Cities and urbanisation

[kenneal - lagger]

The port cities already have energy and transportation facilities in place and will carry on.

Yes, but all fossil fuel based and all the water based transport is large and heavy , nor suitable to be horse drawn or sail powered. Wood powered steam vanished years ago.

Consider that New York had a population of 500,000 in 1850 and Brooklyn across the river 100,000. As transportation hubs they will always carry on. As to the food supply declining the food production sector is a small enough portion of our overall energy use for it to be given top priority (or second after defense) so starvation is a ways off yet.

Take the fossil fuel out of New York and it dies. Who's going to walk up all those towers?

Where is that food produced using that small proportion of the total energy? In the mid West, Canada and California probably. The transportation of that food also takes a massive amount of fuel even if it is transported via the Great Lakes, canals and the Hudson River. And "for it to be given top priority (or second after defense)" sounds like a socialist ordering of priorities to me. Would such a socialist way of doing things be countenanced in the great US of A!! where the market is king.

We won't be getting grapes flown in from Chile mid winter but we can adjust to that. If food shortages bite anywhere it will be in third world countries where population has outgrown food supply.

Food shortages will bite most in the Middle East where their populations have grown on the back of fossil fuel riches. Egypt is a case in point where they have outgrown the ability of the Nile and its Delta to feed themselves.

An end to our exports to them and they are toast.

Third world farmers could probably feed most of the local population after many of them go back to the countryside once subsidised, cheap dumped imports from the US and EU stop putting them out of business. As local farmers have never relied on fossil fuels they'll be in a better position than many Western countries to feed their nations, even with increased populations, using improved seeds and companion planting systems developed locally. Hopefully all this will come about before the likes of Monsanto, Syngenta and Bayer wipe put all vestiges of sustainable farming in those countries.

[vtsnowedin]

Yes, but all fossil fuel based and all the water based transport is large and heavy , nor suitable to be horse drawn or sail powered. Wood powered steam vanished years ago.

The railroads move freight at 436 ton miles per gallon of diesel Sea and canal traffic is even cheaper. It is the commuter single occupant vehicle stuck in traffic jams we will get rid of.

Take the fossil fuel out of New York and it dies. Who's going to walk up all those towers?

Will Niagara falls stop generating power to run the lifts?
Historically the three and four decker brownstones had the highest population densities with lower rents for the upper floors and healthier people living on top.

Where is that food produced using that small proportion of the total energy? In the mid West, Canada and California probably. The transportation of that food also takes a massive amount of fuel even if it is transported via the Great Lakes, canals and the Hudson River. And "for it to be given top priority (or second after defense)" sounds like a socialist ordering of priorities to me. Would such a socialist way of doing things be countenanced in the great US of A!! where the market is king.

Upstate New York is a major food producer. Dairy , Beef, Apples Corn Soy beans etc. The potato and truck farms of Long island and New Jersey have been suburbaned over but that produce can be brought in from south and west by rail. That massive amount of fuel from planting to store shelve amounts to about twenty five percent of fossil fuel use and to give it top priority all you have to do is raise transportation fuel taxes and continue to exempt farmers tractors from the tax and let food haulers write it off. If we can ship wheat from Nebraska to Egypt I'm sure New York can get what it needs even if diesel is $20/ gallon.

Food shortages will bite most in the Middle East where their populations have grown on the back of fossil fuel riches. Egypt is a case in point where they have outgrown the ability of the Nile and its Delta to feed themselves.

............

Third world farmers could probably feed most of the local population after many of them go back to the countryside once subsidised, cheap dumped imports from the US and EU stop putting them out of business. As local farmers have never relied on fossil fuels they'll be in a better position than many Western countries to feed their nations, even with increased populations, using improved seeds and companion planting systems developed locally. Hopefully all this will come about before the likes of Monsanto, Syngenta and Bayer wipe put all vestiges of sustainable farming in those countries.

Egypt is using all the available water from the Nile and all the land they can irrigate. Returning more labor to the land will not increase yields. Ending imports and subsidies will cause price increases and starvation nothing more.

[woodburner]

But the countryside needs the city to supply it with manufactured goods, tourists to come and visit, etc.

This is a total fallacy. The countryside does not NEED the city except to allow it to do what the city does and live beyond its means.

The countryside would be sustainable but not as it is with it’s extravagant living (that includes me) in the UK and many other well-off countries.

[vtsnowedin]

But the countryside needs the city to supply it with manufactured goods, tourists to come and visit, etc.

This is a total fallacy. The countryside does not NEED the city except to allow it to do what the city does and live beyond its means.

The countryside would be sustainable but not as it is with it’s extravagant living (that includes me) in the UK and many other well-off countries.

Totally disagree with you there. The people in the countryside need the city for all the manufactured goods produced in or near the city. Everything from the clothes on their kids backs to the medicine in the cabinet come from a mill or factory in or near to a city. They need the city as a market for the food and fiber they produce to raise the cash they need to buy the fuel and other goods they consume.
It is a good two way street where they both need each other.

[Potemkin Villager]

Many younger people I know who live in London have a plan to move out of there

This was me 30 years ago and I have never looked back. Living in a big city can induce feelings of merely being and scuttling about pointlessly with millions of other ants in a massive claustrophobic ant hill. London in the 80s and 90s was not really that bad compared to the pressurised and insanely expensive place it is today.

The article is well written and thought provoking and I see other linked pieces consider cities like Hong Kong where the packing density of the inhabitants is taken to another level altogether.

[woodburner]

But the countryside needs the city to supply it with manufactured goods, tourists to come and visit, etc.

This is a total fallacy. The countryside does not NEED the city except to allow it to do what the city does and live beyond its means.

The countryside would be sustainable but not as it is with it’s extravagant living (that includes me) in the UK and many other well-off countries.

Totally disagree with you there. The people in the countryside need the city for all the manufactured goods produced in or near the city. Everything from the clothes on their kids backs to the medicine in the cabinet come from a mill or factory in or near to a city. They need the city as a market for the food and fiber they produce to raise the cash they need to buy the fuel and other goods they consume.
It is a good two way street where they both need each other.

You don’t NEED all the manufactured goods. WANT is not the same as NEED.

You would be better off without the medicines in the cupboard in most cases. You can tell the ones you can do without. They have an insert sheet detailing a long list of adverse effects. Medicines are made by companies to keep you sick. That is ids the pharma business model. Healthy people are no use to medicine men.

They only need each other to live beyond their means.

[vtsnowedin]

This is a total fallacy. The countryside does not NEED the city except to allow it to do what the city does and live beyond its means.

The countryside would be sustainable but not as it is with it’s extravagant living (that includes me) in the UK and many other well-off countries.

Totally disagree with you there. The people in the countryside need the city for all the manufactured goods produced in or near the city. Everything from the clothes on their kids backs to the medicine in the cabinet come from a mill or factory in or near to a city. They need the city as a market for the food and fiber they produce to raise the cash they need to buy the fuel and other goods they consume.
It is a good two way street where they both need each other.

You don’t NEED all the manufactured goods. WANT is not the same as NEED.

You would be better off without the medicines in the cupboard in most cases. You can tell the ones you can do without. They have an insert sheet detailing a long list of adverse effects. Medicines are made by companies to keep you sick. That is ids the pharma business model. Healthy people are no use to medicine men.

They only need each other to live beyond their means.

Perhaps in our Grandfathers times but today no one has a spinning wheel and loom in the back workroom so clothing will soon become a problem and who do you know that knows how to tan a hide and make his own shoes and harness for the horses he doesn't know how to raise and train. And modern medicine may be all a scam but when you get a toothache or if your child comes down with a fever I'll bet you show up at the office PDQ.

[kenneal - lagger]

The difference between us and VT is that we are assuming that in an upcoming crisis the economy will break and we will be thrown back a hundred years or more while VT assumes business as usual into the future. The complexity of the modern economy makes it very fragile and it won't take much to collapse it altogether. That the stresses of global warming and sea level rise could be enough to cause a complete breakdown of the economy is the opinion of main stream economist, Lord Nicholas Stern, so it is good enough for me to keep on with my crisis planning.

Also with the nutters in charge of the world, Trump, Putin and Kim, god only knows what will happen in the next few years.

[vtsnowedin]

The difference between us and VT is that we are assuming that in an upcoming crisis the economy will break and we will be thrown back a hundred years or more while VT assumes business as usual into the future. The complexity of the modern economy makes it very fragile and it won't take much to collapse it altogether. That the stresses of global warming and sea level rise could be enough to cause a complete breakdown of the economy is the opinion of main stream economist, Lord Nicholas Stern, so it is good enough for me to keep on with my crisis planning.

Also with the nutters in charge of the world, Trump, Putin and Kim, god only knows what will happen in the next few years.

No not Business as usual, I'm not that optimistic. I expect crises to arise and that most of us will adapt to them and the changed conditions ,be it oil depletion , climate change or some other not yet recognized danger. I also expect free market economies like the United States will do better then centrally planned socialist economies will due to their lack of flexibility.
A total collapse of the economy would be unlikely as it is hard to totally do anything. That does not mean that some countries will avoid going bankrupt and having riots in the streets.

[woodburner]

Perhaps in our Grandfathers times but today no one has a spinning wheel and loom in the back workroom so clothing will soon become a problem and who do you know that knows how to tan a hide and make his own shoes and harness for the horses he doesn't know how to raise and train. And modern medicine may be all a scam but when you get a toothache or if your child comes down with a fever I'll bet you show up at the office PDQ.

I know several people who know how to tan hides. Little John i seem to remember is able to make shoes, and has done so. I have a stock of leather and could do it, though it would take a while. If I get toothache it may be necessary to visit the dentist as I have a couple of root canal fillings which are one of the disasters of modern dentistry. If children have fevers, the last place you would want them to be is at a GP’s surgery/office. The prescribed treatment is usually paracetamol, (Tylenol, Panadol) or any of the other non-steroidal anti-inflammatories. Children have died as a result of taking them. Or let’s get them up to date with their vaccine schedule.

The sooner this system collapses the sooner we can have something sensible.

I think Ken’s post sums it up well.

PS I also know people who have spinning wheels and looms, and most of a group I meet often can make wooden utensils and furniture to quite a high standard. Not to mention the bow makers..............the list goes on. All I have to do is to offer them something they haven’t got, and need.

[vtsnowedin]

Perhaps in our Grandfathers times but today no one has a spinning wheel and loom in the back workroom so clothing will soon become a problem and who do you know that knows how to tan a hide and make his own shoes and harness for the horses he doesn't know how to raise and train. And modern medicine may be all a scam but when you get a toothache or if your child comes down with a fever I'll bet you show up at the office PDQ.

I know several people who know how to tan hides. Little John i seem to remember is able to make shoes, and has done so. I have a stock of leather and could do it, though it would take a while. If I get toothache it may be necessary to visit the dentist as I have a couple of root canal fillings which are one of the disasters of modern dentistry. If children have fevers, the last place you would want them to be is at a GP’s surgery/office. The prescribed treatment is usually paracetamol, (Tylenol, Panadol) or any of the other non-steroidal anti-inflammatories. Children have died as a result of taking them. Or let’s get them up to date with their vaccine schedule.

The sooner this system collapses the sooner we can have something sensible.

I think Ken’s post sums it up well.

PS I also know people who have spinning wheels and looms, and most of a group I meet often can make wooden utensils and furniture to quite a high standard. Not to mention the bow makers..............the list goes on. All I have to do is to offer them something they haven’t got, and need.

I was thinking scarlet fever or rheumatic fever , not just a high temp.
I'll not try to hurry collapse as it will kill a lot of people. Perhaps me and mine.

[woodburner]

It’s nutrition, not drugs. First there is no vaccine for scarlet fever. All these problems can be alleviated with vitamin C. AS LONG AS YOU HAVE ENOUGH!!!!!

[vtsnowedin]

It’s nutrition, not drugs. First there is no vaccine for scarlet fever. All these problems can be alleviated with vitamin C. AS LONG AS YOU HAVE ENOUGH!!!!!

Oh you are on that bandwagon.
There may not be a vaccine to prevent scarlet fever but if your child has it they can and do treat it with antibiotics and greatly reduce the chances of permanent damage.

[woodburner]

Oh, you’re on that bandwagon. Well carry on feeding your associated patients with antibiotics and put up with the damage and disruption they cause. You probably haven’t heard of antibiotic resistance.

[Lurkalot]

Going back to the sustainable city thing , it's a phrase I've heard used on numerous occasions without giving it much thought. Not wanting to sound dim I thought to google exactly what is meant by a sustainable city. Here's a couple of links I found.

https://www.southampton.ac.uk/news/2017 ... -city.page

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/07/opin ... -city.html
They both seem full of grand ideas but , to me at least , a tad sparse on exactly how to implement those ideas. One thing that is mentioned is the trransport systems and a move away from the car. All very logical of course , it's been close to 20 years since I had to drive into London ( working at the Palace of Westminster and having to take in tools and materials) and I can't say I enjoyed it. Last ever visit was a decade ago , we went on the train and used the subway which we found good for travel around the centre. However , I'm not sure how such systems would transfer to the suburbs or for that matter smaller towns . That made me wonder just what would class as a city . I know the definition is that it should have a big pointy cathedral but in practical terms how big should an urban area be to have to implement these sustainable ideas? On the second link it talks of the square metrage that cars take up but other than ge car parks being converted it's hard to see how that space could be utilised without pulling down a lot of the existing city. So as I see it , it's a good idea to try to make cities better but the biggest poblem is the inertia of people to give up their cars and change their lifestyles.