# Sustainable Heat Sources



## PreparedRifleman73 (Nov 2, 2012)

I'm curious to see what you guys think about sustainable heating sources. While economic efficiency is important, I really want to discuss the future of sustainable heat. What will our grandchildren be heating their homes with?

On the one extreme, we have some terrible choices. *Fuel oil*, kerosene, etc... They are expensive, inefficient, terrible for the environment and we've surpassed peak oil and will eventually be out. A quick google search shows that it costs about $25 / million BTU. Plus it is so tied to political events. Petroleum product = unsustainable.

Perhaps *coal* deserves a mention? Pretty dirty, hard to get in some areas. Not going to last forever either!

Maybe a little better is *liquified petroleum (LP)*, largely because of the economies of scale. It is still a petroleum product. More affordable because so many people use it! Again, a petroleum product = not sustainable.

*Natural Gas.* Prices have even gone done. Some estimates say that will hold for decades. The process of mining the Natural Gas sure hurts the environment. There's probably a LOT of it. But eventually, maybe in 25, 50, 100, 200 years....it'll be gone.

*Wood.* You guys would know more than me. But I've read that one home can take 8 acres of woods to sustain. So I don't think 10 billion people will be able to do that.

*Electricity*. Maybe solar and wind technology can get to the point where electric heat is worth it. But maybe not?

What are your thoughts? How will we be fueling the heat for our homes in 2050? 2100?


----------



## hiwall (Jun 15, 2012)

> What are your thoughts? How will we be fueling the heat for our homes in 2050? 2100?


If I was smart enough to know that, I'd be rich enough to heat my house by burning $100 bills


----------



## Bobbb (Jan 7, 2012)

Solar array on your roof. This powers a well pump. The well pump circulates liquid through piping deep into the ground where it picks up heat and then circulates the heat to a heat pump in your home. The heat pump, using power from the solar array, multiplies the heat of the liquid by a factor of 4 and then circulates the liquid through piping underneath, or embedded within, your floor.

Geothermal works remarkably well at leveraging efficiency. The well system sucks up free heat from the ground. The heat pump amplifies it. The hydronic system heats the thermal mass in your floor so the heat is retained for a longer period than if the air in your home was heated. People are more sensitive to temperature in their lower body than in their head, so it's more efficient to keep heat lower in your home than high up near your head. With hydronic heating you can be as comfortable with a lower temperature than you can be with a system which heats the air.

The drawback here is that this is hard to retrofit into an existing home, but it can be done with staple-up tubing and aluminum spreaders. It's the wells or trenches that pose the biggest drawback because of $$$$$.

For a new home though you can really drive down your heating costs, especially if you beef up your floor joists to carry higher dead loads and then put a 1.5" layer of concrete on your floor with the hydronic tubing embedded within.


----------



## Bobbb (Jan 7, 2012)

Something else that you can design into your home is Seasonal Heat Storage. You put piping up in your attic to suck up all of the summer heat and you pipe it down underground underneath your home. Deep enough that it takes 6 months to migrate back to your basement or slab.


----------



## cowboyhermit (Nov 10, 2012)

With electricity the only way to go for better efficiency is a "heat pump" setup, air-source works if it isn't actually cold but otherwise geothermal is the way to go.

In reality burning organic matter is a great way to produce heat and for those who care, it is carbon neutral (before transportation). It is not just wood, people have had success burning a huge variety of carbon waste products such as straw, rice hulls, grasses etc.
I think the figures on the amount of wood required is misleading, it may require 8 acres for me up in the middle of Canada but most people live in much warmer climates. Also I have more than enough wood from shelterbelts and fencelines for many people, and these shelterbelts have been proven to increase food productivity if done correctly (so essentially they aren't "using" any land). 

Solar heating (with storage) has a lot of potential, especially on the large scale, infact I expect to see a lot more houses on a heating "grid" in the future. Not that I think that is a good thing but many alternative heating projects like deep geothermal (when you actually drill down to the hot stuff), large scale solar thermal, co-generation, even efficient organic material burners can be more practical if serving many houses.


----------



## ZoomZoom (Dec 18, 2009)

Breed Snow birds. Have them fly everyone to Arizona or Florida for the winter.

No mention of nuclear power for electricity generation?


----------



## PreparedRifleman73 (Nov 2, 2012)

ZoomZoom said:


> No mention of nuclear power for electricity generation?


Ah I overlooked that. Good point. To me, nuclear with plenty of oversight is safe. I think there are a lot of political reasons we don't use it.

If you could have a nuclear powered grid and every home had renewables grid-tied, all operating geothermal heat pumps...sounds like you'd be set.

Maybe in 200 years they'll be talking about "peak uranium" Haha who knows


----------



## hiwall (Jun 15, 2012)

I would think at some point they would figure out how to do nuclear fusion instead of nuclear fission. That would solve alot of problems with nuclear.


----------



## Bobbb (Jan 7, 2012)

hiwall said:


> I would think at some point they would figure out how to do nuclear fusion instead of nuclear fission. That would solve alot of problems with nuclear.


Space-based solar will probably be cheaper and more efficient than fusion. 24/7 full strength solar not diminished by clouds beamed down to earth.


----------



## cnsper (Sep 20, 2012)

Hot air in DC. Truck it around the country.....

Geothermal


----------



## BillS (May 30, 2011)

There's enough gas to last for centuries. I don't care if it's sustainable. That's a liberal buzzword for controlling what people can and can't do. We have enough coal to last for centuries too. And lastly we have enough wood to last another hundred billion years since trees are a crop and you can replant them.


----------



## zimmy (Aug 17, 2012)

*Heating*

Why not get as many of the above as you can. I have elec. resistance, mini split heat pump, gasification wood boiler, high efficiency propane heater, and solar is in the works. Don't put all your eggs in one basket.


----------



## Caribou (Aug 18, 2012)

We have not reached peak oil. We have enough oil, coal, and natural gas to last hundreds of years each and we are finding more faster than we are using it. Add in the new technology and we are able to recover a greater percentage of oil out of the wells we have. The problem is the current administration restricting the drilling.

We are just starting to use methane. We are recovering methane from a few landfills and some dairy or similar plants. We have barely started to think about the deep sea methane ices. 

Wind and solar will mature to a viable point someday.

Wood pellets are a viable heat source. The technology exists today to convert may heating systems to pellet burners. One advantage to pellets is that any spindly fast growing trees will produce pellets where they might take many more years to produce fire wood.


----------



## LongRider (May 8, 2012)

Wind power


----------



## stanb999 (Nov 14, 2011)

The best way to have sustainable heat is INSULATION. With the proper amounts of insulation and building techniques with an eye for conservation you could easily use 10-20% of the btu's. At those levels what you use matters little. The best is probably grid electric because it's most widely available, Then Natural Gas it's real cheap. 

Pushing the insulation model... You can use active solar heating (as mentioned above) and use no heating fuel at all, just the heat from the sun, even in winter. Even in the far north. IF you choose to solar panels could power the system also.


----------



## Tirediron (Jul 12, 2010)

Simple solutions will work, insulation, solar gain, heat pumps only work if you have a artificially cheap source (electricity) to run them, wood heat can be a lot more efficient, but people think that they know all about it so :brickwall:.....
Short loop sustainability (methane from sewage etc) will probably see more use in the future or there may be a large decrease in population if the current trends continue.


----------



## swjohnsey (Jan 21, 2013)

The reason we don't generate all electricity from nukes is pure political. In some parts of the country passive solar will do much of the work.


----------



## LincTex (Apr 1, 2011)

A properly insulated home, sized appropriately (no mansions) and heated with a Rocket Mass heater will allow for a pretty comfortable living space, and with little wood needed. 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocket_mass_heater









Only a small amount of solar generated (photovoltaic) electricity is needed to run air circulation fans for solar heating/collecting panels. http://www.n3fjp.com/solar/comparisonhotair/comparisonhotair.htm


----------



## invision (Aug 14, 2012)

LincTex said:


> A properly insulated home, sized appropriately (no mansions)


Darn it!!! What if i put in 3??? LoL. Just kidding - although the upstairs is set to 77 it is 75, and downstairs is set to 75 it is 74 with ceiling fan in living room off and I just went down to the unfinished basement... 70 degrees and nice and cool... And it's 90 degrees with 49% humidity (feels like 94) outside...


----------



## PreparedRifleman73 (Nov 2, 2012)

BillS said:


> There's enough gas to last for centuries. I don't care if it's sustainable.


I'd have to agree. Ive been switching to gas. Most recently the most efficient gas tankless water heater on the market.



zimmy said:


> Don't put all your eggs in one basket.


Good point. If we all used multiple sources, prices would be more level.



Caribou said:


> We have not reached peak oil.


I would have to disagree. But your point on methane makes sense. Here in dairy country big farms use methane from the pits.



stanb999 said:


> The best way to have sustainable heat is INSULATION.


Yep



Tirediron said:


> Simple solutions will work.


Haha doesnt it feel like people want expensive complicated solutions sometimes. Youre spot on for sure.



swjohnsey said:


> The reason we don't generate all electricity from nukes is pure political.


Yup!


----------



## carolexan (Dec 28, 2010)

http://thelograck.com/firewood_rating_chart.html

The above link should be helpful when using wood as a heat source.

We have solar and wind turbines and are seeing a big return on both.


----------



## pandamonium (Feb 6, 2011)

Well, the question was how will our grandchildren be heating their homes, 2050, 2100? If things continue the way they are, everyone will be heating with wood. The fancy technology will be the stuff of legend! 

If we DON'T melt down, I believe homes will be heated by residential nuclear furnaces. I am trying to work out the last of the bugs on the prototype now. I'll let you guys know when I am ready to market them, if any of yall wanna get in on the ground floor, ya know??!! :beercheer:


----------



## Viking (Mar 16, 2009)

Where we live wind just doesn't blow enough to generate electricity. We did chose to live in an area that faces due South which is great in the winter. I double walled the North side of our home and have a cold roof on the North as well, if I could have afforded to do the whole roof I would have but with the extensive insulation our home retains heat in the winter and with a night time exchange of cool night air our home keeps about 20 degrees cooler during even the hottest days. 96 today outside 76 inside. We also have a very large big leaf maple that gives us afternoon shade. We heat with a wood burning stove and only use an electric wall heater in the bathroom when bathing and with the generally moderate winters we have we only use one or two cords of wood per winter, there are times I need to watch how much wood I put in the stove because it can easily get to the point of having to open a window because it gets too warm. We are also getting all the components together for a standby or if need be permanent solar power system. We have learned to minimize our power usage over the 30+ years we have lived here in S.W. Oregon. I had considered putting 6" to 8" river rocks in all of the crawl spaces and having heat gained during the day blown through them during the day so they could give heat over night but as things worked out that wasn't needed with the wood heat and I'm not so sure it would have given us a consistent heat source on cloudy periods.


----------



## LincTex (Apr 1, 2011)

carolexan said:


> http://thelograck.com/firewood_rating_chart.html
> 
> The above link should be helpful when using wood as a heat source.


They put Hackbewrry as "Excellent"?!?!? I HATE burning that stuff!!! 
I have to mix it with other decent wood in order to get it to run in the stove at all. The only thing it's good for (to me) is I use it as a "buffer" to help slow the fire a bit so I still have good coals in the morning (without having to choke the air down so much)


----------



## LincTex (Apr 1, 2011)

Viking said:


> there are times I need to watch how much wood I put in the stove because it can easily get to the point of having to open a window because it gets too warm.


What stove do you have?

On "Mild" days, we feed our stove more often, and with smaller sized pieces. It takes a while to learn how the thing runs best, and on what type of day. We have been BLESSED with a very mild winter (not much wood needed) and so far a cool summer  (BIG grin!)


----------



## gabbyj310 (Oct 22, 2012)

When I first moved to Ky(many years ago) we lived in a old house with a coal burning furnace.We filled the hopper every few days a took out the "klinkers".We bought enough coal that a truck dumped in a little room off of the basement.It was cheap and we had enough to last for more than a year in one"CHEAP" load.With a modified filter my husband made it wasn't toooo bad.Sure beats freezing.
I think solar and wind power will be in our days to come.


----------



## machinist (Jul 4, 2012)

At the present level of world population, there is no such thing as sustainable clean energy for all, IMHO. The higher tech methods have hidden costs of resources and energy for their manufacture, which make them a lot less "green" than they would first appear to be. 

The best answers I have seen include earth sheltered homes, passive solar/hot air heating with supplemental wood heat. One earth sheltered home I know of near Boise, Idaho has extreme insulation and is heated by the WATER HEATER's losses. That involves triple pane windows and double pane solar collectors that are shaded in summer. It is cooled in summer by 300 yards of "cool tubes" buried 6 feet deep, and air circulated through them by a solar powered fan. The fan doesn't run unless needed, and only runs when the sun is shining, so no batteries are needed. 

Batteries are a major energy cost for manufacture, so eliminating them in the design is desirable. 

We heat with wood in southern Indiana where there is a LOT of cull hardwood available. We use about 4 cords per year to easily heat our 26' x 50' home. The best choice for any given individual depends on where they live and what resources are available there.


----------



## zimmy (Aug 17, 2012)

*Heat*

Although this is not for heating the air, but heats domestic hot water, this same concept can be used to heat your house.

I installed these on the house a couple years ago, it is a drain back system and is working very well.

I also have 12 flat plate collectors that will be installed in the future.


----------



## Viking (Mar 16, 2009)

LincTex said:


> What stove do you have?
> 
> On "Mild" days, we feed our stove more often, and with smaller sized pieces. It takes a while to learn how the thing runs best, and on what type of day. We have been BLESSED with a very mild winter (not much wood needed) and so far a cool summer  (BIG grin!)


The stove we have probably hasn't been manufactured not long after we bought it. It's a Sweet Home stove made in Sweet Home, Oregon made of 1/4" steel with 5/16" steel doors and it takes 18" logs and weighs enough to have given me my double hernia just to move it, but it runs all night with one filling. Our best wood around here is madrone, trouble is that timber companies are now using it for wood chip for paper so it's become harder to get and more expensive. I have some growing on my property but it's only going to be used in extreme SHTF instances, we also have a variety of oak which is probably our next best choice. The great thing about madrone is that it will grow back even if cut off at ground level.


----------



## BlueShoe (Aug 7, 2010)

Just make a big solar oven for our home. Naturally, this is only one facet of an approach for heating.

The previous owner of my house built a good sized passive solar green house attached to the back of the house. It worked, but was rotten so I tore it down. It was built in the late '70s or early 80s after the energy crisis when passive solar was all over alternative energy outlets.

You know what the sun does to your car if you don't have tinted windows and leave them closed in the sunshine. The metal and interior stores that heat. You need a southern facing exposure and some sort of storage. Insulated glass over rocks and water storage barrels work well. 

I'm reminded of this every time I leave a water bottle in the console of my car in the sunshine. If the lid is on it the bottle, the temp sores quickly. If the lid is off, it take much longer to increase to hot water.

For a while "soda-can" heaters were making the rounds on prepping/homesteading sites. They aren't hideous if done right. They just look like another door on your house.


----------



## BillM (Dec 29, 2010)

Concentrated sources of energy such as coal ,oil and natural gas are sustainable for the next 500 years or so.

Solar generated electricity is fine but if you are talking about sustaining it, what happens when the batteries wear out? how are you going to replace them.

Tromb walls and floors coupled with an earth tube in an underground home would be much more sustainable than solar cells. 

I use propane as a back up fuel for my heat pump and to cook with. I have 800 gallons in a tank and it doesn't require electricity to use it. It also runs a small electric generator when the lights go out.

We would use kerosene lamps to light the house and only run the generator once or twice a day to keep frozen food from spoiling . I could operate a whole year without a propane refill. I also have about six ricks of wood that we use in the fire pit and to heat the shop if it gets real cold and I am working out there.

I figure it is all cheap now and later on it may be costly or unavailable.

Go ahead and get set up now to provide basic necessities while you can.

It won't make any difference how many rounds of ammo you have if you are frozen solid in your home.


----------



## cowboyhermit (Nov 10, 2012)

BillM said:


> Solar generated electricity is fine but if you are talking about sustaining it, what happens when the batteries wear out? how are you going to replace them.


I don't think there is any doubt lead acid batteries are sustainable, very little embodied energy is needed and no shortage of material.
If you are talking about shtf and not being able to make batteries for a period of time, it is possible but not likely for long because not a lot of technology is required, invented in the 1800's 

http://www.preparedsociety.com/forum/f16/diy-lead-acid-battery-19558/


----------



## BillM (Dec 29, 2010)

*My veiw*



cowboyhermit said:


> I don't think there is any doubt lead acid batteries are sustainable, very little embodied energy is needed and no shortage of material.
> If you are talking about shtf and not being able to make batteries for a period of time, it is possible but not likely for long because not a lot of technology is required, invented in the 1800's
> 
> http://www.preparedsociety.com/forum/f16/diy-lead-acid-battery-19558/


My view is that any setback in civilization will be a matter of a couple of years, with a huge die off of a significant portion of the population .

I was addressing the folks that think we are going back to the 1800's for an extended period of time. If that happened , repair parts for a solar cell system would not be available anymore. In that case a passive solar system would work without solar cells , batteries and inverters.


----------



## cowboyhermit (Nov 10, 2012)

BillM said:


> My view is that any setback in civilization will be a matter of a couple of years, with a huge die off of a significant portion of the population .
> 
> I was addressing the folks that think we are going back to the 1800's for an extended period of time. If that happened , repair parts for a solar cell system would not be available anymore. In that case a passive solar system would work without solar cells , batteries and inverters.


:2thumb: I agree passive solar is great, just wanted to clarify about the batteries.


----------



## LongRider (May 8, 2012)

Viking said:


> we also have a variety of oak which is probably our next best choice. The great thing about madrone is that it will grow back even if cut off at ground level.


Alder and vine maple are good options up here. Lots of folks over look vine maple as invasive scrub wood not very big in diameter. A few sticks burn a long time quick is easy to buck up (no splitting required) and it grows back with a quickness


----------



## LongRider (May 8, 2012)

BillM said:


> If that happened , repair parts for a solar cell system would not be available anymore. In that case a passive solar system would work without solar cells , batteries and inverters.


This is why I think that spares of all your equipment and stock piles of replacement, repair and maintenance parts are an essential part of our preps.


----------



## LincTex (Apr 1, 2011)

BillM said:


> I was addressing the folks that think we are going back to the 1800's for an extended period of time. If that happened, repair parts for a solar cell system would not be available anymore.


"Residual technology" (stuff left over that still works after TSHTF) will only be useful (and make life easier) for a "transition period".

If I have solar-powered LED lighting in my house, it only means I have a slightly higher standard of living (for a little while longer) than my neighbor who is burning a tallow candle.

After 20 years, everyone will be burning tallow candles. But, my preps help to ensure I will still be one of the few left over that is still using candles in a 1800's technology-level society.

I won't let myself be deluded into thinking I can store enough goods to get through TSHTF without realizing a transition period has to occur eventually.


----------



## helicopter5472 (Feb 25, 2013)

Originally Posted by BillM View Post 

Solar generated electricity is fine but if you are talking about sustaining it, what happens when the batteries wear out? how are you going to replace them.


A good set of batteries will last 7-10 years. I have seen some lasting 15 years. Get another set now as spares without acid in them....If society hasn't rebuilt itself by then, I guess we will have figured out how to live without?


----------



## Viking (Mar 16, 2009)

LincTex said:


> "Residual technology" (stuff left over that still works after TSHTF) will only be useful (and make life easier) for a "transition period".
> 
> If I have solar-powered LED lighting in my house, it only means I have a slightly higher standard of living (for a little while longer) than my neighbor who is burning a tallow candle.
> 
> ...


And that's what prepping is all about, getting yourself in gear for the huge paradigm shift that a very large proportion of the population will likely not survive too well. I'm 70 years old so my consideration of how long our solar system will supply some basic needs ( no whole house design) won't equate to the years after TSHTF young preppers will have to deal with in taking care of their comforts. LincTex is on the mark in his consideration of this issue.


----------



## LongRider (May 8, 2012)

LincTex said:


> "Residual technology" (stuff left over that still works after TSHTF) will only be useful (and make life easier) for a "transition period".
> snip.................................... I won't let myself be deluded into thinking I can store enough goods to get through TSHTF without realizing a transition period has to occur eventually.


While there is a lot of truth in what you are saying. As already stated long term survival and the ability to maintain current standards of living is relative. It means something very different to a 70 year old man and a 20 something young blood. Additionally the transition will happen in stages. In many cases it will not be an all or nothing proposition, for those that are prepared to be self sustaining.

As an example I am 50 something. Best case scenario based on family genetics I have about 30 years MAX left. With my current level of stores, duplicate equipment, maintenance, replacement and spare parts I have no reason to think I can not maintain my current standard of living for the duration of my life. Granted over time I will have seen every DVD I have enough times that they will no longer be entertaining. But my books and music library will easily keep me entertained for the rest of my life. So there will be adjustments but in my lifetime I do not expect to have to live like Jeremiah Johnson.


----------



## LincTex (Apr 1, 2011)

LongRider said:


> With my current level of stores, duplicate equipment, maintenance, replacement and spare parts I have no reason to think I can not maintain my current standard of living for the duration of my life.


No... you can, but only in some areas.

You have three 500 gallon tanks of propane (give or take - since you have 1000 for sure, plus whatever is in the tank you are using). Propane is a "Transition" item. If you can make 500 gallons last 2 years or 20 years is immaterial. If the SHTF tomorrow, when you are 75 you most likely won't have any propane left..... and probably will not have had any for quite a few years already. It helped you "transition" to where you are, though.

99.99% of the population of the USA would not be able to duplicate the same.

Now, I may be wrong about that. If you really stretch your propane and you live to be 95 you might be able to maintain the same level, but it would take a lot of conservation on your part. BUT - an increase in conservation now means your standard of living just got lowered a few notches...

I am also not in the top .01% left (like you) but I hope that having 2-3 years worth of preps will make the "transition" in my life a lot easier than say, about 85-90% of the rest of the population?

I depend on diesel fuel - to run a tractor - to till the ground - to raise food. I have enough fuel to do this for several years: the "transition period". By the time the fuel is gone, plan "B" better damn well be in effect if we plan to keep eating.

Everyone will need to adjust in some way, shape or form. It just depends on what you have prepped/stored that will determine how long you have to make changes/adjust. Those that have three days of "Transition" supplies available to adjust simply cannot and will not be able to adjust.

How often do you fill a 500 gallon tank right now? Once a year? Once every two years? The math is simple; if you fill 500 once a year and you have three tanks that means you can maintain the same standard of living you are at RIGHT NOW for exactly three years and no more. If you fill one 500 every two years, then you can maintain for 6 years (2 years per tank). To expect the fuel to last any longer, means you must lower your standard of living.


----------



## machinist (Jul 4, 2012)

+100! It is impossible to store enough to last forever. 

I expect that the transition time will vary among individuals and also depending on what particular thing one is talking about. It is conceivable to store enough pencils and paper to last a VERY long time at today's prices. Not so with energy in most forms, especially liquid fuels. That means I had better find a way to plow my gardens that does not need petroleum fuels, but maybe I can keep books and writing materials on hand to help educate the next generation or two of our families. 

I think it is important to focus on what we CAN do, and make preparations for those things. For example, I can buy used textbooks for virtually any subject, encyclopedias, and reference books cheap at Goodwill, yard sales, etc.. I can buy and restore old horse drawn farm equipment now pretty cheap, and get new harness and collars (for a 2 horse team) for less than most people spend on a vacation--roughly $1,500. I don't see the need to get the horses YET, unless you need the experience to work them. There will be horses around, although they may need an education to be useful. 

A wood fired cook stove isn't all THAT expensive, and a couple good crosscut saws and the sharpening tools can be had for under $100 around here. 

I think it is time for those not acquainted with those old ways to visit Pioneer Villages, Amish communities, or whatever to learn those ways so they can equip themselves with the hardware and then learn the skills. Note that this sort of thing was the state-of-the-art tech until at least 1930 in much of rural North America. 

I don't want to wait until I desperately NEED such things to go looking for them. And, it is a rather agreeable lifestyle, once you get used to it.


----------



## machinist (Jul 4, 2012)

I thought the Transition idea was so important that I was compelled to write about it. I covered some technologies that I thought were most likely to be lost and low-tech substitutes for a PAW scenario in my tale DIRTY MONEY in the fiction section here. http://www.preparedsociety.com/forum/f55/dirty-money-12414/

A few of what I addressed were:
-Farming and transport with animal power.
-Biodiesel, as a transition technology for the medium term.
-Oil from oilseeds for cooking, paint, and other uses.
-Water power for grinding grain.
-Pottery making.
-Passive solar heating.
-Seed saving.
-Animal husbandry, without commercial feed products.
-Medical needs.

NONE OF US KNOW WHAT IS COMING. If we are faced with a need for sustainable heating and other technologies, there will be no time for working out the details of them. It will have to be ready to go immediately. Time to get cracking on this, right?


----------



## LongRider (May 8, 2012)

LincTex said:


> No... you can, but only in some areas.
> 
> You have three 500 gallon tanks of propane (give or take - since you have 1000 for sure, plus whatever is in the tank you are using). Propane is a "Transition" item. If you can make 500 gallons last 2 years or 20 years is immaterial. If the SHTF tomorrow, when you are 75 you most likely won't have any propane left..... and probably will not have had any for quite a few years already. It helped you "transition" to where you are, though.
> 
> ...


Your points are right on and you are absolutely correct. I think we agree and where we appear to depart ways is once again about systematics, maybe some denseness on my part. I focused in on the 1800 comment envisioning Jeremiah Johnson mountain man existence. Which I think is the very best those who plan on bugging out can hope for. A very primitive and precarious hand to mouth way of life. That is not how I see those who are self sustaining living. Over all there will not be much difference in the quality of life. As I eluded to in my post of course there will be some loses that can not be over come. No more Micky D's or cross country putts on the motorcycle and as I said no new movies to watch. Those kinds of things are a given. But over all there is no need to have a dramatic drop in our standard of living.
As you said there will be transitions, they won't happen all at once. Yes I have about five years worth of propane (if that is the only fuel I use to generate power). I have alternatives for my vehicles replacement gas engines that can burn alcohol, and a still. Diesel replacement engines and that bio fuel kit/chemicals that has never been opened. Enough spare parts and maintenance parts to last my life time probably longer due to less usage. As well as you have often said not putting all my eggs in one basket some minor solar and hopefully wind power soon with enough replacement repair maintenance parts to last my and ideally my kids life time.

I think we agree, there will be periods of transition where we adapt and do things differently. I do not think that there has to be any dramatic transition in terms of having to become accustomed to living a primitive hand to mouth 1800's, Jeremiah Johnson mountain man way of life for those who choose not to. Lots of folks live off grid now and have a far higher standard of living than that.



machinist said:


> +100! It is impossible to store enough to last forever.


Absolutely correct which as I said on another thread is why we quit "prepping" about ten years ago and began focusing on being self sustaining. Producing what we need instead of trying to store and stock pile it. Storing and stock piling just those things we will not be able to replace to maintain and repair the equipment we do have. So that we can produce everything else we need to maintain our current way of life.


----------



## Caribou (Aug 18, 2012)

There is an old central heating system plan that was used with coal, wood, and early oil fired boilers that requires no electricity. The boiler must be placed in a basement and large diameter piping to a number of the old cast iron radiators. The hot water hot water rises through the pipes to the top of the radiator and as it cools the cooler water returns from the bottom of the radiator to the bottom of the boiler. Circulation is controlled to each radiator by non electric thermostatic valves.


----------



## LincTex (Apr 1, 2011)

LongRider said:


> envisioning Jeremiah Johnson mountain man existence - Which I think is the very best those who plan on bugging out can hope for. A very primitive and precarious hand to mouth way of life.


I guess is depends on where the bugging out occurred to... but yes, a wilderness hand-to-mouth lifestyle would be a serious downer on most anyone's existence (at least those of us in the USA accustomed to a high standard of living. Alternatively, see: "Happy People: A Year in the Taiga")



LongRider said:


> But over all there is no need to have a dramatic drop in our standard of living. As you said there will be transitions, they won't happen all at once.


That is the beauty of why we do what we do... to ease the transition. Stored food, fuel and supplies help us get from where we are now to where we would eventually end up (and hopefully, with some grace).


----------



## LongRider (May 8, 2012)

LincTex said:


> I guess is depends on where the bugging out occurred to... but yes, a wilderness hand-to-mouth lifestyle would be a serious downer on most anyone's existence (at least those of us in the USA accustomed to a high standard of living. Alternatively, see: "Happy People: A Year in the Taiga")


Not really, those who are not actively self sustaining now simply can not bug out with the equipment, tools, knowledge, experience, supplies and skills they will need to become self sustaining to the their current standard of living. Not even if they could bug out with a Matson container on their backs. Even in Taiga their life style will be a primitive hand to mouth existence. Maybe it it will be more abundance warmer and comfortable life but primitive hand to mouth with only the barest of essentials none the less.


----------



## hiwall (Jun 15, 2012)

Depending on what happens, I think some/many of the bugging-out people will eventually move into abandoned homes. There would be a period of time when they live a "Jeremiah Johnson mountain man existence" and then move back home or to someone else's home. I think most agree if things are at TEOTWAWKI stage that large numbers will die leaving many empty homes.


----------



## LongRider (May 8, 2012)

LincTex said:


> I guess is depends on where the bugging out occurred to... but yes, a wilderness hand-to-mouth lifestyle would be a serious downer on most anyone's existence (at least those of us in the USA accustomed to a high standard of living. Alternatively, see: "Happy People: A Year in the Taiga")


Not really, those who are not actively self sustaining now simply can not bug out with the equipment, tools, knowledge, experience, supplies and skills they will need to become self sustaining to the their current standard of living. Not even if they could bug out with a Matson container on their backs. Even in Tropical paradise their life style will be a primitive hand to mouth existence. Maybe it will be more abundant warmer and comfortable life but primitive hand to mouth with only the barest of essentials none the less. Taiga seems like a harsh existence regardless what the movie depicts. But than I hate the cold


----------



## LincTex (Apr 1, 2011)

LongRider said:


> Not really, those who are not actively self sustaining now simply can not bug out with the equipment, tools, knowledge, experience, supplies and skills they will need to become self sustaining to the their current standard of living.


No, it still depends. 
If your children don't live with you right now, but they plan to bug out to *your* location, then "where they bugged out to" had everything to do with their standard of living.

That's the point I was trying to make; I should have clarified it though. Naturally, bugging out to a location of "nothingness" (your example, with a huge container load of tools and supplies brought with them) and then trying to start life all over again (from scratch) would really stink.

Yes, life on the Taiga is pretty harsh - though they are seemingly happy. But we all know happiness is relative anyway


----------



## opaww (Oct 10, 2008)

Landfill gases can be created on your property and if done right gives you gases to burn in gas furnaces to heat homes and cook with. It is a renewable energy source


----------



## LincTex (Apr 1, 2011)

opaww said:


> Landfill gases can be created on your property and if done right gives you gases to burn in gas furnaces to heat homes and cook with. It is a renewable energy source


Yes and no. A lot of perforated pipe ($$$) is required to harvest landfill gas (due to such a large area), and you need to know where and how to bore the holes before setting pipe.

It would be much better to just save all your food scraps, manure, poo, etc.. and such and just feed them directly into a methane digester. That way, the "stuff that makes the gas" is in one central location, not spread out over acres.

Also, the "stuff" left over (after gas generation) goes into the garden or compost pile to be used as fertilizer, so it's a win-win situation.


----------



## Bobbb (Jan 7, 2012)

It's very difficult to capture or produce much usable methane so that it becomes a reliable source of energy. You'd need something on the order of 500 hogs to produce enough methane to heat a typical 1,500 square foot home. It's very difficult to pressurize and store methane, so the most economical way to use it is when it is produced.


----------



## machinist (Jul 4, 2012)

The Mother Earth News magazine had an article on methane for village cooking in India, back in the late '70's or early 80's. All the village threw organic wastes into this huge brick lined cylindrical pit in the ground. A huge metal tank was lowered into the pit with a primitive hoist. The tank had no bottom, like an inverted cup, and fit closely to the wall of the pit. A rubber hose led from the top of the tank to some simple filtration setup. Methane was allowed to escape until there was NO air remaining in the tank, lest it become an explosive gas/air mixture. The filtered gas was piped to cooking burners.

As gas was produced, the tank became slightly pressurized, and the tank rose, guided by posts of the hoist mechanism. Gravity kept the pressure pretty constant at a few PSI. When the tank quit producing gas, a second unit was put into operation and the tank hoisted off the first one for cleanout. The residue was used for fertilizer, and the unit recharged with organic waste.

It was messy to work on, rude, crude, and very low tech. And it worked. Still going, I read somewhere. The EPA, OSHA, and the Health Department would have a hissy fit about such a thing in the US, but they must not have those depts. in India.

Yes, it takes a LOT of manure to make very much gas. I read that some hog confinement operations in the US use their manure to make gas and heat the hog houses with it, but they produce a lot of manure in those things. Those are slatted floor hog buildings that are frequently washed down with water, and the manure handled as a liquid, drained by gravity into holding tanks for gas production. http://extension.missouri.edu/p/G1881

The old German farmers around here had other uses for their hog manure. They simply let chickens run in the hog pastures. The chickens ate hog manure and grew fast on that. (Hogs don't digest all their food.) Then, they ate the chickens. Simple.


----------



## cowboyhermit (Nov 10, 2012)

On a small scale, methane is viable for cooking or even running a small engine on a very limited basis, but for substantial heating it is not a small scale endeavor. Other options like wood are going to be so much simpler. The floating tank method machinist mentioned is one of the safest, and very low tech, it really does work reliably. The tank need not be where the gas is made either, it can be piped there for storage.

These guys are a bit off but they do show some good ideas.


----------



## LincTex (Apr 1, 2011)

machinist said:


> A huge metal tank was lowered into the pit with a primitive hoist.


I remember reading that article over 25 years ago. I think they called it "Gobar gas".

I remember the cable and pulley system ("hoist"?) was actually a counterbalance weight, like old fashioned windows had. That way the tank could really "float" because the the weight of the tank itself was supported.


----------

