Members philbo Posted October 21, 2007 Members Share Posted October 21, 2007 If you really want a driveway going to the studio, a permeable surface would be better. Gravel is better than solid pavement, although it still promotes heat radiation more than I'd want if it were me. There are rubber mulches they make now out of recycled tires, and those work quite well too. As far as the shredded tires, it's also a great surface for martial arts training - seriously. :phil: Doesn't the rubber make your uniform black & smudgey? (I guess the belt would be OK, if you have a black belt.. ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members alphajerk Posted October 21, 2007 Members Share Posted October 21, 2007 i had to mow my yard 4 times this year.... well whats left of it. one side of my front yard is pretty dead, i started parking in it and will probably put a concrete pad in [stamped to look like stone] as there was a driveway there previously so the apron is still there in the curb. i was going to put in two cobblestone treads but the way my wife drives, she wouldnt even be on them enough and kill the grass inbetween anyway. i lost my japanese maple [well 2/3rd's of it] to a late snow this year, my azeleas dead, my dogwood looks about dead but might be hanging on... i lost an evergreen as well. lots of death in the yard this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members nat whilk II Posted October 22, 2007 Members Share Posted October 22, 2007 Well... in most places, yeah they do actually. Lawns originated in the UK, where it rains plenty with little water lost to evaporation, and the lawns were kept grazed by sheep. It makes sense to have them there, as well as New England and some other northern temperate areas (although even there it's questionable if you have to keep them mowed and fertilized). Otherwise, although sure it's better to have a lawn than to cover your whole yard in concrete , there are usually better alternatives and a lot that look really pretty too. Also, suburban houses (mine included) have mostly been built on old farms - we're using some of the country's most productive farmland to (in many cases) just have a lawn. It doesn't take much space at all to grow all of a family's produce as well as lots of flowering plants and trees mixed in to act as mulch, fertilizer and keeping pests away. Seems to me that it's a question of how far you want to go to achieve an ideal water-usage scenario. True, grass lawns are most natural and the easiest to maintain where the grass grows naturally, gets enough rain regularly, and animals do the work of mowing without using petroleum as a fuel. But that's the far-end-of-the-scale ideal. The reality is that lawns are a cultural norm in the vast majority of US suburban homes, and that simply won't change very fast. I'm thinking that lawns, 'tho maybe not ideal from the water-usage standpoint, could still be acceptable in their water use and pollution impact given some very necessary and not-all-that-radical changes. I've been hearing snorts of contempt over suburban lawns since the 60's. But the lawns still persist. It's not just the older generation at all, although I've run into plenty of retirees who water when the hell they want to as much as they damn well please and think it's none of your GD business, etc etc. Yes it's bucking nature to stick a UK style bowling green in Arizona. But politics, (and the water issue will hinge on political factors) is, as the old saying goes, the art of the possible. I suppose this touches on the eternal environmental debate-dynamic: compromise is no-man's land, although compromise is always the eventual outcome of de facto environmental policy and muddle-through measures. I vote for a new thing: lawns that work, given the realities of the water situation. It's worth a try at least IMHO. nat whilk ii Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members John Sayers Posted October 22, 2007 Members Share Posted October 22, 2007 I loved the lawns in Beijing - they didn't mow them, they weeded them. They grew a rye grass that grew to around 6". You would see 10 people in a row making their way across the lawn weeding out foreign plants - they looked really beautiful and were lovely to lay down on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members amplayer Posted October 22, 2007 Members Share Posted October 22, 2007 True, but that's a "think locally, act locally" problem. The population of the earth as a whole keeps increasing, placing more demands on resources. This is a closed system, after all... I understand what you are saying but I still disagree.The "think global" viewpoint does not validate underpopulation in rich countries. The problem in the rich societies in America, Europe, Japan, and others, is that we do not value raising children that much anymore.In these societies, we absolutely must import people from other countries, or risk total economic meltdown. Somebody has to do the real work, and in our aging and declining populations, that somebody isn't homegrown.Is massive imigration the right way to sustain a society? I don't think so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members jlampson Posted October 22, 2007 Members Share Posted October 22, 2007 On the subject of lawns, I've always had a dislike for them ever since I was voted "most likely to mow the lawn" when I was a kid. It's almost as fun as grocery shopping. But thinking about it as one big resource hog is easy: you have to plant it, you have to water it, you have to mow it (usually with petroleum-based fuels), and so on. Plus, that's time that could be used for playing music. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jeff da Weasel Posted October 22, 2007 Members Share Posted October 22, 2007 I saw that Georgia has declared a state of emergency over this. Best of luck, folks... I know a thing or two about water conservation, living here where we have none and are forced to import (ahem, steal) it from elsewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members alphajerk Posted October 22, 2007 Members Share Posted October 22, 2007 you mean re-route what was supposed to go to mexico? and you wonder why they are crossing the border. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jeff da Weasel Posted October 22, 2007 Members Share Posted October 22, 2007 you mean re-route what was supposed to go to mexico? Yes and no. In LA, we do get water that we take from the Colorado River, but also from local groundwater (small percentages) and by stealing it from other rivers like the Owens and Sacramento. You learn a lot about this in grade school history here, or at least I did while growing up. It's an important part of how 12.3 million people continue to live in this metro area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Lee Flier Posted October 22, 2007 Members Share Posted October 22, 2007 The reality is that lawns are a cultural norm in the vast majority of US suburban homes, and that simply won't change very fast. I'm thinking that lawns, 'tho maybe not ideal from the water-usage standpoint, could still be acceptable in their water use and pollution impact given some very necessary and not-all-that-radical changes. I think I've acknowledged that. You're preaching to the choir here, because I've often criticized fellow volunteers for not being pragmatic enough in this regard. In fact, in this very thread I've mentioned that the biggest hurdles to overcome are cultural. However, your statement that I was responding to was "lawns don't deserve the contempt they've gotten." Well, yes they do. That doesn't mean we can't be practical or that I'm passing judgement on anyone with a lawn. It just means, let's not lose sight of the ideal. We can accept compromises without pretending that they're great and not compromises. I've been hearing snorts of contempt over suburban lawns since the 60's. But the lawns still persist. Well, part of the reason for that is there have never really been viable alternatives presented in this country. You can't just say "don't have a lawn," you have to elaborate on what one could have instead. In Europe, a lot of people now have very beautiful and low maintenance gardens because the government has drilled it into everyone's heads for some time now how this can be achieved, and conservation is more a cultural fact of life now. A lot of cultural trends also change only out of necessity, so times like this (drought) are good opportunities to present people with alternatives. It's the one time when they might be willing to try something different. I also think if a few people set examples of alternatives that are really beautiful and inspiring, that goes a long way. A lot of cultural "norms" are about keeping up with the Joneses... so if the Joneses decide they don't want a lawn and have the fortitude to do something different, and it looks great... lots of other people will feel like they're not cool if they don't do the same thing. Oftentimes cultural change is all about convincing a few influential people that the change is necessary, and then giving them viable alternatives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Dean Roddey Posted October 22, 2007 Members Share Posted October 22, 2007 Is massive imigration the right way to sustain a society? I don't think so. But one has to ask... How can any system which requires constant population growth to sustain itself be practical in a limited planet? Clearly we have to move beyond such schemes or we won't survive in any way that I think that any of us would think of as healthy. If it's not even possible to allow the population to shrink, then we are doomed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members chipmcdonald Posted October 22, 2007 Members Share Posted October 22, 2007 Perhaps we are living at the peak of human civilization and it's all downhill from here :-) That's a comforting thought. Of course the greenies were warning long ago that population was a serious problem and that conservation is important, and they were ignored. It's really as simple as that. The math doesn't hold up: limited resources can only do so much. It's not just water; we all know the same will happen with gas, and any number of other things the government should be moving now to rectify - the market has no incentive to forestall problems in the future. The problem is the built-in time lag for the effects to become noticeable on a macro-scale. It's going to be too late when everyone wakes up. I think it's also going to be ugly; which, perhaps is being planned for I'm afraid. I'm thinking the first thing I'll have to do is build a holding tank to run water into the washer; that will be the easiest thing to do. I live adjacent to a river, but I'm afraid it's going to be turned into a stream soon to feed Atlanta; further delaying said Macro Awareness. Which sucks. Most everything now seemingly sucks. And in part it's mostly the fault of the anti-green anti-think-ahead arrogance of a Certain Political Party's propaganda. A bad future has already been deferred to a much worse one in a later future, thanks to American politics.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Anderton Posted October 22, 2007 Members Share Posted October 22, 2007 Don't worry! The SuperBug is coming, which will wipe out a large percentage of the world's population and everything will become more manageable for those who remain. There are lots of really nasty, antibiotic-resistant diseases coming down the pike that will do the dirty work for us. So there's your happy, cheerful thought for the day Unless, of course, you're one of the ones the SuperBug attacks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jeff da Weasel Posted October 22, 2007 Members Share Posted October 22, 2007 Don't worry! The SuperBug is coming, which will wipe out a large percentage of the world's population and everything will become more manageable for those who remain. But isn't that always true? The worst aspects of survival make things easier for those who remain. Disease, plague and pestilence wipes out big chunks of population at a time, allowing an easier life for those that didn't die. War, a horrible concept on its own, has always been the foremost impetus for new technologies that benefit the survivors. It's sad to think of us -- homo sapiens sapiens -- as being no better than the germs we try and wipe out all the time. But we're just one more bug clinging to this rock. Nature balances the scales every so often, in horrifying ways that are neither fair nor necessarily avoidable. So have a nice day! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jeff da Weasel Posted October 22, 2007 Members Share Posted October 22, 2007 And, as Warren Zevon said, enjoy every sandwich. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members strathound Posted October 22, 2007 Members Share Posted October 22, 2007 We're having record rainfall in Texas. Maybe it's our turn to have healthy plants? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members blue2blue Posted October 22, 2007 Author Members Share Posted October 22, 2007 Don't worry! The SuperBug is coming, which will wipe out a large percentage of the world's population and everything will become more manageable for those who remain. There are lots of really nasty, antibiotic-resistant diseases coming down the pike that will do the dirty work for us. So there's your happy, cheerful thought for the day Unless, of course, you're one of the ones the SuperBug attacks. Mr. Pollyannah. But... yeah... as most of those of us who deal with systems (and that, of course, covers everything from human organizations, to markets, to computers and networks) know all too well -- when a system is destabilized, the consequences can be disastrous to those with vesting in the proper function of that system. And that is us walking water bags... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members sunsinger Posted October 23, 2007 Members Share Posted October 23, 2007 I wonder just what happens when a population center of 4 million people suddenly has no water or water distribution plan or centers??? And I wonder how many major American cities have to be brought to their knees by natural disasters before States begin to individually opt out of the loving embrace of our Federal Government. Before they seal their borders with checkpoints, and fend for themselves? Guarding their precious natural resources like water? I am puzzled that our Federal Government is not immediately sending tanker trains, and trucks with food grade containers of fresh water...And doing things like setting up infrastructure for public water distribution centers... Should Atlanta and the rest of us wait to goad this administration until the emergency is 60 days away? How about 30 days??? Shouldn't we be seeing some mobilization right now? What happens when one large population center after another goes down?Is there a cascading effect on economies? On food distribution? Is there an effect that occurrs like a ripple on a pond over the whole? I will be curious to see what the response to this pending emergency will be... And the vision and forethought put into dealing with it before it becomes an emergency for all of us... Atlanta and it's surrounding areas, are communications, shipping & distribution hubs for the entire country... How many falling cities does it take to create a failing nation??? Hey, but were the pillars of freedom & democracy, and the most powerful nation on earth, right? We have a lovely war that costs 10 billion $$$ a month, and is not really doing anything to improve our position here at home, or abroad... Our military is stretched to the breaking point, and our infrastructure is falling apart... And our King is saying that we should now stop Iran or World War III will be at our doorstep... Score one for diplomacy... Rattling Nuclear edged swords... I think he would be better off developing a water policy for Atlanta... Than threatening WWIII Sooo... Most of our National guard resources are in Iraq, so if we need help here, it is in short supply... Good luck Atlanta, and have a nice day... Maybe you can get King George to give you some oil from Iraq, and you can maybe trade it for some water with Russia, or China... Heck maybe those nice folks in Michigan and Chicago, and the other great lakes states will send you some water... I feel like I live in the most powerful nation on earth... Don't you??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Dean Roddey Posted October 23, 2007 Members Share Posted October 23, 2007 I am puzzled that our Federal Government is not immediately sending tanker trains, and trucks with food grade containers of fresh water...And doing things like setting up infrastructure for public water distribution centers... Well, one, they'd have to be asked for assistance first, right? Has Atlanta asked for federal assistance? And two, that would probably be like spitting into a desert. Moving enough water to meet the need would be extraordinarily difficult. And if you can't move enough to meet the need, who decides who can get what you do move? What happens when one large population center after another goes down? Is there a cascading effect on economies? On food distribution? Is there an effect that occurrs like a ripple on a pond over the whole? I think you've been watching a few too many disaster movies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Lee Flier Posted October 23, 2007 Members Share Posted October 23, 2007 And I wonder how many major American cities have to be brought to their knees by natural disasters before States begin to individually opt out of the loving embrace of our Federal Government. Before they seal their borders with checkpoints, and fend for themselves? Guarding their precious natural resources like water? Ummm wellll the thing is that in order to be able to support this many people in the first place, Atlanta dammed up a river to create a reservoir which meant that flow downstream to other states was slowed. If we "seal our borders" here in Georgia, people in Florida and Alabama are going to be screwed. That's why the we have agreements with them about releasing water, and why federal government gets involved in these things... we can't just hog all the water in the region. And even if we could keep it all in Georgia, there are farmers downstream of us in south Georgia who need it. Can't keep it all in Atlanta. I am puzzled that our Federal Government is not immediately sending tanker trains, and trucks with food grade containers of fresh water... And doing things like setting up infrastructure for public water distribution centers... It wouldn't make a dent. And there are plenty of things we can do before it comes to that, anyway. We do actually get rainfall here, you know... it's been raining much of the day today, more is forecast for tomorrow and the next day. Anybody who wants to put out a rain barrel can do so and have plenty of fresh water for their household. I have a 330 gallon rainwater tank which is currently full, and I'm sure that would last me until the next time it rains, if necessary. I don't think you have a clue, here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members alphajerk Posted October 23, 2007 Members Share Posted October 23, 2007 last time we ran out of water, it was during a massive flood. it killed the mains running to town... but did it SUCK. when the water runs out it really sucks. all the bottle water was bought up so quickly, the water that was left was heavily contaminated from the flood, no toilets, no showers, nothing to cook with except what could be found from the stores. they did end up trucking a lot of water in, but we also dont have 4 million people here either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members sunsinger Posted October 23, 2007 Members Share Posted October 23, 2007 It wouldn't make a dent. And there are plenty of things we can do before it comes to that, anyway. We do actually get rainfall here, you know... it's been raining much of the day today, more is forecast for tomorrow and the next day. Anybody who wants to put out a rain barrel can do so and have plenty of fresh water for their household. I have a 330 gallon rainwater tank which is currently full, and I'm sure that would last me until the next time it rains, if necessary. I don't think you have a clue, here. Your right... I don't have a clue... I'm not the decider... But your plan is this... everyone that lives in the inner city, all of the folks that live in apartments, and have had the luxury of running water all their lives, all of these guys should run out and buy 330 gallon cisterns and put them where??? In closets?, on the roof? I still think that a railyard full of tankers filled with water, and National guard mobilization with large tanker trucks and a plan to set up distribution centers is a better idea than waiting for rain to fill all of those rainbarrels... Isn't no rain Atlanta's problem in the first place? And doesn't it take months or years of rain to refill a resevoir? Would you be more comfortable with an emergency distribution plan in place, well before a crisis, or would you feel better knowing that all of those folks who don't have their rainbarrel strategy worked out, will be half mad with thirst lookin for your water... And how big is your family? How many gallons do you anticipate going through in a day? How far will 330 gallons really go? People can live for a couple of weeks or more with no food, but only for about 4-7 days with no water... Here in New Mexico we have been living with drought conditions for a long time... Our resevoir to the north was draining fast... We have been on level 3 or 4 water restrictions for about 4 years now... Has Atlanta been using water restriction policies? and for how long? I believe that these are issues that many more of us will face as we begin to see the effects of globally changing climate patterns. At one time in our planets history, this contenent was divided by an inland sea, Austrailia was completely submerged... The world was completely different from the way it appears now... Climate change means that we can't rely on what used to be stabile weather patterns... We should be more prepared to mobilize for emergencies before they are full blown problems... I believe that your rainbarrel strategy has it's place, but it is not a good long term solution to dealing with years of unexpected drought conditions... What's clueless about that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Lee Flier Posted October 23, 2007 Members Share Posted October 23, 2007 last time we ran out of water, it was during a massive flood. it killed the mains running to town... but did it SUCK. when the water runs out it really sucks. Yes it does... I'm from L.A. and it was a constant worry there. All it would take is one good earthquake to knock the aquaduct out and the whole area would be without water. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members alphajerk Posted October 23, 2007 Members Share Posted October 23, 2007 i was up hiking the other week looking over where our reservior showed its clay banks pretty heavily, and we are part of one of the few "rainforests" in NA. i couldnt tell how far down it was from teh summit some miles away from it, but it was pretty distinct. we certainly arent in atlantas situation, or even other areas surrounding us, but even with the rain the past two days in sure isnt even making a dent into the drought. August here usually gets downpours everyday, i dont think we got any this year. this summer we spent 10deg above average every single day. it hasnt really snowed here in a decade like it used to. its a little disturbing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Lee Flier Posted October 23, 2007 Members Share Posted October 23, 2007 But your plan is this... everyone that lives in the inner city, all of the folks that live in apartments, and have had the luxury of running water all their lives, all of these guys should run out and buy 330 gallon cisterns and put them where??? In closets?, on the roof? Uh no, that isn't my "plan." All I said was that in this particular situation (Atlanta's current crisis) you don't really understand what's going on and you're over-reacting, which doesn't do anybody any good. I've done aid work in places with real problems. Not that this isn't a serious problem, but there's a whole lot that can be done before we start trucking water in from elsewhere. Isn't no rain Atlanta's problem in the first place? No. We've been getting rain, just not enough to keep the reservoirs full at everyone's usual ridiculous levels of consumption. And doesn't it take months or years of rain to refill a resevoir? It would take several months of good rain to return our main reservoir to its normal level, and the weather service says we probably won't get that until 2009. But we've been operating at below normal levels for several years now, and although some conservation measures have been put in place there's a lot more we could do to conserve without actually running out of water. Would you be more comfortable with an emergency distribution plan in place, well before a crisis, or would you feel better knowing that all of those folks who don't have their rainbarrel strategy worked out, will be half mad with thirst lookin for your water... That's not going to happen because we aren't actually going to run out of water. If it really started looking like we were going to, like we have less than 30 days left, then sure, start trucking water in. But otherwise I'd rather see that money spent on a longer term solution, which our government has been avoiding for a long time. Here in New Mexico we have been living with drought conditions for a long time... Our resevoir to the north was draining fast... We have been on level 3 or 4 water restrictions for about 4 years now... Has Atlanta been using water restriction policies? and for how long? Yes we've been restricting water for 3 or 4 years also. However, to some degree it's been lip service. We can do a lot more and we'll need to conserve a lot more until our government gets its head out of its ass. But this is not New Mexico - I'm from out west and Atlanta's situation is nothing like that. We don't have months and months of zero rainfall like you do out there. I'm a huge believer in being prepared for emergencies but not in undue panic based on not knowing what's going on... e.g. Y2K. Climate change means that we can't rely on what used to be stabile weather patterns... We should be more prepared to mobilize for emergencies before they are full blown problems... I believe that your rainbarrel strategy has it's place, but it is not a good long term solution to dealing with years of unexpected drought conditions... I didn't say it was. I said it was one way of dealing with this short term problem and that I'm not going to be running out of water in the next few months. Trucking in water is not a long term solution either. Long term, it's going to take a lot more, and I thought that was obvious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.