Personal Consequences - Worst Case

[wanderer]

Is anybody else thinking about personal consequences for you and your family, when our worst climate nightmares come true?

War for resources... droughts... famines... flooding...chaos

I want to have some kind of plan or something to be more prepared - at least we are the one's who see it coming, so we should be favored to survice the imminent threats.

But where would you go? I'm always wondering about what the best place on earth to survice a +5°C degrees Climate Change would be. Probably New Zealand or somewhere in South America.
I think the eurasian and north american continents are doomed - too crowded, too massive climate changing consequences...

What do you think? Is it crazy or foolish to even think about that?

[fishmahboi]

I wonder how Ireland would fare from this, perhaps it might become some wonderland where resources are plentiful, a joke about the broken climate here heh.

On a serious note I am not sure how one would prepare for a global rise of 5 degrees as resources for food become less plentiful and the majority, if not all, the countries become wrought with starvation, with a large amount of those who are starving possibly resorting to cannibalism.

This puts me in the opinion that there really isn't much one can do for if there is one area that is faring well the mass migration of people to that one area will strip it of its resources fairly quickly.

[Jim Williams]

Back in 1990 I insisted on living on a hill, not down at sea level.  Now I live on future valuable oceanfront property overlooking Boston.  Beyond that, no -- I haven't really considered my personal risks.  I did what I could in my life and then forgot about it.

[Amaranthus]

I'm hoping the weather won't get too unpleasant around here (hope springs eternal, right?), the old family farm is still there if things get truly nasty, a good 100km from the city and functional.  No one is currently farming there since 'Big Ag' finally drove my uncle out of business a few years ago.  He makes a lot more money as a roving carpenter and general contractor these past few years than that last decade of market garden farming.  There's even a Mennonite colony a short way down the road, they're strict enough that they still know how to do things without electricity and gas, so there're experts on hand to quiz about the old ways.

[ccgwebmaster]

I want to have some kind of plan or something to be more prepared - at least we are the one's who see it coming, so we should be favored to survice the imminent threats.

Ironically I already made a post one topic over relating to this: https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,183.0.html

Anyone who followed the links I put there to what I'm doing would appreciate that I've been preparing for some years now. It is late in the day I think to think about making contingency plans - but better late than never.

Crazy? Perhaps - but nowhere near as crazy as most people from developed nations would think.

[Bruce Steele]

Food resources that other people ignore like acorns , amaranth( pigweed ), sun chokes , day lilies ,yacon, dahlias, safflower,winter squash and weedy greens might get you through a tight place. Getting through winter and early spring becomes a real challenge without refrigeration so perennial root crops , oil crops, dry grains and beans and long storage winter squash, squash seeds, and dried summer squash are all survival foods. Keeping seed, and gorilla gardening, fruit grafting  and learning how to leach acorns or winnow seed crops are all simple tasks best learned as a hobby not as a necessity . The U.S. Southwest and desert plants might serve as a template for crops at + 5 C.  Happy gardening.   

[wanderer]

I want to have some kind of plan or something to be more prepared - at least we are the one's who see it coming, so we should be favored to survice the imminent threats.

Ironically I already made a post one topic over relating to this: https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,183.0.html

Anyone who followed the links I put there to what I'm doing would appreciate that I've been preparing for some years now. It is late in the day I think to think about making contingency plans - but better late than never.

Crazy? Perhaps - but nowhere near as crazy as most people from developed nations would think.

Wow- someone's got a plan!

I think that for a single human being (or a small group) it is much easier to survive a 5°C temperature rise than to survive 7 billion human beings fighting for survival!
So climate change isn't the real threat - we all are!
A boat might be a good solution - but I think it would be better to find a save, secret place somewhere - it might be easier to defend and get food.

[Amaranthus]

Food resources that other people ignore like acorns , amaranth( pigweed ), sun chokes , day lilies ,yacon, dahlias, safflower,winter squash and weedy greens might get you through a tight place. 

Pretty much what I'm learning to grow in my itty bitty city garden (all 70sq/ft of of it).  Amaranth is heat hardy and quinoa is cold tolerant, both offer a complete protein in seed form and the leaves of both are high protein and high in nutrients, rivaling spinach.  Beets and turnip can stand heat as well as cold, and sweet potatoes are delicious, heat hardy and high calorie.  Potatoes aren't as heat tolerant but a bit of shade cloth can help, or a south-eastern exposure.  I could really really really use a few years to experiment though...

And if I can add one more very common survival edible no one is likely to think of...pine, spruce and fir trees have an edible underbark.  As well as vitamin c in the needles.  The Adirondack Indians (adirondack literally means 'tree eater') would strip the inner bark and roast it then stack it for eating in winter.  It keeps extremely well.  I've got an old family friend who roasts it crispy, adds some salt and oil and uses it like tortilla chips.  500 calories a pound, dried, with vitamins and trace minerals.  Kinda bland on it's own, but no worse than tortilla chips.

[ccgwebmaster]

I want to have some kind of plan or something to be more prepared - at least we are the one's who see it coming, so we should be favored to survice the imminent threats.

Ironically I already made a post one topic over relating to this: https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,183.0.html

Anyone who followed the links I put there to what I'm doing would appreciate that I've been preparing for some years now. It is late in the day I think to think about making contingency plans - but better late than never.

Crazy? Perhaps - but nowhere near as crazy as most people from developed nations would think.

Wow- someone's got a plan!

I think that for a single human being (or a small group) it is much easier to survive a 5°C temperature rise than to survive 7 billion human beings fighting for survival!
So climate change isn't the real threat - we all are!
A boat might be a good solution - but I think it would be better to find a save, secret place somewhere - it might be easier to defend and get food.

Agree entirely that the main threat is human (until the majority of the population has died and those left are within new carrying capacity at least).

A boat should be pretty secret/safe - if you can mostly sit thousands of miles away in the middle of nowhere?

Unless you think other people in sufficiently large numbers are going to randomly sail (if they even can sail!) into the ocean trying to find it - from a starting position where they might not even have enough provisions on land? On top of which, they'd likely need to bring firepower - which if they had I suspect they'd be a lot more likely to be using on land. And in the case of a steel vessel with steel doors - cutting equipment or explosives... (and all that assuming the vessel was going to still floating if someone went to those lengths)

Plus it gives you long range mobility in a globally changing environment where it is impossible to really predict what will happen where. Mobility with the ability to haul "stuff" at that.

Nothing is guaranteed of course - being able to handle some degree of conflict as a matter of last resort is a given.

[ritter]

I could really really really use a few years to experiment though...

Depending on if your in developed vs developing country, you've likely got a few years. I don't know if we've got much more than that, though.

I wonder how long forage food sources will last when the locust swarm from places like LA or New York emerges. 

[birthmark]

I want to have some kind of plan or something to be more prepared - at least we are the one's who see it coming, so we should be favored to survice the imminent threats.

Ironically I already made a post one topic over relating to this: https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,183.0.html

Anyone who followed the links I put there to what I'm doing would appreciate that I've been preparing for some years now. It is late in the day I think to think about making contingency plans - but better late than never.

Crazy? Perhaps - but nowhere near as crazy as most people from developed nations would think.

Wow- someone's got a plan!

I think that for a single human being (or a small group) it is much easier to survive a 5°C temperature rise than to survive 7 billion human beings fighting for survival!
So climate change isn't the real threat - we all are!
A boat might be a good solution - but I think it would be better to find a save, secret place somewhere - it might be easier to defend and get food.

Bingo, on that last point, wanderer. There are many places even in the US that are remote and difficult to get to but still quite liveable. I know of three or four myself. A solar oven and passive heating, so as not to be noticed, and there's a good chance that no one would even know someone was living there.

[ccgwebmaster]

I could really really really use a few years to experiment though...

Depending on if your in developed vs developing country, you've likely got a few years. I don't know if we've got much more than that, though.

I wonder how long forage food sources will last when the locust swarm from places like LA or New York emerges. 

But don't over assume on the years - I think there is a high probability of conflict between nations breaking out too (and potentially nuclear and biological conflict). It doesn't take things to get really bad for that to happen - just for nations to start moving more aggressively to try to secure "their" resources and be first to them. Changes in the human world can proceed very fast too and will tend to accelerate the onset and rate of collapse above and beyond that implied by abrupt climate change.

[Amaranthus]

I wonder how long forage food sources will last when the locust swarm from places like LA or New York emerges. 

If you want well thought out reading material, I suggest S.M. Stirling's 'Dies the Fire'.  Once the food gets scarce, people get ugly.  Then sanitation related diseases start taking out big chunks of the population.

[fishmahboi]

I could really really really use a few years to experiment though...

Depending on if your in developed vs developing country, you've likely got a few years. I don't know if we've got much more than that, though.

I wonder how long forage food sources will last when the locust swarm from places like LA or New York emerges. 

But don't over assume on the years - I think there is a high probability of conflict between nations breaking out too (and potentially nuclear and biological conflict). It doesn't take things to get really bad for that to happen - just for nations to start moving more aggressively to try to secure "their" resources and be first to them. Changes in the human world can proceed very fast too and will tend to accelerate the onset and rate of collapse above and beyond that implied by abrupt climate change.

When nuclear war is taken into account we may as well all give up for we all toast anyway...

[ccgwebmaster]

When nuclear war is taken into account we may as well all give up for we all toast anyway...

Can't really say I care for defeatism. Plenty of people happy to sit around defeating themselves - guess the silver lining is more time for the few willing to try to prepare (given resources necessarily will not cover the whole population doing so).

[wanderer]

Question: In your opinion, which country would be the best country in the world to survive all the upcoming threats?
I go with New Zealand!

[Amaranthus]

I kinda figure the Inuit will inherit the earth.  what's left of it anyway.  They're isolated enough and some still know how to live off the land. And the arctic is likely to increase in biodiversity so there may be a wider food selection than muktuk and low bush blueberries.   There are fossil forests and crocodiles found by geologists that show the arctic has had a tropical type climate in the distant past.

[ccgwebmaster]

I go with New Zealand!

Of the developed areas of the world currently, I would tip New Zealand too. I still prefer open options - but New Zealand has favourable human isolation, reasonable population density, distance from large continental land masses (weather wise)...

I'd tip them with a bit more enthusiasm if their government showed it was taking their possible value as a "lifeboat of civilisation" seriously.

[fishmahboi]

When nuclear war is taken into account we may as well all give up for we all toast anyway...

Can't really say I care for defeatism. Plenty of people happy to sit around defeating themselves - guess the silver lining is more time for the few willing to try to prepare (given resources necessarily will not cover the whole population doing so).

Nothing really for me to prepare in terms of resources so I just gave up to be honest. Even if one does prepare the resources for whatever is coming up in the next few months/years/decades/ how can one ensure that whatever they prepare, whatever plans they have, are sustainable for those who prepare could be under constant threat from other human beings who might happen to know about that area, living a life in that fashion cannot be enjoyable and the chances of the earth making any improvement is pretty much null, although maybe things will sort themselves out in a million years time, making life itself very depressing. That is my opinion anyway.

[ccgwebmaster]

I actually think the majority of the collapse in population will occur rather quickly (years) and brutally. Rate of change in the earth system is still accelerating and conflict will rapidly further undermine carrying capacity (basically I don't see any meaningful negative feedback in the processes driving either the earth system or the human world into collapse). Once within carrying capacity pressures driving conflict ought to be diminish.

A lot of my life hasn't been what one would call enjoyable - so I'm not sure I'm too concerned on that score. As the cliche goes happiness is where you can find it.

Resource wise I'm afraid to say if I was starting from zero I'd be thinking in terms of what I could obtain by any means necessary. There is altogether too much selfishness in both the creation of this situation and preparation for it. The days where money determines human value are coming to an end - and in a perverse way I am glad about that. I'm in much better shape for survival of the fittest than the survival of the wealthiest that the modern world represents.

[fishmahboi]

I actually think the majority of the collapse in population will occur rather quickly (years) and brutally. Rate of change in the earth system is still accelerating and conflict will rapidly further undermine carrying capacity (basically I don't see any meaningful negative feedback in the processes driving either the earth system or the human world into collapse). Once within carrying capacity pressures driving conflict ought to be diminish.

A lot of my life hasn't been what one would call enjoyable - so I'm not sure I'm too concerned on that score. As the cliche goes happiness is where you can find it.

Resource wise I'm afraid to say if I was starting from zero I'd be thinking in terms of what I could obtain by any means necessary. There is altogether too much selfishness in both the creation of this situation and preparation for it. The days where money determines human value are coming to an end - and in a perverse way I am glad about that. I'm in much better shape for survival of the fittest than the survival of the wealthiest that the modern world represents.

I think Social Darwinism will become the main power for I feel it is those who are equipped well will be the ones to survive perhaps rather than those who have the brains to survive.

[Amaranthus]

Nothing really for me to prepare in terms of resources so I just gave up to be honest. Even if one does prepare the resources for whatever is coming up in the next few months/years/decades/ how can one ensure that whatever they prepare, whatever plans they have, are sustainable for those who prepare could be under constant threat from other human beings who might happen to know about that area, living a life in that fashion cannot be enjoyable and the chances of the earth making any improvement is pretty much null, although maybe things will sort themselves out in a million years time, making life itself very depressing. That is my opinion anyway.

We can probably kiss our current civilization goodbye, but there's a possibility of a new circumpolar culture emerging over time.  Most of our landmass on planet earth is currently too cold and too far north to support many people without huge fossil fuel inputs, still there are the Lapland reindeer herders and the native Yakut peoples in Siberia who live in places that make -30 below seem balmy.  People can survive in the most unlikely places and circumstances.  The native people of the american southwest had vicious multi year droughts so often in their history that the custom was to keep something like five years of food on hand per person, just in case.

It's going to be a rocky part of history, and I hope there will be enough people left to remember the lesson we're about to get smacked with. 

[Bruce Steele]

I don't know about the giving up part , I have been a fisherman and more lately a farmer all my life. So if you don't want to sign up for convention I'm fine with that but for all the little things the other life we share this planet with, for all there is worth fighting for ,take a different path and never give up. I have to go pull weeds. I have calluses on my knees and the body only hangs in there so long but in the meantime.

[Neven]

Question: In your opinion, which country would be the best country in the world to survive all the upcoming threats?
I go with New Zealand!

I go with Austria! 

Come on, not so gloomy everyone. A prolonged process of everything becoming less and less is more probable than a global crash. Don't prepare yourself, but prepare with your community. Live and learn, and if you, you die.

[ccgwebmaster]

Come on, not so gloomy everyone. A prolonged process of everything becoming less and less is more probable than a global crash. Don't prepare yourself, but prepare with your community. Live and learn, and if you, you die.

Are you fortunate enough to live in a community amendable to the idea of considering any sort of preparation? In years of trying to discuss these issues with people - including friends and family as well as people in a wider sense - I can honestly say I have found very few people indeed prepared to seriously discuss the matter (and all of one other prepared to try to act).

If one has any experience of poverty, one may be all too aware that people already struggle greatly even in many of the developed nations to fulfill the most basic level of the hierarchy of needs - food, water and shelter. Without a major change in social compassion that cannot end well if things get "less and less" - the elastic band must surely snap (early signs may be noted in the so called "Arab spring").

I grant that on the continent people might be a bit more well balanced in that way (I'm from the UK originally). In my current surroundings (not the UK) the atmosphere is still one of complete denial and indifference to the whole matter.

In an ideal world I'd agree entirely - the answers to many problems lie in communities operating in a sensible manner...

As is I feel unable to trust my life - or the lives of those who may depend upon me - to the offchance of a meaningful last minute effort by the rest of my society. Especially considering it is that same society - the capitalist developed western world - that destroyed my future (not that the past was that shiny either).

[Kate]

Question: In your opinion, which country would be the best country in the world to survive all the upcoming threats?
I go with New Zealand!

I go with Austria! 

Come on, not so gloomy everyone. A prolonged process of everything becoming less and less is more probable than a global crash. Don't prepare yourself, but prepare with your community. Live and learn, and if you, you die.

Agree with this 100%
I think unless you live somewhere where violence is an everyday event and where violence is used to answer social unrest, you don't really think about 'the end of the world as we know it'. Honestly I couldn't be a 'prepper' if I tried. I don't think that way. Mind you , Australia is a relatively safe place.

[opensheart]

ccgwebmaster - I'm assuming your related to the "Civilisation Continuity Group" and "Deus Juvat" project.  If so I'd like to say there are other people with the same idea.
Check out the following link of a group in "Transition Networks"  http://www.transitionnetwork.org/forums/process/general/sailing-farm-tribe-transition-transport-tribe-tomorrow-tttt
Perhaps you could network with them.


For the larger conversation of what to do at a personal level, there are a range of possibilites.
First you and yours has to decide on the threat level.
   Does it require immediate "run for the hills" action
   Is it certain enough to redirect life into a long term plan
   If it is not certain enough now, is there a point,  a milestone, a threashold that once crossed, activates a plan
   Is there more danger in self-fulfilling prophecies? Therefore one should not make such plans in advance no matter what.


Once the threat threshold has been realized, there is another range of responses.
1.  Build an Ark.   Build some kind of place that will try to survive and save what ever can be saved.
2.  Become a survivalist.   Form/Join a group that will do what it takes to survive.
3.  Focus on sustainablility/permaculture community.   Form/Join a Transition Town or other permaculture community.
4.  Become an activist.   Work to change the world politically
5.  Choose to continue living your current life as best you can.   Reducing/reusing what you can.   But deciding your just not going do a bunch of crazy preperation that might not do a bit of good.  Or worse might make you a target.

And many other options.


The point is, no one can tell you how you should respond.
One of the strenghts of the human race is our ability to fracture and scatter a thousand different ways.
If we all  took the same path,  we only have one chance to make it.
If we take thousands of different paths, there are thousands of chances of making it.

Therefore the best answer is to know yourself, and know what is right for you based on who you are.
Do you do your best work for yourself,  for your family,  for a larger community?
And what would be your highest motivation?
   Personal/Family survival for the duration?
   That sense of accomplishment where you figured out the most-efficent/best optimized path?
   Skill/Knowledge/Technology/Civilization preservation?
   Pass on the best lessions learned to who ever might survive that they might build something better?
   A "We Were Here" memorial?   
   A inner sense that you lived your life in accordance with your higher self/values of love, care, compassion.

Each of us, will balance all of this and more and come up with our own way.
The more concious effort we put in to finding a way that is right for us, the more at peace we will be.

For me, there is one issue I wish the world, the masses, as many as possible would face before any panic/breakdown/whatever starts.   And that is some level of acceptance.
Some grown up or mature view that says if we are all toast, then there is no need to kill/take/steal/destroy.
That taking anything/everything will make no difference, so we might as well leave it be.
That we go out with some nobility, not just brute beasts exercising every weapon at our disposal.

What I would ask for is for the human race to rise to a higher plane.
And to grow beyond the base reptillian survival of the fittest
If we could grow beyond that plane, now that would be a humanity worth saving.

so I would ask all of us thinking ahead, to not just decide on what gives us the best "survival of the fittest" advantage, nor just decide on what would be best for humanity/environment,
but can we do to best add one person-hood's worth of nobility, grace and higher character to the human race at this time.

[ccgwebmaster]

If we all  took the same path,  we only have one chance to make it.
If we take thousands of different paths, there are thousands of chances of making it.

I thought everything you said was good - the above I especially wanted to highlight to agree with.

I should note I think avoiding conflict is a key objective (whenever possible), and community and co-operation (within at least a group context, if unachievable as a global mass) is a necessary strategy to move forwards, especially longer term.

Thank you very much for a well considered and thoughtful response - and for the link to the similarly thinking transition group I wasn't previously aware of.

[gfwellman]

I too would like to thank opensheart for that very constructive contribution to this conversation.

I have little choice but to go with response #5 on that list.  My wife is dependent on very high tech medical treatment.  If civilization even regresses a little, it's game over for her.  I'd say such civilization has a decent shot at outliving us, although perhaps not by much.  We have no children.

[Lucas Durand]

If we all  took the same path,  we only have one chance to make it.
If we take thousands of different paths, there are thousands of chances of making it.

opensheart,
Exactly.

Be careful however, "the man" doesn't like anarchists - don't you know they're all trouble makers?
 

[Glenn Tamblyn]

Simplest basic action you can take - get out of the city. Perhaps commute back into a city for work but live more rurally.

2 basic reasons. Rurally you should be able to have some land to live off. And the population density is lower so any bad impacts from social collapse will be less there. In the cities, social collapse can happen much, much faster.

[OldLeatherneck]

I've thought for a long time that everyone should take a personal inventory of their individual circumstances.  Among the considerations in determining their moving to a different locale, be it to a different country or a different region in  their own country as well as changes they can make in their own lifestyle.  Among those individual circumstances would be:

1. Age
2. Physical Health
3. Financial Health
4. Realistic assessment of the near-term and long term impacts of AGW/CC at their current location.
5. Willingness and financial means to relocate.
6. Individual skills that would enable them to live in a different locale under different circumstances.
7. Family issues that may preclude the optimum choices in change of locale or occupation.

This is by no means a comprehensive list of everything each one of us needs to consider before making major life changing decisions.  However, I don't believe that there are any "one size fits all" solutions.  Every individual's circumstances, needs and abilities are unique to them and must be respected.  (Unless they need a Hummer, indoor swimming pool, private aircraft, etc.)

[ccgwebmaster]

Simplest basic action you can take - get out of the city. Perhaps commute back into a city for work but live more rurally.

When I started on this course I found articles written by an Argentinian blogger "FerFal" made for illuminating reading and provided insight into one mode of collapse in a society (though Argentina did not go all the way down). He commented that in the countryside people had greater food security (I note there is the little matter of ownership and if one can afford to "get out of the city" in a capitalist society) but worse physical security - what rule of law existed was weak within the city and non existent in the countryside. He makes lots of other good points about how a society can collapse and what it entails for practical living within it at the time (how things go down depend on circumstances and location of course).

http://ferfal.blogspot.com/2008/10/thoughts-on-urban-survival-2005.html

I can attest from someone I know very well that Russia experienced a similar descent into criminality in their economic crisis. The scars still run in their society and you can see most older buildings have steel bars on ground floor windows - steel doors - and high fences (often metal).

Hard to find good descriptive accounts of the experiences of people actually in these situations, but interesting case studies when you can.

[Vergent]

Every good plan has a limited carrying capacity, that will be overwhelmed, for the obvious ones, like New Zealand, or Ausrtalia. How many million can they take? How many billion will want to go? If you are not rich you better do it now.



 

[fishmahboi]

In what timescale would one expect for the worst events to happen
IE nuclear bombs going off, people resorting to cannibalism, etc.

[ccgwebmaster]

In what timescale would one expect for the worst events to happen
IE nuclear bombs going off, people resorting to cannibalism, etc.

I think that's an incredibly difficult question to properly answer.

My short answer (and only a gut feeling, no proper science or mathematics behind it) is 1-5 years.

My longer answer is that it is extremely difficult (impossible even) to accurately predict the human world. We haven't ever faced an exact analogy for this situation before so the lessons one can infer from history are necessarily limited. The responses of both individuals and societies can vary dramatically based on cultural norms and the exact situation. Consider the way the Japanese handled the massive tsunami they experienced - minimal looting, a stoical make do and work together attitude - and general acceptance. Compare and contrast to the descriptions of life in Argentina or Russia from eye witness accounts of their respective financial crisis - a gradual decline into social breakdown, disorder and substantial violence. This is of course partly also to do with the situation and the way it is handled by the socioeconomic elites. I do not believe we understand precisely how hard and fast agriculture will come down or exactly what the response to it will be at the national level.

It should also be considered that the onset of collapse is a very personal thing. There are people living in such violent and deprived places in the world that I would have to say for them collapse is already here. If you live in a net food importing nation such as the UK I would give you less time than a major exporter such as the USA. I would still give the UK more time than the Arab spring countries on account of favourable political ties and greater economic wealth (notwithstanding appalling distribution).

I do not think that collapse will be a well defined event (the FerFal blog quoted explores this). You may see increasing rioting and rising crime well before a final disintegration of law and order. Existing governments may intermittently restore some level of control amidst the chaos and even when they are gone it is the nature of people to form into tribal groups of one form or another. Warlords - or perhaps competent enlightened administrators - may manage to create local stability in regions to a greater or lesser extent.

It is by no means certain that all the horrors one can envisage will come to pass - I just believe in preparing for the worst (to the extent possible) and hoping for the best.

So I suppose the long answer is that collapse has already started (in the sense some people are affected and there is no clear pathway forwards except into collapse). I think it will accelerate and that there will be a loosely defined transition point in most regions past which the continued operation of modern technology will become impossible (due as much to global interdependencies as actual climate change - eg what happens as international trade breaks down?). In some densely populated or highly climatically vulnerable countries I would predict a bigger chance of a brutal rapid episode wiping out a lot of the population. In other countries with more favourable population density and natural resources (considering favourable areas may shift significantly as the climate changes) I don't really see why it shouldn't be possible for people to survive fairly peacefully almost indefinitely in some regions - though I would question at what technological level they would be doing so (especially without addressing that question sufficiently in advance).

You'll probably find my assessment (long or short) rather more pessimistic than most.

[fishmahboi]

In what timescale would one expect for the worst events to happen
IE nuclear bombs going off, people resorting to cannibalism, etc.

I think that's an incredibly difficult question to properly answer.

My short answer (and only a gut feeling, no proper science or mathematics behind it) is 1-5 years.

My longer answer is that it is extremely difficult (impossible even) to accurately predict the human world. We haven't ever faced an exact analogy for this situation before so the lessons one can infer from history are necessarily limited. The responses of both individuals and societies can vary dramatically based on cultural norms and the exact situation. Consider the way the Japanese handled the massive tsunami they experienced - minimal looting, a stoical make do and work together attitude - and general acceptance. Compare and contrast to the descriptions of life in Argentina or Russia from eye witness accounts of their respective financial crisis - a gradual decline into social breakdown, disorder and substantial violence. This is of course partly also to do with the situation and the way it is handled by the socioeconomic elites. I do not believe we understand precisely how hard and fast agriculture will come down or exactly what the response to it will be at the national level.

It should also be considered that the onset of collapse is a very personal thing. There are people living in such violent and deprived places in the world that I would have to say for them collapse is already here. If you live in a net food importing nation such as the UK I would give you less time than a major exporter such as the USA. I would still give the UK more time than the Arab spring countries on account of favourable political ties and greater economic wealth (notwithstanding appalling distribution).

I do not think that collapse will be a well defined event (the FerFal blog quoted explores this). You may see increasing rioting and rising crime well before a final disintegration of law and order. Existing governments may intermittently restore some level of control amidst the chaos and even when they are gone it is the nature of people to form into tribal groups of one form or another. Warlords - or perhaps competent enlightened administrators - may manage to create local stability in regions to a greater or lesser extent.

It is by no means certain that all the horrors one can envisage will come to pass - I just believe in preparing for the worst (to the extent possible) and hoping for the best.

So I suppose the long answer is that collapse has already started (in the sense some people are affected and there is no clear pathway forwards except into collapse). I think it will accelerate and that there will be a loosely defined transition point in most regions past which the continued operation of modern technology will become impossible (due as much to global interdependencies as actual climate change - eg what happens as international trade breaks down?). In some densely populated or highly climatically vulnerable countries I would predict a bigger chance of a brutal rapid episode wiping out a lot of the population. In other countries with more favourable population density and natural resources (considering favourable areas may shift significantly as the climate changes) I don't really see why it shouldn't be possible for people to survive fairly peacefully almost indefinitely in some regions - though I would question at what technological level they would be doing so (especially without addressing that question sufficiently in advance).

You'll probably find my assessment (long or short) rather more pessimistic than most.

Your thoughts are very similar to Douglas Spence's opinion of the consequences of Climate change (http://arctic-news.blogspot.ie/2012/06/when-sea-ice-is-gone.html).

I wonder how Ireland would fare from this situation, being a country with a reasonable population density with the only problem at this point being the Recession and the rainfall.

I appreciate the analogy however for it was very comprehensive and I agree with the fact that the consequences could be quite personal with some areas faring better than others, even in the worst of conditions.

[ccgwebmaster]

Your thoughts are very similar to Douglas Spence's opinion of the consequences of Climate change (http://arctic-news.blogspot.ie/2012/06/when-sea-ice-is-gone.html).

Doh, that's me busted then - I'll come clean - that's because I wrote that one too 
I'm still standing by that one (as a "probable worst case" assessment anyway).

I wonder how Ireland would fare from this situation, being a country with a reasonable population density with the only problem at this point being the Recession and the rainfall.

I just looked up population density - Ireland vs England (and very briefly Irish agriculture) - there is no question which one I'd want to be in - Ireland every time. Excepting the proximity of England I can't see what's not to like? I believe both Ireland and the UK are likely to remain "climatically viable" even in worst case end of century scenarios (albeit they might be very different places by then). That is to say I don't think the climate in either place will necessarily exceed direct parameters for human survival (principally heat stress).

My own experience from the poorer section of the population in the UK is that there's a lot of violent undercurrents (England especially, Scotland less so). That would score against England (note the riots a couple years back).

[Neven]

Personally I would want to stay away from oceans, because of weird weather.

[ritter]

Personally I would want to stay away from oceans, because of weird weather.

I don't know. Being close to the Pacific (20 miles inland), our weather is fairly moderate compared to what the interior of the US has been experiencing. Will ag prefer the occasional storm to the freeze/extreme heat/drought of the interior? I know I will. 

[ccgwebmaster]

Will ag prefer the occasional storm to the freeze/extreme heat/drought of the interior? I know I will. 

If memory serves, James Lovelock (Gaia hypothesis) would recommend:

Continental fringes, polar regions, and high altitudes still getting convectional rainfall.

Personally I don't care for the latter, you can fall off the top of a mountain (so to speak) and I feel you'd be gambling on the rain.

[Anonymouse]

But what is the carrying capacity of Ireland (or the regions Inuit inhabit, or New Zealand,as a few posters have mentioned)? How prepared are they for an influx of refugees? Word will spread fast.

[wanderer]

Yes... BUT... when chaos is ruling - those regions - New Zealand at least - are hard to get to!
How would you get to New Zealand?
You have to go there before it's happening - that's the point.

[Anonymouse]

Hi Wanderer,
I get your point about getting there, but where there is a will there is a way.  Especially if there are still seaworthy vehicles.  I guess it is into 'On the Beach' territory here, but I am guessing that if there are people who hear about New Zealand, there are people who will reach NZ.  Mostly from Australia, but others will commandeer ships and such.  Well, here we are in fiction-land now.;  hi Cormac!
Never underestimate the will of humans, after all, isn't that the fundamental essence of how we managed to conquer the world?  And without all of these nifty technological advances (forget the internet, I am referring to star navigation, wooden boats and basic food preservation...)  If there is habitable land populated by some, others will seek it out and find it - merely my opinion, of course.

P.S. I am just old enough that I am not too stressed out about it anymore.  I have finally started to (but not totally, that is why I am here) learn how to Stop Worrying and Love Climate Change.. it helps that my loved ones are set.

[wanderer]

to amplify fiction further:
New Zealand will be ruled by military then - but I don't think they will banish people, that already live there. so you either be there before everything starts or as a normal citizen you won't be able to get there...  Intruders will be refused and events in the rest of the world will be carefully surveyed and hopefully there will be other safe havens...

How are your loved ones set?
How can you not worry, even when you are old - I worry about my parents, who are in there sixties too - if a global crash will happen within the next ten years, they will have a hard time... being old and fighting for survival can't be that nice...
Survival of the fittest and best armed could become reality.

[Anonymouse]

Wanderer #44,
Getting old is for old earth, remember? Eaarth, on the other hand... Many have pointed out that being prepared is important, others have pointed out that it may be too late, others have pointed out that it is too late.  I don't know, personally.  I DO know that climate change has been a rock rolling down a slope for far too long, with too many people saying it is a bird.  I can only do what I can, and tell people what I can.  It is nice this particular thread on this forum exists, but I am guessing Neven will shut it down soon because we are starting to stray too far from the topic (I wouldn't blame him in the least).  Survival is nice, but I started to make the popcorn a while ago.

[Neven]

I'd rather not shut anything down. It's an interesting subject that also influenced my decisions after leaving the Netherlands. Unfortunately I can't participate as much as I'd like to.

One underlying theme I'm noticing in these discussions is that the main motivation seems to be a fear of dying. Is that a good or a bad motivator? Is survivalism a smart form of selfishness? Or does it stand in the way of working at solutions?

I don't know myself, but these are questions I tend to think about when I can afford to.

[wanderer]

Good questions Neven!
I would say that it is a form of selfishness - but isn't that part of being human?
I know, that mankind will survive climate change - but isn't it just logic, that I would be more concerned about me and my family than about anything else?
I don't fear that there won't be a solution for mankind to survive climate change - what I fear is that my family and my offspring will have to suffer.

I'm glad that Neven doesn't intend to shut anything down - that's the point of the forum - to discuss anything in different threads, so that someone who doesn't want to read or talk about this stuff won't have to!

Of course to much selfishness will stand in the way of working at solutions - I personally won't be that selfish - if there is a single spark of hope I will do anything in my power to find a solution for our entire society and for our environment. I also won't prep.

I am just looking for some kind of being prepared in my mind.

[Justin]

Self-sufficiency and growing your own food is exceptionally challenging. Most of the people I know have difficulty keeping a banana plant alive in the living room or don't know the basics about plant cultivation. They don't understand that plants require light and -no- that dark spot in the hallway isn't good enough to keep your Amaryllis alive. And no, your cactus isn't going to survive in the shed because you decided it doesn't match the new curtains. And no, that plant won't survive, how can you not notice that huge colony of thrips/scale/aphids ?!?

So no, please don't think that watching the odd episode of Gardener's World has provided you with enough knowledge.

Keeping a crop alive is one thing. Harvesting with a surplus for winter and next generation + cycling crops is another. BTW, how are you going to store a bulk amount of seeds during the winter? We're not talking about a few packets in the basement but kilograms that are waiting to be consumed by all sorts of fungi and rodents.

Personally, I would be screwed. I live in a fairly large city. Growing challenging plants is kinda my thing but my region is overpopulated.

The only answer I see is basic crops that require nothing but sunlight and simple nutrition in a controlled environment. Think algae. Soylent green was spot on.

[Justin]

But where would you go?

Easy, go where the survival experts live: Africa. They'll teach you how to get by.