[vtsnowedin]

Even on boats many, who have desal units, folks report using 20-30 gallons per person per day. They report taking 2 to 4 showers a day, washing the boat every day, washing the anchor chain in fresh water, flushing with fresh water, on and on.

I expect that is just yacht club competition for who has the biggest boat with the most toys and most pampered trophy wife.
In any real situation where you have to haul water or deal with drought restricted supply five gallons a day per person will do and ten would be a luxury.
I remember a drought back in the 1960s where we had to put the old three hole out house back into service. The water used to boil the corn was saved and used to wash the dishes etc.

[Newfie]

Yup, far too much of that. You really want to start a fight open an anchor thread. Makes our squabbles here seem polite banter.

But anyway, lots of folks buy fancy boats, dock queens, and have some Minnie Mouse anchor. But it’s polished Stainless. Eye catching.

Hoagies are far from immune to conspicuous consumption.

[Newfie]

Something else to fuel degrowth in the USA.

Opioid deaths doubling annually.

https://www.latimes.com/science/science ... utType=amp

[Newfie]

This sounds like a nod to degrowth to me.

Paradise may soon have no vacancies, if some Hawaiian travel experts are to be believed.

In a paper published by the University of Hawaii (UH), researchers claim that tourism in Hawaii has hit a so-called “tipping point” of overtourism as increasing numbers of annual visitors are reportedly on the brink of overwhelming the island state’s resources, damaging the quality of life for residents and negatively impacting general economic vitality.

The experts claim that the problem will continue to escalate with potentially dangerous consequences unless tourism management officials intervene to initiate change.

https://www.foxnews.com/travel/hawaii-a ... el-experts

[Tanada]

That’s funny, sort of reverse, reverse osmosis. You keep the stuff everyone else throws out. Love it!

Even on boats many, who have desal units, folks report using 20-30 gallons per person per day. They report taking 2 to 4 showers a day, washing the boat every day, washing the anchor chain in fresh water, flushing with fresh water, on and on.

Wow talk about wasted effort! I grew up in a navy family and I happen to know the US Navy developed soap about 80 years ago that works perfectly well in filtered sea water to get the user squeaky clean. Not to mention it is used for clothing washers and so on and so forth. Heck 'holystoning' i.e. cleaning the deck with salt water goes back a heck of a lot further than that to the days when the Navy consisted of a measly four sailing frigates in the 1790's.

[Newfie]

Conspicuous consumption at its finest.

Here is another brain buster: why recycling is bad.

What this chap misses entirely, must be an economist, is that we have a problem with human waste. And that recycling is just one of the ways to address address it.

https://fee.org/articles/america-finall ... z2Dq_KsSsg

[onlooker]

Conspicuous consumption at its finest.

Here is another brain buster: why recycling is bad.

What this chap misses entirely, must be an economist, is that we have a problem with human waste. And that recycling is just one of the ways to address address it.

https://fee.org/articles/america-finall ... z2Dq_KsSsg

Can anybody speak about the feasibility of making human waste the principal fertilizer for world AG? Your killing 2 birds with 1 stone. Eliminating the waste from the water supply and replacing FF based fertizers with this more natural alternative

[Newfie]

I think there are basic issues with that unless it’s processed pretty well. Creating feedback loops and all that.

Philadelphia has a poo to fertilizer plant for some years. It was quietly shut down and replaced with a more conventional system. Tried researching it a while ago and found dead ends.

But if it could work all we would need is one plant, in DC, that should satisfy world demand.

[EdwinSm]

Try looking up The Humanure Handbook. a guide to composting human manure by Joseph Jenkins [ISBN 978 0 9644258 3 5]

My daughter gave me a copy as a birthday present

As far as I can remember from the book, this recycling is best done at a very local level (ie each house), and if done properly (including left long enough) it is safe. I have not done much about this as our current toilet room is just too narrow to fit a composting toilet in.
I think the primary benefit would not be getting fertilizer (although in small scale vegetable growing it would be worth a lot) I think the primary benefit would the the saving of all the water used to flush the toilet.

[Newfie]

A number of boaters use composting toilets. But they can’t use the output so they need to dispose of it. There are also incinerating toilets which produce a fine ash, so I’ve heard. IIRC in neither case is it legal to dispose of in a no dumping zone, inside the 3 mile limit. USCG regs.

I do believe the Chinese use human waste as manure for a very long time.

[Newfie]

Here is another buzz word,

POST GROWTH

Still sounds squishy to me, without some solid underlying economic theory.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-growth

Post-growth is a global futures approach to the limits-to-growth dilemma[1] — the perception that, on a planet of finite resources, economies and populations cannot grow infinitely.[2][3] The term "post-growth" acknowledges that economic growth can generate beneficial effects up to a point, but beyond that point (cited as $25,000 GDP/capita by Richard Wilkinson and Kate Pickett in their book The Spirit Level) it is necessary to look for other indicators and techniques to increase human wellbeing.[2][3][4]

[vtsnowedin]

(cited as $25,000 GDP/capita by Richard Wilkinson and Kate Pickett in their book The Spirit Level)

Interesting. But I expect it will be a matter of how much dollar value we place on things like art and intellectual pursuits and increased knowledge. We may reduce the number of tons of steel and other commodities we produce and the production and use of energy may decline per capita and food should stabilize on a per capita basis but there is no limit to how much thinking we can do and the various products of that will have value. Base ball players making 300 million over ten years, Pop singers making 100 million a year. The newest app on your $1000 phone you just gotta have.
What is to limit that?

[Newfie]

Great question that sort of gets to the heart of the matter.

The reason we have those outliers has to do with our personal aspirations. It’s part of our culture. That would not fly in Boston when the Puritans ruled because it would have been seen as an aberration, outside their cultural norms. Not in the least saying we have to be Puritians, just that we need to develop a completely different mind set, change our cultural values.

Now doing a culture change thing takes a long time, yet it is what is needed. That’s gonna be a tough one.

The other thing that needs change is our economic system, away from Consumerisim. How that works in the nuts and bolts of economics is beyond me. Not that it is undoable, I just don’t have answers. It strikes me we need an economy where we DO NOT have interest bearing accounts. But that is such a paradigm shift I don’t know how to twist myself into that pretzel. But I’m old and arthritic.

[Pops]

Post Growth, First point:
Acknowledging limits to economic and population growth.

I really enjoy having my grandaughter living here, she is a smart cookie and very empathetic and caring. Just an hour ago we were talking about stuff and how she hopes to be in social services, maybe a psyc. She isn't all that interested in a big salary (OK, some) but mostly having a profession she likes, that helps people, without being in debt forever. She also sees motherhood receding for her way past the age she did even recently, into her 30's. Likely only one child due to "population pressure".

People our age aren't going to change anything but she makes me optimistic.

[Newfie]

The sad part is she’s likely the kind of kid we need to propogate.

I’m reminded of the movie Idiocracy.

It’s another circle I don’t know how to square. A conundrum.

[Newfie]

It is not entirely clear exactly what is ahead if we are reaching Limits to Growth. Perhaps that is for the best. If we cannot do anything about it, worrying about the many details of what is ahead is not the best for anyone’s mental health. While it is possible that this is an end point for the human race, this is not certain, by any means. There have been many amazing coincidences over the past 4 billion years that have allowed life to continue to evolve on this planet. More of these coincidences may be ahead. We also know that humans lived through past ice ages. They likely can live through other kinds of adversity, including worldwide economic collapse.

https://ourfiniteworld.com/2019/01/09/2 ... urbulence/

[Newfie]

https://www.resilience.org/stories/2018 ... ars-later/

Post-growth or De-growth analysts and movements. Increasing numbers of people regard the rapid global economic growth seen in the past few decades as metaphorically cancerous, since it was purchased at the expense of resource depletion, waste generation, and pollution, with severe impacts on global natural life support systems. Economic inequality has worsened and quality of life is crumbling. Growth of this sort has to end, voluntarily or otherwise.

Indeed, it’s become clear to many climate researchers and other environmental scientists that addressing climate change, resource depletion, and the biodiversity extinction crisis requires deliberately shrinking the economy. For example, British scientist Kevin Anderson of the Tyndall Center for Climate Change Research estimates that staying under the agreed-upon 2 degree Celsius ceiling for global warming in a way that allots poor countries their fair share of the carbon budget would require rich countries to reduce emissions by 10 percent per year—which would be incompatible with economic growth in those nations.

What I find difficult with these reports is that while the analysis may be true, they don’t seem to delve into what an alternative economy might look like. They mention the Transition Movement, but I don’t think that counts as a comprehensive economic theory.

Or I’m just showing the depths of my ignorance.

[Ibon]

https://www.resilience.org/stories/2018-04-11/the-end-of-growth-seven-years-later/

Post-growth or De-growth analysts and movements. Increasing numbers of people regard the rapid global economic growth seen in the past few decades as metaphorically cancerous, since it was purchased at the expense of resource depletion, waste generation, and pollution, with severe impacts on global natural life support systems. Economic inequality has worsened and quality of life is crumbling. Growth of this sort has to end, voluntarily or otherwise.

Indeed, it’s become clear to many climate researchers and other environmental scientists that addressing climate change, resource depletion, and the biodiversity extinction crisis requires deliberately shrinking the economy. For example, British scientist Kevin Anderson of the Tyndall Center for Climate Change Research estimates that staying under the agreed-upon 2 degree Celsius ceiling for global warming in a way that allots poor countries their fair share of the carbon budget would require rich countries to reduce emissions by 10 percent per year—which would be incompatible with economic growth in those nations.

What I find difficult with these reports is that while the analysis may be true, they don’t seem to delve into what an alternative economy might look like. They mention the Transition Movement, but I don’t think that counts as a comprehensive economic theory.

Or I’m just showing the depths of my ignorance.

Because the devil is in the details nobody wants to open that box. None of those details can realistically preserve the status quo.

Aren't we tired yet of explanations how our way of life is cancerous to the planets life support systems. Reading this 40 years ago was cutting edge and novel. Reading this after 40 years of doing nothing just sounds like more of the same old same old.

And so tomorrow follows today and so on until it doesn't

[Newfie]

The “doing” has to start somewhere. The thing I found interesting in the second piece I posted was that he was able to cite such a wide variety of folks following this path. I suspect it’s still just a tiny fraction, but it should grow, maybe.

Then again the most important action is in the personal front, one person at a time. Do a little , a little there. We all won’t survive but maybe a few will.

Setting aside a few acres can’t hurt.

We never really know for sure what our lives efforts amount to in the long run, we never live that long. So we do what we can while we can remembering to enjoy life enroute. What more can be asked?

[onlooker]

Nothing we have tried has worked. Wonder if we really tried
https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2019/03/28 ... ied-works/