How much time to prepare before economic collapse??

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by moomesa on December 8, 2008 at 1:50pm

CAN YOU SEE ME NOW ? GOOD

HEHE HUGS ALL {{{{HUG}}}}


O^O hers some specticals for ya teehee

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by American in the D.R. on December 8, 2008 at 1:53pm

Hellllloooooo Moo!

Have have you been? Hope that you and yours are warm and have lots of moose and deer stored for the winter.

{{{HUGS}}} back. ADR

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by moomesa on December 8, 2008 at 2:08pm

howdy ADR

if you go back to my post i left ya some reading glasses. sorry that print is so small because it is fairly interesting. either that or you just being to kind and don't want to say it was an abomination hehe.

i have elk, deer and beef for the winter so i'm good there. i slacked on the cannin' a bit though.
also workin' on a wood stove so i can cut out the oil heat. oh and from way back when, i wish that 1902 sewing machine would sew leather but i'm afraid its a bit fragile for that.

i also been stocking up on tobacco ( not good at the quiting part )


your silly friend

Moo

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by American in the D.R. on December 6, 2008 at 12:54pm

So this has been a SALES PITCH?

ADR

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Auntie Tutu on December 5, 2008 at 11:56pm

Buy a used FOrd, put some PV panels on your house, plant a victory garden in your yaqrd and switch out the flowering shrubs to fruit trees, (see PERMACULTURE on the internet) and see if you can get the boss to reduce hours instead of firing people, let the wages sink a little, enjoy the time without spending money, learn to cook, take the kids our for a hike or a bike ride, stop and smell the roses, and enjoy life . There is more to living than a 50 minute commute and TV and cell phone texting.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Anthony DeAngeles on December 6, 2008 at 7:20am

You claim that their is more to life than T.V. and cell phone texting? What about surfing endlessly on the internet for hours on end????

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Peak Dad on December 6, 2008 at 1:33pm

Lisa,

Enjoyed the first one... all should see - if for no other reason than to watch Yeltsin get the groove on. Truly a masterpiece contribution to the world of dance.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Todd McKissick on December 8, 2008 at 2:08pm

David,
I don't want to get into a heated logic free debate again but I really get tired of everything from you being unproven and everything from anyone else being wrong. You should have learned by now that if you get all the math right every time, that only guarantees you a 'half right' result. You have to apply everything correctly as well.

You say that you can save 85% of total residential and commercial energy. Well, that's so WRONG that you should be embarrased.

You may save 85% of a given building's 'heating and/or cooling' energy needs, but not the electricity. For that to be true, the building would have to spend 85% or more on their heating/cooling energy use while you eliminated it all.

Given that the majority of US electricity comes at a 33% efficiency rating, this limits the end user third to 5% so the other two thirds could still be wasted at the power plant.

You obviously do mean to include electricity because you make no effort to split up the raw energy forms into the end user energy uses. If you're adding up all the res/comm consumptions together, you're expecting complete and total adoptance of these conservation efforts which is not possible. Then to top it off, you equate that into dollars spent on oil. You use $150/bbl which has not only not been reached, it is over tripple the current price. However, the big problem is that these energy sources wouldn't be saved from just oil. They're going to be saved in their respective forms, natural gas, oil, coal, propane, nuclear and LNG. Each has a different efficiency and a different avoided cost. Each one also responds much differently to a drop in demand.

You still have not addressed how you can make the assumption that insulation and other efficiency improvements which are only influencing energy use during the heating and cooling season are comparable to an energy supply device operating all year. You have not attributed a cost to the 'economic activity surrounding all the install work' or given credit to a renewable like PV causing the same employment.

To be clear, I'm NOT AGAINST DOING THE STEPS YOU MENTION, I'm just against the attitude that conservation in any way competes with onsite raw electricity production. The value of energy goes up as you go from heat to potential to chemical to electrical. How is saving heat comparable to making electricity.

Lisa makes a really good point in her post above about efficiency creating more demand. The economic condition is pretty closely tied to activity resulting from energy use. It shouldn't be that way, but it has been. Programs to conserve will always be elastic because of this and efficiency achievements will be viewed as ways to justify other energy use. However, if you gave people a way to generate their own combined heat, cooling and power (CHCP), they would always tend toward balancing their use against the amount of generation equipment they could install. It puts the incentive in the right column. The other side of that coin is the KISS principle. Which is easier? a) Install a alternative energy system and backup to make all the power you need. b) Redo the insulation in your roof, walls, crawl space, ducts, replace your furnace, water heater, windows and siding, teach everyone visiting to not waste energy, add air exchangers to get some fresh air without that bad temp change (which is actually free on the other side of your front door), install CO2 and Radon detectors and then worry about every time you feel like just wasting energy (parties, gatherings, spring/fall cleaning, long shower after a hard day, etc.) Good grief, that was tiring just writing it all.

How about we just do all things in moderation.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by neil cox on December 10, 2008 at 10:56am

Hi David Epps: Why is it called intigrated? Why is evacuated tube twice as effic as water filled tube? We are running a $5000 anhydrous ammonia turbine, perhaps? Neil

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Willmorth on December 8, 2008 at 2:48pm

Ty, ADR, Brian, et al.,

Did you notice that those mean old crusty conservative Supreme Court Justices refused to hear the Obama ain't a citizen case? I just thought I'd point it out here because I doubt if the glass-eyed folks up on the Dim Bulb posts would say anything about it!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ray Phillips on December 8, 2008 at 3:16pm

But Steve, don't you know it's all just a liberal conspiracy? Look on the bright side, though, at lest Rush will have a topic to talk about for the next week. lol

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by moomesa on December 8, 2008 at 3:38pm

you have no i dea how embarrassed i am right now.

now i have to get ahold of the school district i recieved it from and tell them that it is hoax.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 262
• 263
• 264
• 265
• 266
• …
• 287
• Next ›
• Page