Sunday, July 20, 2014

Innovators Gathering in Montana

So for this year's Rocket Mass Heaters workshop in Montana, our friend Paul is launching the Innovators' Gathering.

He asked us to nominate 4 remarkable innovators who've done neat things with rocket mass heaters.  These 4 people will be invited to attend the entire event as guests.

Things start with our tried-and-true, cob-style rocket mass heater workshop Sept. 19-21.   Then from the 22nd through 26th, we have a "Pyronaut's Laboratory" where all 4 (or 6, or 7, depending how you count us) get to play and innovate. Paul's providing workshop space, materials, and inviting his crew and other interested folks to serve as "minions." We anticipate the challenge and inspiration of working alongside other innovators may lead us in some unexpected new directions.

If this sounds like a wonderful time to you, well, come!  Tickets are still available to be a student for the weekend workshop, or if you have prior rocket experience you might just want to sign on as a "minion" during the week-long Pyronautics Laboratory session.  There's a combined rate to be there for the whole thing.  http://richsoil.com/rmh-workshop.html

We had a hard time narrowing the field down.  There are at least a dozen people we know doing good work in this space, and that's not counting the ones we don't know about. 

We thought about who we'd like to meet.  Who has done something uniquely interesting - or fulfilled a frequent request in a particularly robust way.  When people ask us for something we haven't done yet, who do we send them to?

We tried to balance different talents and personalities for creative ferment.  The "who we'd like to meet" category tended to favor people from further away; those who might not consider attending if they had to cover both travel and ticket costs. 

And of course, those who publish their results on YouTube, or spend time on the Permies.com (or ProBoards) forums, are most likely to catch our attention in the first place.  We also paid attention to the suggestions people made from our mailing list.

Finally we picked an A list and a B list, and started contacting people.

We are extremely excited that most of A-list said "yes," they plan to attend.  Here, in alpha order, are the 4 confirmed guests:

Tim Barker:
A long-time permie from Australia and New Zealand, Tim built the most robust rocket water-heater that we've seen.  The design uses minimal parts, no electronics, yet safely controls water temperature and vents off steam pressure, and allows students and interns to produce their own hot water for showers with minimal instruction or experience. 

You can see Geoff Lawton explain the water-heater setup here on YouTube; Tim has also written up the project, and answers questions, in.
this article at permaculturenews.org.
It's not his first rocket rodeo, neither. Tim's work seems like interesting hybrids of rocket mass heater (J-style) firebox, but with a flexibility more customary with rocket cookstove fans.  Here's a rocket-powered oven:
http://permaculturenews.org/2012/11/08/rocket-oven-nitty-gritty/

Peter van den Berg:
A masonry heater scientist, Peter has been testing subtle refinements to the rocket mass heaters' firebox, getting the performance and emissions tuned-in to run from start to finish without a puff of smoke.  He also designed a cast-refractory firebox using these improvements for the DragonHeater folks.  Peter is a regular contributor on both the ProBoards and Permies.com forums.  We hope he will be able to bring his Test-O Meter and other toys.
A sample PeterBerg post from Proboards - http://donkey32.proboards.com/thread/472?page=2
- http://donkey32.proboards.com/thread/355/small-scale-development


Chris McClellan:
A bit of a dark horse from Ohio, we got to meet Chris in 2012 and have heard updates from mutual friends at the Strawbale Studio and privately.  Chris has been playing with small-scale heater hybrids like his woodstove-mass-heaters for smaller spaces and portable locations (like a school bus).  Chris is also very active with Mother Earth News, and print-on-demand resources for natural building; he has a depth of knowledge about who's doing what in the natural building world that leads to very interesting hybrid projects using reclaimed or conventional materials alongside robust natural building methods.
Facebook:
Woodstove mass heater ("It works ... sort of.")
8" rocket mass heater  (with reclaimed cast-refractory components, below)
Bus stove with bum warmer



Matt Walker:
One of the relative locals, Matt was the first person to publicly solve the flame-viewing window ... and the second as well, with two different heaters using different materials, and featuring a mini-oven and a modified cooktop vent.  He's also submitted a variation called "Walker stoves" to efficient wood-heating competition, and posted about other experiments on YouTube and the Permies.com forums.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A4NoC0U8geMhttp://www.permies.com/t/28331/rocket-stoves/Walker-Stoves ,
http://walkerstoves.com/

This get-together is going to be a memorable lot of fun.

-Erica


In other news:
- Ernie will be going to San Antonio shortly to be fitted for a new, dynamic leg brace that might put him literally back in the running this fall.  We are trying not to get our hopes up too much, as there will still be pain and circulation issues to manage, but we hope that the brace will be in good working order by September and allow Ernie more hours on his feet.

- The Carleton Complex (wildland fire) is burning along Hwy 97 about an hour south of us, yet so far westerly winds are keeping our days almost smoke-free.  We are checking the InciWeb periodically for updates: http://inciweb.nwcg.gov/incident/3967/
I'm not yet fully trained as a firefighter for our local volunteer fire department, so we're just trying to stay informed, and replace worry with action whenever we think of something useful to do: weed-whacking, tidy up the clutter around the house, etc.  Right now the local weather remains clear, breezy, with only a hint of smoke to the south south-west (spectacular sunsets and moon-rises).  The biggest impact on a daily level is that I'm milking goats for a neighbor who has been deployed "on resource" with one of our local water-tender trucks.

- The irrigation well is back on line (last winter's hard freeze damaged the well itself, but the repairs didn't take long once we got the right folks on the job).  Running water, hot showers, and plenty of water for the garden.

- Strawberries, cherries, and peas are in season up here, and tomatoes, cucumbers, summer squash, and various berries down in the valley.  I got to play "substitute farmer" last week, trying to keep up with Leaping Sheep's abundant production for almost a week while the owners took a family trip.  This week I've been milking goats and braiding garlic.  Very country!

Saturday, June 21, 2014

Climate Change - How Big Is It?

OK, so I imagine you already have your own opinions about global warming, or climate change, or climate wierdening, or whatever you want to call it.

But today's XKCD panel puts it in pretty stark terms:

The short version of this post would stop here.
But I'm not that good at stopping.

So here's The Long Version:

Don't mis-read the scale above; it's easy to think of the ice age as "recent past" and "really cold but there were people alive"; and the question mark seems equally unknown as "the future."

But the ice age benchmark, 20,000 years ago, is a long time.  We are not entirely sure where there were people on the planet at that time, let alone what type of civilization they had.  The ancient civilizations we know much about are all less than half that age.  Most are younger than 5,000 years (ancient Egypt, Biblical Genesis, Babylonia).  None of them ate mammoth, or even had mammoth elephant legends.

"The Future" - 86 years from now is a really short time, considering.  Those of us saving up a college fund for our future kids, or trying to reforest a patch of land, would like to imagine that we have some idea what the world might look like 86 years from now.

86 years is a weird estimate to see for geological events.  Usually it's more like, you know, "In the next 20 to 200 years,..."
   In geological terms, I have never yet seen an accurate 5-year-plan, let alone a quarterly forecast, that considers the effects of volcanoes, weather, or continental drift.  Even El Nino and La Nina aren't that easy to predict, though they do give us some idea of what trend to expect compared to 'average'.

Climate averages, like sea level, tend to change in increments that we would consider catastrophic bumps.  The idea of watching your local beach slowly erode is a lot less scary than the realization that many of these changes will literally happen overnight, in large, populated areas.  Ice sheets do melt and freeze a little bit each year, but they also fall off Antarctica with a big "whump" the size of Alaska.
 Consider how all factors like sea level rise, sea surface warming, and devastation of marine ecosystems interact in an event like Hurricane Katrina.  Larger patches of warmer sea water, just those few degrees from 28 to 30 C, translate to more rain, stronger winds, higher storm surge crest, more flooding inland.  It doesn't help the way our coastlines are developed: forces can be focused, instead of dispersed, by engineered coastal changes that funnel immense natural energy directly toward the industrial hub of the city (new shipping channels).

Bigger, fatter hurricanes are happening more months of the year, and their effects may reach further inland. 

You know what other harbor is shaped like a funnel?  New York.
You might want to check out the structural vulnerabilities of any coastal areas that handle things you depend on - like shipping ports (LA handles the most cargo), financial institutions, energy pipelines, literary agents, etc. As my brother so poetically put it in his blog post "Agent 13," America keeps most of its literary agencies, "stacked like sandbags," along the Manhattan shoreline.
National Geographic did a rather nice mapping article of the effects of Hurricane Sandy, and the likely effects of future storms in a higher sea-level scenario.

California is in its third year of drought, threatening to cut off everyone's lettuce if they don't get water from somewhere.  Drawing water from other regions just messes up those regions' ecology and agriculture, and makes California vulnerable to pipeline failure or sabotage.  They have a long coastline, and lots of technical expertise, but have not invested much in desalination or other water-harvesting technologies.
But people keep moving there, following the dream of a climate that doesn't require hauling firewood or frost-free garden taps, and voting with their heart on every environmental or infrastructure proposal.  Problem with sunshine 365 days a year is that plants dry up. Few of our Southwestern cities have a renewable water source that is replenished by nearby rains - most depend on  fossil water deposits that disappear as fast as we draw on them, or faster.
Once the irrigation is gone, you have dried-out vegetation just begging for catastrophic wildfires.  After only a few cycles, you have basically gravel and sticks and lizards, and well-adapted fast-blooming rain-triggered plants we would typically call 'weeds'.  If a lawn (not made of rocks) is an important part of your American Dream, please consider staying in a state where summers are muggy and experience regular monthly rainfall.  All the states along the Colorado Basin are in the same boat - this famous river that no longer reaches the sea. 
There are ways to 'green the desert'without dependence on outside water - but they don't necessarily produce lawns.  They depend on well-informed, observant, and responsive choices about earth-shaping, water-collection, preventing evaporation and salt buildup, and appropriate plant selection. The larger landscape dictates the feasible limits of such projects, and the population limits suggested by natural growth. 
If your area gets less than 12 inches of rain per year, and each person requires at least 1 gallon per day (more than 5 to 10 gallons for a typical lifestyle which includes regular bathing, and eating water-dependant plants; more than 50 gallons for eating water-dependent meat and plants), how many acres of rainfall collection are needed per person?  (One gallon contains 231 cubic inches, or one cubic foot is 7.48 gallons. One year contains 365 days.).  I make it about .... 49 square feet which receives 12" annual rainfall yields about 365 gallons of water per year, or 1 gallon per day.  However, one problem with desert regions is water does not arrive at 'average' rates - it arrives in gully-washer storms which may drop all their rain on a single large ranch or mountain, leaving nearby areas entirely dry.  So a normal year in arid regions might involve two months without rain, followed by a 2 or 3" rain event; annual patterns can be similar, with periods of long drought punctuated by rain that falls faster than an 'average' collection system can store it.

That's the arriving rain.  How fast does this water disappear if not carefully stored?

"During a typical month of summer, only a quarter inch of rain may reach the surface, but during that same month a foot or more of water may evaporate into the atmosphere from that same surface of a large lake in the high desert."*
Evaporation pans measure something between 50 to 70 inches per year of water evaporation in high deserts, mostly in summer months; the sun bakes away the water 4 to 6 times as fast as it arrives, so rainfall must be fairly heavy to establish a flow into collection systems rather than a quickly-lost dew. 
Water in soil may evaporate more quickly than lake surfaces due to higher temperatures and greater surface area, but it is also possible to use mulch, row-covers, or stone-covered catchments to shade water and shield it from wind, reducing evaporation.

Where rainfall is not dependable, wells are dug.  In some ancient civilizations (Inca, Jordan area, Persian), attention was paid to where the water comes from, and wells or springs channel relatively recent rainfall toward key areas for plant growth.  More commonly, wells tap into existing springs or aquifers; modern technology allows us to dig much deeper to find buried water (if it is there), but does not necessarily help us know where that water is located, or at what rate it can be drawn in order for the aquifer to remain at the same level (be replenished without dropping the groundwater levels). 

Tucson, AZ is famously sinking as the city depletes its aquifer; they are demonstrably drawing more water than is replenished from the lens of fresh water under the present city's location.  When this happens in any area, artesian springs dry up, and deeper wells are needed to reach the remaining water.  One neighbor had 17 recorded springs and water-access rights on her property as of about 40 years ago, only two of which are currently usable access points.
Boring more wells increases the risk of contamination of the aquifer, and needing deeper wells indicate a limited time until the fresh water (the top layer) is all gone.  Below the fresh water in some areas (atolls, deserts, coastal areas) one can expect to find heavier, salt or mineral-poisoned water, which can't be used to grow plants and isn't fit for people to drink.  There's a high probability that some of our fresh-water boring and fracking wells are causing salty and fresh water to mix, reducing the volume of available fresh water further.

What does it cost for a ranch, household, or city to re-drill in search of deeper water?  Our neighbors spent $9,000 about ten years ago, to drill a well which didn't reach water.  How many failed wells could your household afford to try?
Algae-rich irrigation water is locally available from a dammed lake, but only during non-freezing weather, and subject to interruptions or delays for maintenance (which must also occur during non-freezing weather).

It's easy to ignore such risks if you are on city water - but that dependence only means that the entire city is vulnerable to shared costs or droughts if the water fails.  Cities typically assess water costs as fees, taxes, or rates.  Cities enjoy economies of scale over rural households, but also pay the higher costs of working around existing infrastructure, and of higher population concentrations (and higher proportions of certain chronic health conditions) making disease control more critical. For example, back in the 1960s my grandparents were assessed $10,000 for a mandatory connection to city sewers, despite having installed a new, up-to-code septic tank only a few years previously. 

All infrastructure costs; and all of these costs have been subsidized over the past couple of centuries by cheap fossil fuels and fat fossil aquifers of water.  It's quite likely that some of our wells today are drawing glacial melt-water from the last Ice Age.  These are literally irreplaceable resources, although we do have some control over the rates of drawdown and replenishment.

It seems right now like a lot of people kind of throw their hands up and say it's not their problem.  I've heard "This might just be natural," or "Those giant tropical plants from the Mesosoic sound nice," or "well, that does look like it could cause massive crop failures, famine, and poverty, but we can't afford to take any measures that would slow down the economy right now."

News flash: the economy is not doing a whole lot to stop poverty at the moment.
Nor is it impossible that 'costing' the economy could boost it.  Most predictions place the economic costs of drought, dustbowls, hurricanes like Sandy and Katrina, and the political costs of vast numbers of displaced people and destroyed coastal industrial centers much higher than the cost of researching and implementing more efficient, and carbon-neutral or carbon-offsetting technologies.

Right now, starting a new small business is pretty complicated, and made more so by lots of subsidies, loopholes, added taxes, and fee-for-service licenses.  Adding a carbon tax might not improve matters.  But removing subsidies for unsustainable practices, simplifying tax codes, and making it easier across the board for folks to invent their own jobs based on actual physical reality (not legislative environments) might be a help. 

We could tax, license, and regulate the poisons and carbon-rich fuels used in conventional agriculture instead of the folks who abstain from them, for example.  Right now, the trend seems to be in the other direction, with North Atlantic and North Pacific trade agreements that undercut environmental protections.

Could zero-carbon R&D offer a similar economic boost to that we experienced during WWII?  I'm just wondering; I know it's a very unconventional economic view.  I'm one of those people who also thinks employing more people and being more judicious about machines might be good for the economy.  I heard a radio program recently on NPR in which several Kansas farm families discussed how expanding their acreage to build a profitable big-ag farm has contributed to the evaporation of local small towns.

Wars aren't noted for their productive results (a lot of the ships, planes, and bombs that the War Effort manufactures get blown up, which seems like a lot lower return on investment than most speculators demand from other projects). Yet war seems to affect our psychology, making us collectively willing to do more work and make more sacrifices; and perhaps easier to lead and manipulate by the well-positioned industrial and government interests. 

If war is good for the economy, what's wrong with our notion of economy? 
Blowing stuff up, burning our reserves, higher divorce rates, and big messes like oil spills, ironically boosts the GDP.  If war is economically good, and one accepts that war is at best a necessary evil, does that mean that our economy is also evil?

Families that stick together with three or more generations in the same home; which grow a fertile garden and sustainable home-grown timber; who take turns watching children and only need half the adults working outside the home; could be seen as diminishing the national GDP compared to two divorced, single-parent households that buy more appliances and guilt-gifts. 

Spending more money than you have, through credit-card and  other debts, seems to be encouraged as an economy-booster; whereas the old notion of thrift "use it up, wear it out, make do, or do without" runs contrary to this new economics.

 Maybe we need a metric that includes reserves, not just extraction rates, in assessing our national 'growth'.  Maybe we should not trust the people who are currently making public pronouncements about 'the economy,' especially if they seem to make money off the results of such pronouncements no matter how the rest of us fare.

Current economic models are based on scarcity; when there's no scarcity, the model doesn't work.  Marketers exploit our sense of scarcity by capitalizing on fear, loneliness, envy, or limited-time urgency, among other scarcity-based sales tactics. 

It is very easy for powerful interests and monopolies to create artificial scarcity and control prices.  More than 100 years after the Anti-Trust legislation, we still don't have a good way to prevent big fish from influencing government, let alone to assess damages or compel corporations to act with ethics befitting an influential 'citizen'. 

What kind of economic theory might we develop if we studied the nature of abundance (and the means to increase it) instead of scarcity?
What would it look like if it
- incorporated a basic understanding of physical natural laws (updated as needed);
- distinguished between economic activity that constitutes good stewardship (increasing resources) and non-renewable exploitation; and
- defined transactions and taxes in ways that make abundance more profitable than artificial scarcity
- defined human participation and rewards in ways that took ongoing abundance into account, and reduced the incentives for zero-sum gamesmanship?
- created moral if not legal imperatives for limits to growth, or at least prevention of forseeable disasters due to growth incompatible with reserves and natural conditions?

Then there's the question of what to do with this information. 
It's widespread knowledge that fresh water is scarce, and likely to get scarcer. 
In a public-interest model, the depletion of resources critical to survival would be an impetus for collective conservation efforts - conservative members of society would emphasize traditions which preserve and husband those resources.
Instead, we have re-defined 'conservative' as 'rapacious business interests,' so  international businesses are buying up water rights.  And in some cases those same businesses even support activities that reduce public access to water, such as polluting industries like mining, fracking, and conventional agriculture.  Those who can afford bottled water will continue drinking, long after the farm wells are all dry or poisoned.
Our friend Paul got a call from someone last year wanting help to stop a local fracking project that was about to start up in their area .... from a person who heats his house with natural gas.

I don't like the idea that we spend our last reserves of this super high-energy fuel doing things that will permanently damage our future.
  Permanent, as in groundwater contamination that will likely affect future generations for longer than we've existed as a species, let alone on this continent.
  I would like to invest these last bits of gasoline energy in permanent improvements, like you might get your roof and furnace replaced a few years before you retire from a good job - or make a break for a more satisfying career.

Maybe not permanent on that geological scale, like, none of these things will outlast the planet.  There will be some bugs, slime, and weird little critters that survive, and eventually flourish in a different environment.  We already have salt-tolerant sea creatures and plants; maybe we can all just get used to eating algae.  So the issue is not geological permanency - it's whether life "as we know it" will survive - whether we will retain any significant fraction of those species which grew up with us on this planet, and whose interactions formed the Garden that sheltered our birth as a species.
The groundwater contamination, nuclear waste, and deforestation are degrading resources that built up over thousands and myriads of years, and leaving pollution that will last for myriads more.
 
Things are moving fast.  In a direction that does not point to human comfort.

We are already in a position of having to explain what we were thinking "back then," to generations who are already old enough to ask awkward questions.  Today.  In the literal, not geological, sense.

If you don't think all this has anything to do with humans, consider this:

Note that chickens, reptiles, insects, etc. are not part of this picture.
These are just mammals - the warm-blooded, mostly hairy or furry animals that can regulate our own temperature and have hair or fur.

There used to be a lot more kinds of mammals, during the ice-age era and interglacial periods.  But we're all out of North American camelids, mastodons and mammoths, and most giant [whatever]s.  Starting to run low on elephants of any kind, big cats, pandas, specialized island fauna, and .... well... all wild mammals that that don't thrive in human-controlled areas.  Cattle have wiped out most of the food sources for indigenous traditional lifestyles as well as wildlife; the most notable surviving wildlife are those that have adapted to rooting around in our trash or browsing our hedges, and breed fast enough to tolerate being shot.

I am not even sure what to do when I see a bear anymore.  (Saw my first one on the mountain this past week).
If a bear comes to visit, our first instinct is to shoo it away.  It's not safe to encourage bears near human habitation; I'm absolutely clear I should not feed it, or tempt it to get too close by being careless with trash or compost.

But where do I expect it to go?  There are some national park, tribal, and state forest lands within bear-ambling distance, if it can get past the dogs and guns in our neighborhood.  But those landscapes are getting smaller.
I called off the dogs and thanked them for their support.  The bear did not return.

No nation on Earth has set aside enough wildlife sanctuaries to support a viable, genetically diverse, resilient breeding population of any large mammal.  If bears (and every other creature larger than a breadbox) are to survive, they will require some access to private lands to do so.

How do I manage a backyard that will feed me, and wildlife? How many fences are enough to keep the neighbors' dogs out, yet allow deer, moose, and bear to wander through?  (Currently: 8' fences keep most critters out of the two garden areas; 4' fences seem to stop well-trained dogs but allow deer and, clearly, the occasional bear or moose.)

In Canada we saw mile after mile of 12' fencing along the highway, indented every now and then with turnstiles.  At first we wondered if there was a prison nearby.  Then we realized that the turnstiles pointed toward the wood, and were also 12' tall.  They appeared designed to keep moose off the highway.  If your fences do not create attractive 'alleys' for wildlife, they will share our roads.  And while the occasional deer or raccoon roadkill is an acceptable collateral cost for a quick evening commute, a moose is big enough to inconvenience a semi-tractor.  There are very few large, wild animals in our daily lives any more, at least in the settled, industrialized world where most of our human population lives.

We passed the tipping point where more people live in cities than in rural areas sometime in the past century - 1960's maybe?  Was it at the same time that the average person lost all immediate experience of other creatures large enough to consider a threat?

The altering of our environment on a massive scale to support livestock tends to remove trees.  While there are ways to restore soils using careful livestock management, mostly we don't do things this way.

The cheapest meats in the world tend to kill off the remaining wild animal populations.  In the case of feed lot chicken, pork, and beef, huge nitrogen-rich dead zones are created downstream in what used to be the spawning grounds for most of the Atlantic's fisheries, not to mention the wildlife excluded from (or poisoned by) large plantations of feed crops.  Agricultural lands are generally established in the richest, most productive areas first - and in the case of North America, only after exterminating or excluding most of the wild animals that would otherwise browse and graze in those areas. 

In the case of bush meat, the remaining wild populations are directly harvested for sale in the encroaching extraction and settlement communities.


So what am I doing about this today?

Well, let's start with "today" in the geological sense; this decade.

We love to eat, and a big part of our household income goes to food (especially if we want to be able to choose high-quality food that isn't treated with pesticides).  Prior chemical exposure or maybe just nature and chance have made Ernie sensitive to MSG, and I don't handle processed sugars very well.  So we eat healthy.
  Note that 'healthy' does not mean cardboard or rabbit food - we are talking about locally-cured bacon grease to fry up some greens, or getting a cheaper cut of local grass-fed meat and making our own Philly cheese-steaks (with a little pepperoni, and some wilted greens and aged cheddar).
  So we split the difference between store-bought, garden, and local farm produce.  If I can do a favor to a local farmer or cheese-maker, it's worth my time.  Agriculture uses tons of energy, so if we can learn how to do it better, without just hiding the costs by eating chemicals, or subsidizing expensive business models, that seems useful.

Energy usage can grow a lot faster than population, regardless of how we eat - lots of engines, motors, smelters, and furnaces are run on my behalf day and night.  I don't have a lot of direct control over how manufacturing energy is used, except to buy more durable goods, instead of disposables.
  I love things with replaceable parts - like how my Oster blender fits a standard small-mouth canning jar lid.  I don't know how much benefit Oster sees from this clever design, as I am still using my grandmother's Kitchen Master station which is over 40 years old.  So I am mentioning it to all of you - in the hopes that we can recognize and celebrate good, durable design.  The brand has gone more toward disposables these days (most companies seem to think is the way to survive).  But I'd still look at their high-end stuff if I wanted a new kitchen gadget.
  I'd like to get away from the mindset that "cheaper is better," and back to a mindset where if you need it, you buy it to last.

In temperate climates, home heating and cooling is a big energy use.  You probably know about our work with rocket mass heaters and other sustainable technology - we've been putting out books, resources, answering questions online through forums like permies.com, and teaching workshops on how to acheive heating and other goals with a fraction of the fuel.
We would like to think that this work reduces deforestation and carbon emissions due to home heating (and cooling, in most climates).

We'd also like to think we're helping people learn how to use local resources (reducing transportation dependency), and problem-solve with thrifty principles like
- passive heat storage,
- building with natural and reclaimed materials
- passive and solid-state air circulation (no mechanical fans required), and incidentally teaching a little more about
- passive solar design,
- energy cycles and the chemistry of carbohydrate combustion, and
- new (old) ways to think about renewable resources that might help us outlast the non-renewable ones.

That's what I've been doing the past 8 years or so.

Today...
- I weeded and watered some tender areas in the garden.
- I checked how my water-saving methods (mulch, hugels) are working.  Perennial berries, onions, deep-rooted vegetables, and rhubarb are looking good.  Eating the weeds (lamb's quarters) with nuts and butter for dinner.
- I checked on the trees I planted this spring, and gave most of them a drink.  Aspen looks happy, ceonothus less so (was planted last / late), mock orange happy in most locations, white poplar seems to be surviving for the moment.  I also watered some larch that volunteered along the forest edge - I couldn't have planted them in a better spot myself, and hopefully an extra drink will encourage them rather than throwing off their survival clock.
- Ernie helped me get the Geo ready for summer use; now that the switchback road up the face has been graded, we will let our 4-wheel-drive car take a break and use the more fuel-efficient Geo for errands.
- I talked to Paul Wheaton about our workshop in September, and more digital media resources for people who want to save energy.

In geological terms anything in the next decade is basically "today," but for me as a human being I feel like it's important to do something, some little thing, every day.  Because life's short and I don't want to sleep through it (tempting though it may be) - and because when you take the cumulative effect of all our daily choices, we human beings are a huge and sudden geological event.

We've all seen how the last 40 years' discussion of "we should do something NOW" is working out.  It can always be done a little later, like procrastinating on the garden in spring or the plumbing repairs in autumn, until suddenly the ground is rock-hard and it's too late.

Doing something each day, something each year, keeps me on track to feel like I've done something with my whole life.

So if your schedule is open:
- consider one of the lets'-build workshops our friend Paul is hosting in Montana:
---- this weekend's solar energy workshop in Montana
---- our rocket mass heater workshop (cob style) in September, plus a week of innovator experimentation to follow
- Ask us (or better yet, hire us) to consider how to reduce your energy usage while the weather is warm enough for construction on a remodel or new heater.  If we picked up three additional consultation fees this month, we could get some testing equipment we've been drooling over, and get some hard numbers on just how efficient and squeaky-clean our heaters are... and also prototype a larger model for those interested in a single heater for larger homes or greenhouses.

But you don't need something from my list.
- Go do one or two of those things on your own list. Like:
---- Fix something that leaks, like your car, house, or plumbing.
---- Upgrade something to save energy and money.
---- Tend something that reduces your dependence on things you disapprove.
---- Get outside, and fall in love with your climate all over again.

Or, you know, we could talk about boats and barbecues.
Maybe next week.

(technically, I think learning to sail or row is an excellent zero-carbon exercise as well.)

When you catch yourself counting problems or grievances -
- count your blessings
- count what you've done today to make a difference.

Imagine the difference if we each did 3 things today, as a 'retirement contribution' to the world of our future.

-Erica W

Friday, June 6, 2014

Gardening on a slope - onion comparison

This post is partly an excuse to get a picture up here, to show something interesting about my hugel bed. 
This is a garden bed built over a pile of logs, which theoretically acts as water storage through dry periods.  This one is probably not big enough to compensate for our 2+ months of summer weather without rainfall, but it does mean I can get away with sporadic (weekly or biweekly) garden attention and still grow some hardy crops.

This is the same bed whose building was described in last spring's post "The Quickening."

It received sporadic watering - usually by me sticking the hose into a vole-hole in the top or side of the bed while weeding, about once every week or two.  But sometimes during our absence, the folks watching the house kindly set up a sprinkler. 

Here's what the onions look like that over-wintered:

Hugel bed showing horseradish (recently released from protective plastic cover because of vole browsing) and onions that over-wintered on sunny side of garden bed.
Approximate heights of onions on the top, middle, and lower parts of the hugel's slope.
So there's this beautiful clear progression in height between the onions on top and bottom of the hugel slope. 
It's possible the difference may reflect the benefits of the shelter and reflected warmth of the bed itself.  On this side, they have protection from NW winds, and also more heat from the sun.  None of the plants are sticking up much above the crown of the bed, even now that spring has arrived with very warm weather).

But I think it's more likely that this reflects the difference in our major limiting growth factor around here, water.  All the onions are in bloom relatively simultaneously; they are the same age and responding to the same seasonal triggers, just different sizes.

The onions at the base of the slope naturally enjoy more water. 

This picture was taken May 11th 2014.  In the three weeks since, that horseradish has of course exploded to a height and volume as big as all three onion plantings combined - its tap roots, like the rhubarb on the far side, give it an extreme advantage to finding deep moisture.

-Erica

Tuesday, April 8, 2014

April Pond & Garden Update

The wildlife is convinced it's spring.
First frog song started this week (about April 4th as I recall), so far it's more solo than chorus, but I think there are two now.   

Last night we had our first encounter with the annual March of the Salamanders. 

Herald of spring? or harbinger of spring cleaning?
They seem to be heading for the pond just N of the house.  Since our front door is on the S side, and the weather is getting nice enough to leave it open, they often find their way inside. 
They move silently and slowly until they encounter one of my salamander-alert traps, a carefully-strewn layer of papers and other rustly clutter at the base of the closets and office areas.  They sound like very clumsy mice, but don't chew or squeak.  Now that I realize what they are, we promptly re-direct them back out to the side garden, and freedom.

I am itching to get the garden going again, and trying to balance that against my promises to have the Builder's Guide out by the end of the month.  Electronic version, anyway.  It will likely be a draft, with the appendices unformatted.  We'll probably sell a few copies but more will go out to the folks who offered to help edit, for comments.  We may release the updated, smoother version a few months later for the autumn spike in heating interest.

 Lots of little things are greening up, especially those rosette-type plants with taproots.  Onions, rhubarb, horseradish, and catmint survived in the garden (yay!).
Here's the hugel bed in the sunny-slope garden for those interested:
Hugel bed-  N side

 It doesn't look like much, but zoom in near the middle and there's life peeking up:
Rhubarb starting to leaf out (yay!)
Southwest side of hugel bed
 Note that the soil is kinda thin, there are burrowy-holes all over, and the soil here is already drying out.  This means that Paul is probably right: it will need to be substantially bigger to be effective at holding moisture over the season from thaw through planting, let alone into the summer.  So I guess for now, this one is an 'irrigation-extender,' not a 'no-irrigation garden.'
Onions happily greening up - probably need dividing
I am trying a larger one in the front yard near the house (no deer protection).  It is not pretty - but it's an experiment to see whether a larger one actually works.  There were two piles of topsoil already here, so I filled in between them with duff logs and snow.  (The beanpoles on the L, and the concrete and A-shaped boat nose on the right, show the locations of the original dirtpiles.)
 The snowplow piles from the driveway end up right along this wall; should melt into this each spring, and/or be easily shoveled on from above.
Design by random assembly: 'huglacier' looking SW
 Yes, that is a little 'fireplace' on the left.  I do not forsee any time in our climate where an outdoor fireplace in this location would be safe or convenient.  The wind blows up the SW slope below us every warm afternoon/evening, and it would blow the smoke in anyone's face sitting in front of it.  Also the dry grass above it is obviously not be a good chimney material.  But since it was assembled there (to show the classic Rumford fireplace angles), there it sits.  Perhaps it will become a cold-facing thermal mass bed... a cloche.... or something?  I could add a reflector on this side and turn it into a warm planting bed maybe.  Or just remove it down the road and put the rubble to better use. 

The W side of hugel, looking SE
 Ice and logs go in, then dirt is piled on top, then mulch on top of dirt.  A lot of the dirt was taken from the piles on each side, resulting in a planting hole where I would like to put some trees... flowering ones probably, since they might rescue this ramshackle contraption when the in-laws reclaim this cottage in a couple years.  If I could manage to establish cuttings of the Mrs' lilacs, or some cherries / plums with nice blooms, the whole thing might just get to stay where it is long enough to see the experiment through.

The potatoes loved the north side of the one in the garden last year, and I hear rumors that deer don't like potatoes as much as they like beans... so sprouting purple potatoes got distributed all over this dirtpile for an early start. 
E side of 'huglacier' looking W
 The foot of the pile is where the moisture will be, so there's a ditch layered with old cardboard, bark, and a single layer of duff logs.  Then topsoil and some peat moss on top of that.
Mulch - barn muck and rotten wood
 This is a relatively hot and nasty mulch, pulled straight out of the horses' stall... but I have plenty of potatoes to re-seed if it takes them out.  Topped off with some brown cube-ish rock (possibly cubicle rot), in lieue of wood chip or other weed-suppressing mulch.

Transplanted some tulips and onions in there already, and layered some potatoes in with the mulch on top, so we'll see how it does.  Overseeded the top with clover, arugula, snow peas, and favas to build up some organic matter.  Some of that 'topsoil' was definitely not - chalky subsoil from the lower trenches went up there too.


We picked up some lovely trees and shrubs at the Conservation District's native  plant sale, so I am surveying for where they shall go.  My first choice, in the shade on the N side of the existing forest, turns out to still have permafrost (well, just subsoil frost; far from permanent).  So scouting other areas...

Here's a mini-tour of the place, for those interested.

Proceeding E from house (about 2 pm)

Turning NE in the woods by the house

Typical well-browsed forest floor, beside path

Looking N across pond
 The next few pictures were taken from inside the forest edge, to avoid disturbing a couple pairs of mallards and some Canada geese who seemed to be enjoying the pond.  But I will jump ahead and give you the view to the West across the pond (taken from down below the snowline in the picture above), so you can get oriented.  The canoe dock is on the WNW side of the pond, near the horse's path from the barn.

Horses' path (made by two elderly horses, one remains)
So the whole point of today's explore, aside from my guilt at disturbing the wildlife, is to scout out places for some new native trees and shrubs. We have aspen, ceanothus, Rocky Mtn maple, and a couple other shrubs to place in the next week or so. 
My guess is that the rose-type shrubs on the sunny (N) side, across the pond in these pictures, could probably handle some aspen in amongst them to fix nitrogen.  The neighbor has a stand on the N side of his residual wetland, but ours seem to have been destroyed during logging / bulldozing?  Or perhaps our slopes are different. 

(If I say "birch" I probably mean "aspen," we had a white-barked weeping birch in my childhood backyard and it has become the Type for all white-barked trees in my mind.)

I'm also working out a plan for removing the plastic around the pond.  It does remove itself / get punctured easily (it's landscaping plastic, not pond liner).
The plastic removal process, 'automated'
 The difficulty is those slopes.  You can see the bare, hard-packed beige where the plastic is slumping; how to get something established on that slope is a challenge.
Wary waterfowl, disturbed despite my discretion

N edge of the forest, S of the pond, looking west.
 The bare dirt (you can still see the tracks of the equipment if you look closely) is a recent disturbance; most of the snowy areas are the forest edge as we've always known it.  I think it might want some more shrubby stuff, since it looks better with an aspen/birch and some scrub:
 
A small amount of remaining 'forest edge' scrub

Moss, fungi, and browse at feet of conifers on N edge of woods
 Where there are no bushes or deciduous trees, the forest edge does have some nice moss and lichen and fungus in the ground, and some heavily-browsed shrubs.  We get a lot of deer traffic, which is lovely.
Swale on E edge of pond, with evidence of deer
 I will spare you the entire sample collection of deer-evidence, but they seem to congregate along this East side of the pond, in the swales (little dips) between the pond's 'crater' lip, and the fence and woods.  Neighbors to E and W have dogs, but we don't, and the in-laws' dogs to the W are well-behaved and trained not to run deer off.  Garden areas are fenced and don't get bothered much.
Cut on NE side of pond, looking SW
 The pond was re-shaped with a bulldozer maybe 10 years back, deepened out, with a crater-like rim.  Some other things happened too (firefighting helicopters, neighbors messing with the creek, more folks moving up here and putting in wells, etc).  The pond doesn't fill nearly as high as formerly, it used to be pretty stable at roughly the depth indicated by that canoe dock.
Canoe dock, showing current and "expected" pond levels.
   In the canoe dock picture, you can also see where I've been pulling up plastic.  I discovered some big round rushes, possibly tule? that poked their heads up through holes in the plastic, so I targeted that area to remove plastic  and spread a few of the clumps that loosened up into the newly-cleared zone.

There are lots of smaller round-rushes, and lots of kinds of grass.  But up on the sloping edges of the 'crater,' the plastic tends to dominate the 'understory,' with thistles, mullein, and crustal bryophytes (moss, lichen, algae) as next-most-dominant.  I did spot and save a few potentilla (silverleaf), both in the lower pond area and up on the slopes.

Orchard W of pond (peeking through deer fence)

 There are two nicely fenced gardens - one near the barn and greenhouse (above) on the west side, with a mixed orchard and some perrenial blueberries and strawberries struggling along under much TLC.  The orchard is about 8 years old now, the in-laws say to give a plant 3 years when the label says 18 months.

So my current questions:
- Where to put those trees?  I'm thinking:

   ---  mock orange along that forest track near the greywater outlet / garden taps, where we can enjoy it from the E-facing kitchen window.  But I have a bundle of 5; I can put a few more elsewhere.

   --- birch along the sunny N side of the pond - the dillemas are: do I plant some in that vernal bog / trough, or do I keep them further up the slopes?  Do I fill in the area to the NNE where it's just scrubby willow and something with rust-red tips, or leave it relatively open?  I may want to try to naturalize blueberries or other fruiting plants in here too, though I've been warned blueberries don't naturalize well in this climate.

   --- Maples: I am thinking they might be nice along that N edge of the forest, in the shade S of the pond, but maybe they want more water than that.

   --- Ceanothus: Probably staking out some of the middle of that empty pasture - Ernie says deer don't like it that much, and we need some shade out there if anything but grass is going to establish.

The only other one is 'shrubby penstamon,' a wildflower, and we might put some near the orchard to encourage pollinators.

- What to do about that pond margin? 
Do we need to take that crater back down so the pond can naturally collect water a little easier? 
Or will nature take care of that over time, and we are doing a bigger favor by keeping the pasture / meadow more moist and not re-disturbing the much-abused soils?

- Will any of the current trees be plantable where they could shade the pond?  I might try for some aspen up on that island.

- Should I hold off on my plastic-removal and reseeding efforts until autumn, in the hopes that the ducks might nest this year? Or just keep at it?  They do give me a good glare when I want to come putter around the pond in spring.  But autumn's a busy season for harvest and off-site workshops. 

Speaking of workshops, we have the last-saturday-in April, one-day, Intro to Rocket Mass Heaters coming up.  This year we're following it with a Builder's Week, to try out the new book. 

In fretting over the book (and the wildlife distractions) I haven't advertised these events as much as I would like.  Any help spreading the word is much appreciated.   We also have workshops scheduled for the fall in Montana, and possibly Illinois and upstate NY/New England.  But this April series is likely to be our main West Coast thing this spring.

We have been scheduling light this year to keep time open for Ernie's leg.  The latest news is he's not a good candidate for amputation (he would be weight-bearing on very sensitive scar tissue).  The surgeon put it bluntly: We have a lot of tools to get folks from "bad" to "OK."  But going from "OK" to "Good," we don't have a lot of tools to help people do that.  And where you were before the injury was far above "good." 
They do have a new high-tech, custom brace that's made to offload force like the athletic spring- or spoon-type prosthetics.  The program that developed them has been fitting active service and a few service veterans, calling it "Return to Run", and some of them are going back into combat deployment.  He is a good candidate for those, as far as type of injury and potential for improved activity level with the appropriate brace, so our sympathetic VA team is negotiating for him to get approved for a fitting.

SO: Thanks for all the kind wishes and prayers about Ernie's leg.  Please keep them coming. 
And please let anyone who might enjoy meeting some ducks, newts, and deer, and playing with fire before we get into the dangerous summer dry season, know that we are hosting workshops at the end of this month.

Many thanks,
Erica and Ernie

Tuesday, March 11, 2014

Backdated Beauty - just landscapes.


I sent some of these pictures to family last spring, but thought I'd share them with you now.

Just enjoying the thaw, and looking forward to the birds, bees, and wildflowers that I know are coming next.

Spring flowers
Spring growth around our "weather rock"


Late spring - balsam-root blooms moving uphill

Spring view across nearby valley - pine woods at elevation
Valley farm, late spring. Hills and buttes behind

Summer weather

Late summer thunderstorm
Fall - Sagebrush slopes near valley floor
Late fall snow (note yellow larch)

Winter view across valley
Sun on frost on snow on little trees
Fog: being the clouds in someone else's sunset.
That's it for now!

Tuesday, February 25, 2014

Weird Question - Statistically

OK, weird question:

- anybody taken a statistics course that they liked, or
- or recommend a good book to learn the basics?

(posted on facebook, too, for easier commenting)
Statistics is the mathematical branch of critical thinking.  There's some good arguments that it matters more than calculus. 
( http://www.ted.com/talks/arthur_benjamin_s_formula_for_changing_math_education.html)


I never took statistics.  Which might make it hard to teach.
(On the other hand, as a self-taught person I might be able to make a more compelling presenter, since I'm one of those weird people who actually thinks it matters.  But that depends on me being able to present to "normal" people, and people who are different kinds of weird than me.  You readers are probably far more like me than different, but your experiences are a useful first step towards a broader perspective.)

  - Do you remember any insights from statistics? 
Either classroom, or from applying statistics in a real-world situation?
I'm looking for personal stories that could make a non-maths person curious to learn more, and/or give me personally a 'hook' to study more of the basics.

    Statistical literacy matters for health, and weather, and farming, and quantum theory, and for evaluating critical evidence in our increasingly complicated (and legalistic) world. 
     It helps us understand what the actual relationships are between touchy subjects like race, poverty, and disease, as in Hans Rosling's TED talks with the bouncing bubble graphs.  It may be one of the fairest tools for making good, effective laws instead of laws that make things worse.
(http://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_shows_the_best_stats_you_ve_ever_seen.html)
www.ted.com
You've never seen data presented like this. With the drama and urgency of a sportscaster, statistics guru Hans Rosling debunks myths about the so-called "developing world."


Glossy graphs are the fun part, at least the way Hans Rosling does them. 
But the integrity of the process is about asking the right questions, and realizing what data to pursue.
(For example, would some other measurable quantity like hours of sleep, or levels of stress hormones, be a better mark of national welfare than per-capita income?)

One engaging life lesson is how statistical literacy helps you know when someone is trying to fool you.
But even more critical is being able to use good data to realize when you are trying to fool yourself; though that's much harder.

Looking for the axes on a newspaper graph, for example, is one of my favorite ways to avoid getting caught up in media hype. Above is an ominous graph. 
But is that decline a drop from 80% to 30%, about to bottom out entirely?  Or is it only a noticeable drop between 98% and 93%?  I've seen this type of graph presented where the lower 'axis' was set way above zero; and in fact, it's very common to re-set the axes to a different scale or origin for each data set. 


   Likewise, if I was thinking about investing in a particular company or product, I'd want to check the axes on their graphs of cheerful upward curves too.

I also need to know how this compares to other similar situations. 
- Is it normal for the drop to occur (for example a seasonal drop in employment in a farm community, which we just save up and plan for every year)?
- Or is a small change a huge difference (a change from 99.9% to 97% in DNA similarity is the difference between a human and a chimpanzee.)

"If this trend continues" is a big IF, as well.  


- What are some important parts of statistical analysis? that people get wrong?
What are some good ways to help them get it right?



- Have you ever found statistics a real help in making a real-world decision?
(Sometimes it's not really a help... sometimes it just quantifies the unknowns.)
("Lanes" / http://xkcd.com/931/)

- Have you ever used statistical analysis to make a big mistake, or bad personal decision? When is statistics not the best tool for the job? 

- What's your favorite big lie that people tell with statistics?
(Are the arguments faulty, accurate but misleading, or does statistics point toward something we can't accept as true?)
This video covers some court cases where mis-use of percentages can get someone wrongfully convicted.  (No, mis-use of percentages is not a crime; the people whose error resulted in years of jail time walked away with nothing more serious than a little egg on their faces.)
Experts can sway juries with numbers, even when neither of them knowing the right questions to ask about the statistics.  Pretty scary.
http://www.ted.com/talks/peter_donnelly_shows_how_stats_fool_juries.html


- Have you ever helped with a community decision by gathering data? Had a class of students help in this way?

- Where do you got for reliable data when you want to make a decision?

 Statistically speaking, based on my past experiences, that is WAAAY too many questions.  Even with comics.  My chances of getting responses here are lower than on the original Facebook post. 

Feel free to ignore some questions, and just tell me if you thought of anything while reading this post.

I think the best place to respond might be that Facebook post I mentioned, same date.
But please feel free to comment here, or reach me privately, as well.


Links to good online content, books, and papers are very much appreciated; and feel free to anonymize any stories you don't want shared.
Many thanks to XKCD.com for routinely exploring this territory in repeatable ways.

Yours,
Erica W