What to do in a failing civilization

[beev]

If you can do something about it, there is no need to worry.
If you can't do anything about, there is no point in worrying!

[Totally_Baffled]

The problem is getting to that fundamental level from where we are now - and I'm not convinced that that fundamentla level really exists. We're told that the world is (way) beyond its carrying capacity, and that the UK is one of the most densely populated countries in the world....

This is correct, it is hard to argue against the fact the UK is overpopulated for a "no oil" or "low energy" situation.

However, if you consider what resource remains in the UK (coal , oil , gas, UCG, nuclear, wind, tidal, good land etc) , if properly managed with some imports (we will be able to at least afford some?), then the UK could buy itself enough time to decrease population less painfully.

If you also consider some cooperation with the EU (which I believe will cooperate as trade distances will be limited to these sort of distances), then again the UK should be able to secure enough resources to prevent a total breakdown for decades.

I was sad enough to calculate how the population of the UK would be effected if immigration stopped , the birth rate remained at 1.6 (2004 figure) , BUT the death rate increased to that of Eastern Europe(because complex life extending medical care is no longer available for example), and the population would halve by 2050!(assuming a start year of 2015 - birth rate at 10 per 1000 and death rate at 24 per 1000)

OK the above numbers are a little over the top , but it demonstrates a point.

The above is already happening in places like Ukraine , Belarus , and to a lesser extent Italy & Germany (ie the population is already falling and quite quickly!). There are number of other European countries like this.

If the population doesn't fall by the arse end of this century , then things will get dicey!!!

TB

[isenhand]

[This is correct, it is hard to argue against the fact the UK is overpopulated for a "no oil" or "low energy" situation. TB

I don?t think the UK is. There is an upper limit but I don?t think we have reached it yet. To start with we waste a lot of food that is produced because it is not up to standard or for other reasons. We also do not utilise the growing capacity of the land fully (there is waste land, gardens and land covered in concrete that could be used to grow food on). Also, we could also grow food indoors using hydroponics as well as grow things on walls and balconies as well as window sills. We have the potential to grow much more food than we do and to improve our efficiency as well. On top of that we don?t need to eat as much as we do either. For these reasons I don?t think the UK over populated for PO. If people start starving after PO I think it will have more to do with the way things are done.

[Blue Peter]

[This is correct, it is hard to argue against the fact the UK is overpopulated for a "no oil" or "low energy" situation. TB

I don?t think the UK is. There is an upper limit but I don?t think we have reached it yet. To start with we waste a lot of food that is produced because it is not up to standard or for other reasons.

But also, we import a lot of food, and a lot of the food which we do grow depends upon fossil fuel inputs (machinery, fertilizers, pesticides, etc.).

As well as for growing food, we will also need the land for construction materials (timber), fuel (wood again), fibre (sheep and/or flax and hemp), and perhaps oils (vegetable oils).

Are there any rough calculations of how much land a non-fossil fuel society requires?


Peter.

[isenhand]

But also, we import a lot of food, and a lot of the food which we do grow depends upon fossil fuel inputs (machinery, fertilizers, pesticides, etc.).

Yeap, but it not needed to be the case. There is also a lot of free food that is not collected each year. How many people collect berries etc?

As well as for growing food, we will also need the land for construction materials (timber), fuel (wood again), fibre (sheep and/or flax and hemp), and perhaps oils (vegetable oils).

And also to improve quality so as to minimise our need for such things. Again, this is all to do with the way we do things which is what needs to be improved.

Are there any rough calculations of how much land a non-fossil fuel society requires?

That is a very good question. I assume that the calculations that are around are based on the way things are produced at the moment. That is to say, the do not work out what is needed if, for example, we implemented permaculter in communities or used more hydroponics.

[Blue Peter]

enhand

Are there any rough calculations of how much land a non-fossil fuel society requires?

That is a very good question. I assume that the calculations that are around are based on the way things are produced at the moment. That is to say, the do not work out what is needed if, for example, we implemented permaculter in communities or used more hydroponics.

I should think that looking at the productivity of 3rd world countries was perhaps the way to go, though it might be difficult to find examples with a simialr climate to ours. Alternatively, what sort of productivity did we get in the 18th century?


Peter.

[Totally_Baffled]

Oh I agree Isenhand, the UK could easily be self sufficient in food for many decades yet.

--33% of the food we produce in the UK is thrown away. Most at the farm because of very specific requirements. No marks, or bruising are allowed, must be the right size etc.

--15% of our arable land is "set aside" (upto 1.5 million hectares)

--Self sufficiency figures are based on providing 3500 calories per day per person!!!! A man only needs 2500 and woman 2000 calories, no wonder we are all fat bastards!

--There is also a lot of calorific waste in consuming so much meat. To produce a pound of meat requires 10 pounds of biomass (corn, hay, grass, other crops whatever). If these crops were fed directly to humans you could feed a lot more people. For example 70% of ALL Corn produced in the US (and they produce a lot!) is fed to cattle to produce higher quality meat!

-- There is also the potential food production in what people could grow themselves and on abandoned land and grassland which could be "improved" to grow some food.

Food production in the UK in terms of fossil fuels consumes only 1% of current gas consumption (for fertilizer) and 10 million barrels of oil per year (excluding though getting it to market and to customers)

When you consider there will still be 31 mpd of oil produced in 2050 (according to ASPO) and more natural gas than is being produced today (although declining), we could cope for some time yet.

The big issue is when fossil fuels are very scarce (2050-2075 + ) then we are in deep shit if we havent rerganised and shrunk our populations!!

Blue Peter, another stat I stumbled across was that pre industrial Ireland supported 8 million people (according to the 1847 census - might have me date wrong but around then).

Ireland has 16% of the arable land that the UK has and even less pasture and grasslands.

Yet they produced enough food to support their population

They f***ed up in the potato famine , but then that was a political and communication screw up more than anything , exporting barley and wheat whilst people were starving at home!!!

So if you multiply 8 million by 6.25 (which is 100%/16% to allow for land area difference) you get 50 million people can be supported in the UK without fossil fuel inputs in agriculture.

Of course we now have the advantage of growing specific high yielding varieties and knowledge of ecosystems and how plants grow and what they need at a chemical level. So in theory we should be able support a little more for some time yet.

TB

POP

[Bootstrapper]

I found this link at Sydneypeakoil.com:

http://www.fcnp.com/529/peakoil.htm

Eep! 'Mad Max' Zimbabwe may be a crystal ball on what the future could be like. Note particularly that the government's not even trying to address the problem (like Cuba did when the Soviet subsidy ended) it's just looting everything it needs to stay in power. When the brown-and-smelly stuff's well and truly in the rotating oscillator, who do you think your grubbyment will look out for - the people or the priveleged elites?

It's a retorical question. Answer it and make your plans accordingly.

[Totally_Baffled]

Can we really compare our government to that of Mugabe?

Apples and oranges perhaps?

[Bootstrapper]

Apples and oranges perhaps?

Same sh*t, different shades of brown.

Paul - Just expressing his opinion, not trying to change anyone else's.

[fifthcolumn]

I've been wondering about what it will be like when the die-off begins. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm assuming that those who are due to die are the ones who have not made any plans for the future. They have not attempted to curb their consumption, they have not bought a bicycle, not got a solar panel or other form of energy source, not joined a community, etc. What I'm really wondering is this: are those people (probably the majority) expected to die-off quietly, or are they expected to be stealing our bicycles and solar panels and raiding our communities and our allotments etc?

I've been wondering about this because I think it is a thing that would make survival considerably more challenging. As a matter of fact, if things like food really were scarce because it was impossible to import, and networked communities were the only realistic form of survival, I would expect the system of law and order to have broken down by then, and the unprepared people who have no idea of the concept of communities to be running wild (trying to avoid dying). I would expect to be in fear for my life, and my bike and my tins of food - basically everything. Without a shotgun and a big dog I would be f^?ked, correct?

You're exactly right.
I personally have everything necessry to make the transition, but it would only work in e.g. a Bird-Flu scenario where 90% of the population just died without bothering me.

Most likely we will become unemployed first and have to spend our stores of tinned food etc as inflation rapidly eats away our dole money. Then people would start to starve. At that point the violence would escalate.
The police do nothing to protect you right now and you are NOT ALLOWED to defend yourself.
Unless huge swathes of the unprepared go away quietly into the night we are looking at a bloodbath and those of us who have prepared will simply ensure that the tough strongmen in the community will have something worthwhile to steal.

Planting a bunch of fruit trees etc and building a permaculture garden will be a big give-away.

The only way out of this is to move to a farm or else to a small village where EVERYBODY knows what's going on.

Otherwise, yes, we're fncked.

[Vortex]

(What happened to the page formatting???)

The only way out of this is to move to a farm or else to a small village where EVERYBODY knows what's going on.

As I have posted before, a village is simply a micro version of a city. You still have junkies, scumbags, the infirm, rich, poor, lazy, bright, dumb, thugs & the meek.

It is NOT an homogenous environment.

[RenewableCandy]

Are there any rough calculations of how much land a non-fossil fuel society requires?
Peter.

There are area numbers and quite a detailed description of methods in the book "Farmers of forty Centuries" (by F.H. King) which talks about China Japan and Korea in 1911 (ie before the Green Revolution and FF-propelled farming). Some public-spirited Usonian has put it up on the web.

Interestingly King (also a Usonian) contrasts the asian well-looked-after soil with "our country which has worn out a virgin land in less than two centuries" (or phrase very like that), and that's BEFORE the big farms they have today.

[leroy]

There is no way individual or small group preparation is going to work here in the UK if things around us fall apart quickly - irrespective of permaculture, water filters, tinned food and good security - notwithstanding some extreme epidemic or whatever as mentioned by Fifthcolumn. Lifeboats may work in the wilderness, but not here in crowded Albion.

I question the utility of thinking about these scenarios too much - I realise that this is not an altogether voluntary activity and can become obsessive - I have spent many, many hours doing precisely that and have come to the conclusion that a more gradual/bumpy descent is more likely, and that we do have a lot going for us here in the UK, as listed by above posters. In addition, we are a real military power in the world, a nuclear one too, and if things were to become too desperate here that Europe, particularly the French and the Irish would be in no position to ignore us, they would need to help out of self interest and not just humanity.

I agree that systems can fail, and will in many cases and on different levels, but that the point of studying and promoting sustainability and Transition Towns, buying people fruit trees for Christmas &tc. is to help provide awareness of choices as things change. I think that those who benefit from BAU will lose considerable legitimacy in the next few years as people start considering there actual needs, which is when we can make real progress. With regards to violence, I think that most people will make do, cower, settle, will prefer rough justice/martial law that all out anarchy.

In honesty my feelings change regularly regarding prospects for the future. It could get really bad really quickly, and I am sure that this haunts the dreams of anyone who is PO aware, but if we have a good chance of a reasonable life, and that includes how we feel now and not just in 5 years time, then surely it is our duty to pursue that chance and not to dwell on the Resident Evil scenario.

[Catweazle]

This "lifeboat" thinking isn't going to help you much. As things slide pear shaped the Government (of whatever colour), as many have done before, will blame the shortages on those who have stockpiled goods.

The hungry masses will then feel totally justified in robbing you of everything you have stashed away, probably leaving you with less that they now have as a punishment for causing the problems by being "greedy and not sharing".

The best way to ensure your survival is to have the knowledge and skills to be able to produce trade goods wherever you are, this may mean you get into a senior position in a community that has realised the need to produce their own food and goods.

There will be a need for people who know how to make bio-diesel, how to cure meat, how to store grain, treat a sick animal, how to rotate crops and a thousand other "lost" skills. Some will be obscure but valuable - how to manufacture a horse harness, manufacture antiseptic etc etc.