for more than a decade and now stand at a mere 57 days, the lowest level in a quarter century, threatening what it calls "a very serious crisis."10

According to Josette Sheeran, director of the UN's World Food Program (WFP), "There are 854 million hungry people in the world and 4 million more join their ranks every year. We are facing the tightest food supplies in recent history. For the world's most vulnerable, food is simply being priced out of their reach."11

In its biannual Food Outlook report released November 7, the FAO predicted that higher food prices will force poor nations, especially those in sub-Saharan Africa, to cut food consumption and risk an increase in malnutrition. The report noted, "Given the firmness of food prices in the international markets, the situation could deteriorate further in the coming months."12

Meanwhile, a story by Peter Apps in Reuters from October 16 noted that the cost of food aid is rising dramatically, just as the global need for aid is expanding. The amount of money that nations and international agencies set aside for food aid remains relatively constant, while the amount of food that money will buy is shrinking.13

To be sure, higher food prices are good for farmers - assuming that at least some of the increase in price actually translates to higher income for growers. This is indeed the case for the poorest farmers, who have never adopted industrial methods. But for many others, the higher prices paid for food simply reflect higher production costs. Meanwhile, it is the urban poor who are impacted the worst.


Odds 'n Sods:

Reader RH says: "I have been collecting Foxfire books for some 20 years now. I was so happy to find Foxfire.org! These books have so much important information from the past for our future, lest we forget."

o o o

Tina in the Philippines sent us this article: Iligan folk seek St. Michael help, also bear arms. Tina's comment: "A real big surprise for me, cause I've been asking around about the gun laws here, and generally understand that its very restrictive. So many various permits are needed, and separate permits if you want to transport your gun to the range, and even then, for a good chunk of the year, guns are banned from the streets because politicians tend to get shot. Guns aren't practical or usable for self defense, with laws like this. I hope there'll be positive effects from what happens in Iligan when the fighting stops."

o o o

Cyberiot recommended a piece of insightful economic commentary by James Quinn, posted over at The Prudent Bear: The Great Consumer Crash of 2009

o o o

Terry B. In Upstate New York flagged a piece of commentary by The Mogambo Guru: The new silver - made with paper. Terry's comment: "This article explains why it's important to own actual physical silver, not a piece of paper promising silver."

o o o

There is now talk that the pending bailout of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac may force the breakup of the organizations into numerous regional privatized organizations. If this happens it will very likely push up mortgage interest rates. And this in turn, will further exacerbate the collapse of residential real estate prices in the US. To my mind, this represents a huge "lose-lose". Not only will it balloon the cost of the Mother Of All Bailouts (MOAB), but it will also make the impending depression deeper and last longer. (And to add insult to injury, the cost of the bailout will be extracted from our wallets. The Fannie and Freddie debaclesare indicative that the global credit market is indeed badly broken. It will be many years until global liquidity is restored, and I'm certain that there will be be plenty of pain in the interim.


Jim's Quote of the Day:

The ant works hard in the withering heat all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter.
The grasshopper thinks he’s a fool.
He laughs and dances and plays the summer away.
Come winter, the ant is warm and well fed.
The shivering grasshopper has no food or shelter, so he dies out in the cold. - Aesop (620BC - 560BC)


Friday August 22 2008

Note from JWR:

If you find what you read in SurvivalBlog useful, then please consider becoming a voluntary 10 Cent Challenge subscriber. Thanks!


Letter Re: How to Store All Those Saved Nickels

Mr. Rawles:
I diligently read your “nickels”article and archived follow-ups, but nowhere do you mention which size ammo can it is that cubes rolled nickels for storage most efficiently?

I have cleaned out my children’s bank accounts slowly over the last few weeks and am walking into random banks and grocery stores converting the cash into rolled nickels. ”Havin’ a yard sale, don’t ya know.”.Wink. It keeps the Stepford bank weenies from asking unnecessary questions.
- Laura C.; Hiding in Plain Sight, Somewhere Deep In The People’s Republic of Northern Virginia

JWR Replies: In my experience, the USGI .30 caliber ammo cans work perfectly for storing rolls of nickels. Each will hold $180 face value (90 rolls of $2 each) of nickels. The larger .50 caliber cans also work, but when full of nickels are too heavy to carry easily. Speaking of weight, several bags of "junk" silver coins or ammo cans full of nickels coins make great "ballast" for the bottom of a gun vault. This makes it more difficult for a burglar to haul away a vault intact. (But of course gun vaults also need to be securely bolted to a floor, for the same reason.)