Talking About Hunger in the USA-

One of the things I admire about both Crunchy Chicken and Sharon Astyk is that they fearlessly charge into discussions that are bound to become difficult and rancorous. Lots of things just plain need to be talked about; regardless of hurt feelings. So they do.

I'm about to do that too. However, I want to start with a disclaimer: I'm not judging anybody here. I'm really not. But we have a problem no one is facing, and we need to face it.

In the last couple weeks Hunger In the USA has gotten a lot of attention, and rightly so. One of the nifty little facts that came out in the NYT was that currently 1/8 of adults are getting food paid for by the government, via what used to be called "the food stamp program"; and 1/4 of our children.

That shocked a lot of people. In truth, I'm pretty angry that people were shocked. We should have been horrified- and aware and doing something about it long before it got to this point. Once again, I'm embarrassed to be a citizen of this country. We let 1/4 of our children grow up in such poverty? Unforgivable. Not a word I use at all lightly.

At the time, Sharon put up a post on the topic; and my comment on it was the second one. My topic here is a little different.

There, I pointed out that quite a few people who are actually hungry- are in situations where their parents or caretakers truly just do not know how to feed them.

What I want to say here - non-judgmentally, remember! - is that many who believe they are hungry- are not. They do not know what real hunger is; in spite of those ubiquitous advertisements with skeletal children in them.

Today the Washington Post has chimed in; and I think without knowing it, they've hit a nail right on the head. There's both an article, and a rather long photo gallery.

These were the photos that set me off. Neither this woman, nor her child, are actually "hungry", in the sense of not having enough to eat. They certainly may be malnourished- but hungry? No.

I do not, in the least, doubt that the woman believes she and her family are hungry, and that she is frantic about the welfare of her children. I would be willing to bet she's entirely sincere, and in no way a "bad person"- quite the contrary. But her problem has been misidentified; and the help being offered her- will not help.

Later in the photo gallery there is another mother- who is skipping meals, so her children can eat. She's skinny. And I'll believe in a second her stomach hurts, and that her children's do too.

There is the crux of why I'm writing about this. One of my myriad ex-girlfriends (ok, 3) fiercely accused me during one of our breakups of being a "problem solver"; a great sin for someone who didn't want her problems solved, she just wanted me to listen to them. (Evidently this is a fairly common source of friction between males and females, but I REALLY don't want to talk about it.)

Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima etc. Loathsome as it may be, I really do prefer to come out the other side of a difficulty in an improved state, if possible.

Hunger in the world is actually a major focus of my life. To hear that one out of every four children in my country requires help from outside the family in order to not be hungry sets me going. Big time.

A tried and true way to fail at problem solving is to apply the wrong solution to a problem. For example, like trying to fix a flat tire with a wad of bubble gum. Looks kinda like it might work, if we're lucky. But in fact, it's just truly dumb.

I think we have abundant proof available that we're applying bubble gum to our hungry populace. It isn't going to help; which is by far my biggest objection; and it's insanely expensive, in a time when the country doesn't have a dime to spare. The money could and should be spent so that the recipients of the aid actually get help for their problem.

Problems come in layers, more often than not. The next layer to this particular one is that we know many people on food stamps are not actually hungry- but we don't want to deal with what's really going on. It's embarrassing, from all directions. So, rather than cause some forced blushing- we continue as a nation to pretend: lack of food is the problem; and money is the answer.

Very simply- lack of food is NOT the problem; and money is NOT the answer. Can't get much simpler than that.

The problem is- we refuse to talk about, or deal with, the problem.

If you haven't read the Washington Post article, now would be a good time. Surprise! They actually talk about all this.

I was delighted to discover that; and that others are struggling with it.

Now what?

Once you've discovered your solution to a problem isn't a solution; and the problem isn't what you thought it was - you must, must, must - throw everything out and start over.

What we're doing right now, to continue the flat tire simile, is "hey, maybe if we got the gum hotter, it would work." "hey, maybe if we mixed the gum with gasoline, it would work" "hey, maybe if we put sand in the gum, it would work." "hey, mixing the gum with gasoline almost worked, let's try mixing it with brake fluid instead."

It's painful to throw out a "solution" that you're so deeply invested in. But anything else is almost certain to just add to the "fixing the fix" cycle.

A black hole for the people; and the money.

Picking the right path...

Billy M left a comment on an earlier post asking for some basic opinions/advice- 

"The research I've done on heating for food has only resulted in seemingly balanced arguments from the two options I have at my hands. I have an old propane grill ($5 at a garage sale), as well as an electric stove that came with the place I am renting. The most convincing information I read said that propane actually releases a ton of CO2 into the atmosphere, since it is a natural gas, and that the methods of obtaining electricity have become efficient enough to surpass the carbon emissions of propane. However, other readings have said that propane may just be slightly more efficient than electricity, although the fact that it is a natural gas does in fact bring down the resourcefulness of the energy source.

I don't own any type of device that would allow me to burn wood...

So I guess what I'm wondering is if you have any facts/opinions straight out of how someone should go about heating food (if they did in fact have all three options -- wood, propane and electricity)

Billy, you're not alone in wanting to know "the right answer" for a question- I'd love to be able to give it.

What struck me immediately here though was the missing component- Billy, basically.

What kind of cooking do you do?  What kinds do you LIKE to do?  Are you allergic to woodsmoke?  Do you enjoy cutting, splitting, handling firewood, or are you really too busy?  How much "extra" time do you have- either to wrangle wood, or propane containers?-

Etc.  Hopefully you get the idea.  Who you are- what you need- and even what makes you happy- all these considerations are genuinely IMPORTANT to the answer.

You are important.  We need to remember that.

"Sustainable" practices WON'T be- if they make people miserable, and they won't stick to them.

  Which seems obvious, but quite a few enthusiasts will, in the excitement of the moment, adopt practices that they can't/won't - uh, sustain.  Because in their enthusiasm for the greater good, and the benefit to the planet, they forgot- WE are part of the planet we're trying to save here- and we matter, too.

The whole decision- what kind of fuel SHOULD I cook with - can get pretty crazy complex if you keep picking at it.

Propane is a fossil fuel- bad carbon.  It's mostly delivered on trucks- diesel fuel; more fossil carbon. Where does your local propane actually come from?  Natural gas is often moved in pipelines/pipes- pretty efficient, if available- but still fossil carbon.

Electricity is mostly coal (bad), and nuclear (BAD); with minor bits of natural gas (badish) wind (ok) and hydro (okish) - depending on where you live.  If you've got the option as some do to essentially purchase straight renewable electricity- that could make a difference in your decision.  

Wood is "current budget" carbon- good carbon; and it CAN be renewable, though like everything else wood can be done badly.  If you live in a city - it may not be legal- most available wood-burning stoves are much dirtier than they have to be, and wood smoke is pretty irritating for the neighbors.  Do you have a good supply?  The space to store it, the time?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

As an aside here- firewood is kind of dominating my life at the moment- because of the floods last fall, and global warming.  I cut and gather it myself; the floods made harvest much more difficult/much more time consuming- so I wasn't able to do my normal autumn wood cutting.

  And- the firewood we had cut from our own plantings; stacked, curing/drying - got soaked thoroughly by the 14" of rain in August/Sept- and is unburnable.  Given normalish weather- it wouldn't be nearly so wet, and we'd have had days of low-humidity sunny windy weather in Sept/Oct that would have dried it very well.   So in fact I'm cutting firewood every other day- and burning it fast, since it's cold this winter; lots of below 0 F nights.

There are a LOT of other things I need to be doing- but here I am.  The Little House has no backup heating system- it's firewood only (with a little passive solar boost- not useful at 1 AM).

Will rainy autumns happen more often?  Don't know.  This wet autumn, though, may be the thing that pushes me over the edge into adding a layer to my firewood process- a drying/storage shed.

There have been many years where a rainy week in November got my wood a little wet- making me aware that if all the winter stacks had been under a roof, I'd be burning less wood; doing less hauling- but- it's always been a fairly minor factor.  And every time that happened, I've done mental calculations- what would it cost me- money, time, and new habits- to design and build a wood drying shed?  A bunch.  How big would the benefits be?  Considerable.  Balance?  Kind of six of one, half a dozen of the other.

This year is the first where all the stacked wood is so wet it's nearly useless.  I can make it burn, but it gives little heat, and clogs the chimney fast.  The balance may have shifted- instead of being a minor improvement, the shed may now be a necessity, up-front costs or not.  

It strikes me that this kind of shift may be another major aspect to global warming- tiny local processes/technologies may no longer be reliable.  Pushing people over all kinds of edges.

------------------------------------------------------------------

Maybe the best I can do for an answer to Billy M's very sensible question is to describe my own answers.  More than one answer, since I've changed, over time.

When I first moved to the Little House, a major factor in the calculation was money- we didn't have any.  We DID have wood- 40 acres of hardwoods.

With that in mind, I designed the Little House to use wood both for heating and cooking- all year.  Including our sultry hot continental summers.  (It's a huge advantage to be able to design a dwelling from the ground up- with all the integration factors being considered.  I still missed a few, of course.)

The House can essentially be tweaked to function like a big chimney/cooling tower in the summer - the downstairs has big windows in all 4 walls; the upstairs/loft has one huge window (floor to ceiling) on the north, and a normalish window on the south.    All the windows but the small one upstairs open on a hinge- so unlike a sash-window, where the actual opening can only equal half the window area at best, the hinged windows when open make holes equal to the entire window area- huge, in our case.

And- there's a BIG opening between upstairs and down- so if all the windows are open, any heat from the stove is quite free to rapidly move up, and out.

It works fine, too- we did all our cooking with wood for probably the first 5 years or so.  

Then several things changed- we had children (available time and energy vanished), we got involved in other projects that were important too; and we got a little money coming in.

  Suddenly it became more sensible to use propane for cooking in the summer.

And that's what we still do.  The stove that heats the house is a modern Canadian stove designed for both heating and cooking.  If we need heat- it's on, and we cook with wood.  If we don't need heat- we cook with propane.  The time required for the propane is a small fraction of time needed to cook with wood in the summer- and no question, July and August are a little more comfy if we don't have to crank up the woodstove to make a cup of coffee, or soup for lunch.

One departure from that practice can be canning- if we're canning tomatoes or whatnot- we will usually use wood- canning takes a lot of heat; and ergo a lot of money.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

One more aside- cooking in China.  As part of my work, I've hiked well up into the mountains in a number of places there, out into nearly untouched countryside.  These are ancient communities, long in "balance" with their environment.  Chances are, this clan has lived here since these people were Homo erectus, not Homo sapiens.  That long.  

They long ago hit the limits of their environment; and adapted, in many ways.  Only the rich can afford to burn wood- there's just not enough of it, and mostly it's needed for other uses, tools, furniture, housing.  They burn- rice straw, and pine needles.  Under a wok.  That's exactly what a wok is for- cooking over a very quick, hot fire.  Their whole cuisine is adapted in that direction- because of the primordial shortage of fuel.

I'll bet you could cook entirely on - junk mail.  If you had the will, and someplace outdoors for the smoke to go away.  :-)  You'd need something like a ventilated 5 or 10 gallon steel can for the fire to burn it, and the wok to sit on- (I'm kidding- mostly... probably too many toxins in junk mail smoke to be good cooking fuel...)

-----------------------------------------------------------

So.  Answers to questions like this are going to be highly variable, I think.  Forever.  Because one of the most important components in the decision making algorithm is always going to be personal.  How does this fit your life, your finances, your region?

If it makes you miserable- in the long run, it's not a good answer -

The good answers should leave you - solvent, not overworked, and satisfied.

EVERYTHING can break.

Having climbed just far enough out of my alligator morass to be able to catch my breath for a moment; my problem with this blog is a huge overload of stuff I'd like to write about (floods, philosophy, meat, science...) and stuff you've asked for. And I can't do them all, of course, so I'm going to do a short one, that wasn't on ANY of those lists so far, but which IS important, and connected. :-)

There have been multiple discussions on laundry hereabouts; including one today in the BBC, which probably tipped my choice of topic this way. England builds desalination plant. Last line in the article; "At the moment, half of the drinking water supplied to homes is used for flushing toilets and washing dirty clothes, which is madness." !! Ya think??

Nice somebody is starting to think, anyway.

So- laundry, and water, is NOT the point of this post; they're just the platform. Is water use critical? Way past. New lake?. This is a very good article; pointing out the tangle of interconnections between climate change, genocide, bad policies, and inadequate understandings. Darfur; one of the great horrors of our time, from all aspects. Water is going to continue to be a huge factor in global disturbances, as far out as anyone can see now.

So. We have to CHANGE the way we use water. Duh. Everybody agrees. Immediately after that lovely agreement, all the 2,804 different viewpoints and vested interests go straight for each others throats. Not much useful discussion going on, or progess in changing anything; hence the need for England - to build a delsalination plant for drinking water, so our current wasteful ways can continue without troubling interruption or real thought.

What is the sensible reaction of sensible people in this situation? Where the noise of conversation is drowning out any actual discussion, and no world body is actually capable of making any decisions? My own answer is; I'm going to live my own life as sensibly as I can, at least. Kind of all I can do; and the example might help, some decade or other.

Then- we get to the real world, that nasty nasty place, where your actions have real consequences. What, this isn't a video game? I don't get 10 lives, before I get to just start over? We'd laugh, but it's so not funny.

And here, in my own backyard, is a perfect example of what I'm trying to say- change is NOT EASY- and one of the barriers to real world change- is the increasing number of humans we have- who have never, ever been in touch with the real world.

This is where we do our laundry; a subject we've never raised here before; largely because it's not likely to be of use, in its total process, to folks living in cities or suburbs; This is a rural process; mostly, though some aspects could be adapted.



And why is the clothesline down on the ground, you ask? Ah. We'll get to that.

That big water tank down at the end there is a 500 gallon tank. It's filled by our windmill, and we use that water for lots of things; showers, and the occasional watering of plants just being established in our fields. And, laundry.

The basic idea here- this whole setup is on the path between the house and the greenhouse and the garden. We walk between house and other places like 6 times a day, most days. What I've developed over the years, is the habit of doing laundry- ALL DAY - EVERY DAY. In little tiny bits.

You're SUPPOSED to walk down and do "the next thing" for the laundry- every time you pass. Both ways. Regardless of how big a hurry you're in. If you allow yourself to say "oh, but I'm in too big a hurry to make lunch right now, I don't have time to stop and change the laundry from soap to rinse tank, I'll do it later.." you've lost the battle; and this will not work. You will wind up not doing the laundry. So you do need the philosophical attitude that "hurry" is a bad idea, pretty much always.

But if you can set up this internal habit- it's a pretty sweet system. You don't wind up spending hours doing just laundry- you do it in 5 and 10 minute bits. Then move on- usually feeling good about it, rather than overburdened. Here's what we do; you put a reasonable batch of laundry into a 30-40 gallon tank, which has a lid for it. Add soap/detergent/whatever, in the right amount, so the tank is about 2/3 full; and agitate; or "pound" as we say. Lots of different choices for pounding implements; currently we mostly use a natural rubber "plumber's helper" - which I have cut holes in, to increase the turbulence, and decrease the work. Pound the laundry up, say 100 strokes- counting is fun, with kids- put the lid on, and leave it to soak. Probably for hours, maybe in the sun, which adds heat to the water.

On the way back from whatever; you stop in- pound it another 100 strokes. Leave it to soak. The decision when to shift from soapy to rinse cycle depends on how dirty your batch is, of course. It's pretty forgiving. Usually we have 2, or 3 tanks going at once; one soapy, one first rinse, one second rinse. Then, it goes onto the clothesline, for lovely outdoor sunny drying. Wonderful fresh smells.

So. Spice tried this system a couple times when she first got here, and was not enthusiastic. She reverted to driving the laundry in to town, laundromat. For about 10 reasons, one of them being the price of fuel, she decided this year to give it another shot. For about 10 reasons, this time she became enthusiastic. One of those was- the height of the tanks. Something just that simple will make all the difference between success and failure- MOST OF THE TIME.

I'm 6'1; my two sons are both the same-ish. Spice is "5 foot-nothing" as she puts it. She just had too much of a struggle getting soaking wet laundry out of those taller tanks. We got some that were shorter. Hey presto! it's not killing her anymore. And Smidgen loves to help, and is entertained.

So. She's decided this is the future for us; a good functional cheap laundry system; and incidentally fantastic exercise- think of the money we save on gym fees and exercise equipment! But our original clothesline had died- the aspen tree it was secured to succumbed to a fungus disease- and fell over. So we needed a new clothesline.

Part of the problem with the old line was the fact that it was a quicky; temporary. Wasn't done right; so now I have to do it again.

One of my father's favorite jibes- "Yeah, there's never time to do a job right. But there's time to do it over; once it breaks."

Building something RIGHT is incredibly satisfying. Constructing something that will last- and that will be basically USEFUL for your life, your family, is about the most rewarding activity I know.

So with the help of Middle Child ( trying out a new moniker here :-) - before Smidgen, he was Younger Son; but now he has the Garrison Keillor slot-) I set out to build a clothesline for the ages. The Rolls Royce of clotheslines.

We had fun building it, too. Went down to the SE quarter, and cut some black locust trees- which I had planted, decades ago- for exactly this kind of purpose. Black locust won't rot in the soil- it's better than any treated wood, no kidding. Peeled the posts- the bark will come off messily and slowly otherwise. Set the posts so they are guyed to "deadmen" - 3 foot long black locust posts totally buried - sideways - to provide tremendous anchor power. Laundry is HEAVY, you know? That beautiful line is under serious tension when loaded with wet clothes. You need to design for it.

Bought 50' of plastic coated steel cable for the line. (Oh, hush; it's a good use of plastic. :-)) 50' is a LONG way- you need to allow for re-tensioning; and for - mowing the grass! So there's a big turnbuckle in the line, with a hook- a few turns and you can take the line down for mowing; if it's sagging, a few turns and it's tight.

Worked great! Looked beautiful! Dried laundry!

Worked so well, that Spice decided to put ALL the laundry on the line today; doing a big batch. With blankets.

Overload.

You can overload ANYTHING- and this is what so many people growing up protected in cities- and thinking you can always do it over, like in the video game - just DO NOT understand, in a very basic way.

"It's working great! I'll just add a little more!"

LIMITS. Limits. Everything has limits- and we have a society we've trained to NOT KNOW that- and it's a huge part of reaching our goals of a livable world. You want more? Bigger? YOU CAN'T HAVE IT. The world will break.

The laundry overload didn't break my massive black locust posts. Didn't pull out the deadmen. Plastic coated steel cable is a little tricky to fasten; you CAN'T tie knots in it; you have to use "cable clamps". The overload actually pulled the cable out of the fiercely tightened clamp- which I had put together myself, in a pretty knowledgeable way- cable doubled back; looped, right piece down- etc. Still- stripped the plastic off; pulled the cable right out.

Easy enough to fix; only took me 10 minutes. Lots of humor. But the principle remains one that worries me- how do you get people to accept limits- when they don't realize there ARE any?

My concern, and experience, goes far beyond Spice. One year we had a group of GREAT interns living here for the summer. All exceptionally bright. And all city kids.

They broke every machine on the farm, eventually. "The mower is doing great in this foot high grass; I'm going to mow the 18" tall grass over there next..." Nope. CAN'T. Overload. Burn up the belts, if you're lucky; burn up the transmission or overheat the engine, if you're not. "Well, how was I supposed to know??" in anguish.

Good question. We need good answers. It used to be called "common sense" - but how do you teach that?

What we're overloading is the Earth- and it's mostly the result of millions of tiny overloads; from clueless humans; far too many of whom do not know "overload" is even possible.

Planet Picnic- Or-

As far as I can tell, what we have wound up with in the "community oriented green personal action" arena, are three essentially complimentary alternatives. Looming in the immediate future. That would be COGPA for short, and silly. I like the pa part, though.

I also like diversity- it's one of the best things out there to help "sustainable" along. Choices.

A) is a week long event for everyone, particularly those new to "green" living.
B) is a week long event for those who are already green, and would like to be greener
C) is a.... YEAR long endeavor- for the most serious greenies.

And kind of in the middle is the Planet Picnic/Party; to which everybody should come, of course. Undisirregardless of the Crunchy Commandowannabe's poll, which showed only a minority of party-goers. That's just crazy talk. We NEED the party folks, or we'll be painted as sourpuss party poopers. SP3's. Can't have that. :-)

You can pick your level of involvement, which is a good idea, and also match levels for those you are trying to bring with you. Not all spouzes are going to be ready for #C, for sure.

A) (The best alternative, by far... ) Starts June 21st, with a picnic for friends and neighbors, on the Summer Solstice; and continues for a week, during which everyone is supposed to pick one new (for them) "green" action, and try it out. Picnic Plan. This is supposed to be modeled after Mardi Gras- and Lent. Just borrowing a good idea here. Party first, pay later- it's the modern way, yes? :-)

The warm fuzzy vision for the party is here, In the Moonlight; and the over-all rough philosophy is here; Why, etc..

B) Is Crunchy Moa's "Low Impact Week", starting June 1; and you've got compleat instructions available there.

C) Is the 90% Off year long project from Casaubon's Book. Not for rookies, but an outstanding project, and great one to watch while we all learn.

All of these are intended to be joint efforts- a bunch of folks doing the same thing, at the same time. No question but that new adventures are easier, and less scary, when they are shared. A and B are intended to become annual events- not sure about C.

From this point on, I'll mostly be talking about A, which after all originated here. But that doesn't mean I don't like B and C- I do. I just think we need more than one size here; and my own primary interest is in getting the currently non-involved to dip a toe in the pool. Just a toe, is fine. For a lot of the barely green, even Crunchzilla's lists are going to look pretty scary. But you can catch them with toasted marshmallows, I'll bet ya.

"Earth Day", alas, is kind of a red rag to a bull, for some of the anti's - it started out as more protest than celebration, and it still comes across that way. Earth Day is fine- but we need a wider audience. Right quick.

Basic diplomacy. The kind our recent "leaders" didn't bother to look up in a text book. "Never back your opponent into a corner." And, "Never leave the table; keep talking, no matter what." If you ignore those basics, you tend to wind up - in a war. We can't afford a war over environmental stewardship. If you think it's not possible, you're not paying attention.

So- basic formats set. Now what?

1) Send this link to every newspaper you have access to. Email it to your friends. Get the story out- get folks involved. (We're assuming YOU are already hosting a Planet Picnic, of course!)

It doesn't need a huge group to be a great success- just you and a few friends, a neighbor or two, is a good start. Then there's next year. If we're ever going to get to "sustainable" - next year, and next decade, have to be where our heads are. They really will get here. Count on it. Act like you know it.

Of course if you can talk your local group into doing a Planet Picnic, great. Who? Audubon, Sierra Club, Knights of Columbus, VFW, Chamber of Commerce - anybody MIGHT. :-)

Ask- if you're a member, your opinion should matter. Whether you get a picnic or not, the subject will come up; and will get talked around; plus the fact that it's something you care about. That's important. Basically all you're saying is "Hey, guys- this stuff is important. Let's get together as a community, and just start talking about it a little. And let the kids run. And eat some watermelon." Fairly hard to object to that. (if you holler at me about "local" watermelons, I'll swat ya.)

2) Let me know you're involved, in the comments here. It'll help. Tell us what you're doing, and sort of where. I'm a little reluctant to suggest you give out invitations on the blog- the world does contain some nasty folks, as we all know. But I'd really like to generate a broader sense of community among those throwing Planet Picnics.

Maybe someone (with a bit more web skill and time) could set up a Planet Picnic Web site- where we could safely share photos, stories, and ideas for next time. I'd like that.

Other ideas? Questions? Answers?

I'll stick up some photos of ours here. Summer Solstice is June 21 this year- it's a Thursday; and NO, we can't move it to the weekend. (I tried- doesn't work.) It does happen on weekends sometimes, of course. Sometimes is often enough.

As you may have noticed- we're still kind of searching for the right names for all this. Maybe they'll just show up, after the Picnics.