I assume you mean per person per day but even then that is pretty extreme and not something you should do unless forced into it by circumstances. knowing how to do it, mast broke, rudder jammed and adrift is one thing. Doing it on purpose without a real need is not logical.Newfie wrote: We are also using under 1/2 gallon of fresh water per day. .
Newfie wrote:
What is the daily average usage here in the USA?
Tanada wrote:eventually when we get past the insane fear of radiation
asg70 wrote:Tanada wrote:eventually when we get past the insane fear of radiation
Insane fear of radiation? Tell that to the people of Fukushima.
Alfred Tennyson wrote:We are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
Newfie wrote:1/2 gallon, 64 ounces, of fresh water per person per day is more than adequate for drinking. There is a old Wife’s tale you should drink 8 glasses of water a day, which is a lot. If you take a “glass” as 8 ounces (a cup) that’s 64 ounces.
That said I think I muffed the math and is more like 1 gallon per day. I know we filled up in Vero Beach and topped off 20 gallons in Georgetown, Bahamas about about 10 days latter.
What is the daily average usage here in the USA?
Understand I’m not setting ourselves as role models. I’m just pointing out the difference between “need” and “want”. If we are forced to conserve then there is a LOT of fat to be cut on many fronts. Including oil and water.
Alfred Tennyson wrote:We are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
onlooker wrote:No doubt the FF companies have played a major role in the anti-nuclear campaign
https://www.forbes.com/sites/kensilvers ... 0449e17453
Are Fossil Fuel Interests Bankrolling The Anti-Nuclear Energy Movement?
Alfred Tennyson wrote:We are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
Newfie wrote:There ya go. Don’t wash the car, don’t water the lawn, composting head (urban? Ug).
Do you let the water run when washing dishes?
When brushing your teeth?
15 minute showers?
Now if you really had to could you could squeeze by on 10 gallonas a day?
Same with cars and fuel, we COULD economize and use a lot less.
That’s the kind of thing that makes peak demand or cliff predictions so very difficult. We adjust all the time.
KaiserJeep wrote:One small correction to my last post in this thread. 12,000 people die annually in the USA from coal effluents, another 48,000 suffer respiratory disease. The other figures I gave were all world death rates which are estimated to be much higher than US totals for coal. The world figure is estimated at 2.5 million annual deaths from coal burning.
Expressed another way, burning coal kills as many people as WW2 did, every 30 years. Burning wood and other biomass is even worse. But even relatively clean fuels like propane and natural gas are far deadlier than nuclear energy.
baha wrote:Tanada, you know I support Nuclear power and radiation is not as bad as people think but...The fact is what we call background radiation is the leftovers from above ground nuclear bomb testing done in the past. Before Humans dug up uranium and enriched it there was no background radiation.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 256 guests