These people have a lot more courage and resiliency than I could ever muster. Congrats to them for living the life they want.
Last edited 8 months ago by Jim Veenbaas
Jim Veenbaas
8 months ago
These people have a lot more courage and resiliency than I could ever muster. Congrats to them for living the life they want.
Last edited 8 months ago by Jim Veenbaas
Nell Clover
8 months ago
In June 2023, Ofgem (the UK’s electricity market regulator) ruled that minimum grid inertia requirement will be reduced. This got no coverage in the news, and no doubt it might seem quite irrelevant to write about it here. Bear with me.
Grid inertia is what keeps the nation’s lights on when a power plant (or its connection to the grid) trips. Grid inertia supplies electrical power to the system for a few seconds to fill the gap and hold up the electrical frequency above 49.2Hz, enough time to restore a plant’s grid connection or bring online an alternative power plant. This is really important; if the electrical power gap is not closed in time, the grid collapses, and there is a blackout affecting millions. If, even just moments later, the electrical power gap is closed to allow the lights to go back on, they can’t be. You see, grid inertia is needed to switch the grid back on. Without grid inertia, you also can’t re-power the grid all at once. Without grid inertia you need to progressively re-connect parts of the grid. Scotland’s entire grid would take over a week to switch back on. That is for some homes, businesses, water plants and hospitals a week without electricity.
Ofgem recored its reason to reduce the minimum grid inertia requirement as follows: “operating a low inertia system is necessary in order to meet net-zero targets”. The minimum grid inertia requirement had to be lowered due to renewables, and will be further lowered as more renewables storage is added.
So what is the risk of one of these outages? Much depends on the weather, demand, where the trip occurs, and what back up plant is available. 49.2Hz is the magic number, and Ofgem estimate there is now a 1 in 10 years event likelihood of the grid frequency collapsing below this. It was 1 in 600 years in the 2000s. It will become more frequent as grid inertia is lowered again in the future.
A likelihood of 1 in 10 years makes it a near certainty large parts of the UK will be without power due to the difficulty of managing the renewables grid, and it may take weeks to reconnect some areas. That would be apocalyptic for those affected, breakdown of society type stuff. And this has been planned by those governing us.
The unease many of us feel about the future is real. Whether shutting fertiliser plants necessary for feeding half of us, or catastrophically weakening our electricity networks, we can see the very foundations of modern society being deliberately damaged by policies driven by nihilists. Guy Alaska can live without modern industrial society. We can’t.
The idea of switching off “Scotland’s entire grid” sounds very attractive indeed, and no doubt would yield enormous environmental benefits.
Perhaps we might also ‘switch off’ the ludicrous Barnett Formula which keeps too many ungrateful Scots in clover.*
Thanks Neill,
Very interesting, and extremely concerning, but as you point out these major issues that have massive implications for society as a whole are simply not reported.
As we saw during Covid, the false narratives of the ruling class echoed by a compliant MSM are only half the problem, the other half is the failure to report news that does not support the narratives.
I live in Australia, and having seen the issues of relying on unreliable renewables created across Europe, are ruling elites seem determined to follow the same path.
In addition making everyone switch to vehicles, and heat their houses with electric heat pumps, etc, makes the electrical grid a single point of failure for our whole society.
The idea of switching off “Scotland’s entire grid” sounds very attractive indeed, and no doubt would yield enormous environmental benefits.
Perhaps we might also ‘switch off’ the ludicrous Barnett Formula which keeps too many ungrateful Scots in clover.*
Thanks Neill,
Very interesting, and extremely concerning, but as you point out these major issues that have massive implications for society as a whole are simply not reported.
As we saw during Covid, the false narratives of the ruling class echoed by a compliant MSM are only half the problem, the other half is the failure to report news that does not support the narratives.
I live in Australia, and having seen the issues of relying on unreliable renewables created across Europe, are ruling elites seem determined to follow the same path.
In addition making everyone switch to vehicles, and heat their houses with electric heat pumps, etc, makes the electrical grid a single point of failure for our whole society.
Great comment. I already agreed with you on this but thanks for fleshing out the case with these – very concerning – numbers.
Nell Clover
8 months ago
In June 2023, Ofgem (the UK’s electricity market regulator) ruled that minimum grid inertia requirement will be reduced. This got no coverage in the news, and no doubt it might seem quite irrelevant to write about it here. Bear with me.
Grid inertia is what keeps the nation’s lights on when a power plant (or its connection to the grid) trips. Grid inertia supplies electrical power to the system for a few seconds to fill the gap and hold up the electrical frequency above 49.2Hz, enough time to restore a plant’s grid connection or bring online an alternative power plant. This is really important; if the electrical power gap is not closed in time, the grid collapses, and there is a blackout affecting millions. If, even just moments later, the electrical power gap is closed to allow the lights to go back on, they can’t be. You see, grid inertia is needed to switch the grid back on. Without grid inertia, you also can’t re-power the grid all at once. Without grid inertia you need to progressively re-connect parts of the grid. Scotland’s entire grid would take over a week to switch back on. That is for some homes, businesses, water plants and hospitals a week without electricity.
Ofgem recored its reason to reduce the minimum grid inertia requirement as follows: “operating a low inertia system is necessary in order to meet net-zero targets”. The minimum grid inertia requirement had to be lowered due to renewables, and will be further lowered as more renewables storage is added.
So what is the risk of one of these outages? Much depends on the weather, demand, where the trip occurs, and what back up plant is available. 49.2Hz is the magic number, and Ofgem estimate there is now a 1 in 10 years event likelihood of the grid frequency collapsing below this. It was 1 in 600 years in the 2000s. It will become more frequent as grid inertia is lowered again in the future.
A likelihood of 1 in 10 years makes it a near certainty large parts of the UK will be without power due to the difficulty of managing the renewables grid, and it may take weeks to reconnect some areas. That would be apocalyptic for those affected, breakdown of society type stuff. And this has been planned by those governing us.
The unease many of us feel about the future is real. Whether shutting fertiliser plants necessary for feeding half of us, or catastrophically weakening our electricity networks, we can see the very foundations of modern society being deliberately damaged by policies driven by nihilists. Guy Alaska can live without modern industrial society. We can’t.
Last edited 8 months ago by Nell Clover
Matt Hindman
8 months ago
After all the fun of 2020 and the failures of government and corporate America since, it seems like just about everybody is stocking up. Democrats are buying guns and ammo, city dwellers are buying generators, and rural people are trying to increase the self-sufficiently of their land. Everyone is buying food. It’s not a panic or anything like that. There is just a profound sense of unease about the future and it seems like no one in charge has even noticed.
Well that is a good thing. I have spent a lot of time in the Canadian remote wilderness and you learn a bit about reality. If you can’t find water you are immediately in a serious crisis. If you get soaked in rain and the temperature drops you have to get warm. Which can be really hard to do in some conditions. We live in an earthquake zone and it amazes me how few people have done even modest preparations to be self sufficient.
Well that is a good thing. I have spent a lot of time in the Canadian remote wilderness and you learn a bit about reality. If you can’t find water you are immediately in a serious crisis. If you get soaked in rain and the temperature drops you have to get warm. Which can be really hard to do in some conditions. We live in an earthquake zone and it amazes me how few people have done even modest preparations to be self sufficient.
My acupuncturist has bought herself a pistol as well as a shotgun
Matt Hindman
8 months ago
After all the fun of 2020 and the failures of government and corporate America since, it seems like just about everybody is stocking up. Democrats are buying guns and ammo, city dwellers are buying generators, and rural people are trying to increase the self-sufficiently of their land. Everyone is buying food. It’s not a panic or anything like that. There is just a profound sense of unease about the future and it seems like no one in charge has even noticed.
Jeff Cunningham
8 months ago
The subtitle says: “Americans are increasingly vanishing into the wilderness”. The article is entirely about one family from Michigan that moved to Alaska. There is not a single statistic in it to suggest they are part of an “increasing” number of people doing this. Nothing. Total clickbait BS. I find this really tiresome.
My wife lived in Alaska a number of years. She managed a bulk healthfood store in Anchorage that did a large business with the kind of people this article pretends to be about. I showed her the picture accompanying the article and she scoffed dismissively. “That’s a sports tourist up on a fishing trip. The guide took the picture. Look at those sunglasses. The cigarette. The clothes. The real off-the-grid people don’t look anything like that.” Her customers came in wearing homemade clothes, with beards and hair, smelled like they looked; they bought pallets full of supplies they loaded onto big ugly trucks. Once a year. She still has brothers and friends in Alaska. And their opinion is that the number of people trying to live “off the grid” there is diminishing, not increasing.
Makes me wonder if this “environmental scientist and co-founder of the Rizoma Field School” has even been to Alaska. Their website says they are in Uruguay. Why not write about that? Sounds interesting. But surely off the grid in a climate like Uruguay is going to work a little better than in most of Alaska.
And the part where she lists all the things things he’s built in the last 2 yrs. How does someone with absolutely no money build a 75 sq meter cabin in that timeframe. I do lots of homesteading type projects and it’s not cheap to plant a hayfield or create a garden when you’re just getting started.
And the part where she lists all the things things he’s built in the last 2 yrs. How does someone with absolutely no money build a 75 sq meter cabin in that timeframe. I do lots of homesteading type projects and it’s not cheap to plant a hayfield or create a garden when you’re just getting started.
The subtitle says: “Americans are increasingly vanishing into the wilderness”. The article is entirely about one family from Michigan that moved to Alaska. There is not a single statistic in it to suggest they are part of an “increasing” number of people doing this. Nothing. Total clickbait BS. I find this really tiresome.
My wife lived in Alaska a number of years. She managed a bulk healthfood store in Anchorage that did a large business with the kind of people this article pretends to be about. I showed her the picture accompanying the article and she scoffed dismissively. “That’s a sports tourist up on a fishing trip. The guide took the picture. Look at those sunglasses. The cigarette. The clothes. The real off-the-grid people don’t look anything like that.” Her customers came in wearing homemade clothes, with beards and hair, smelled like they looked; they bought pallets full of supplies they loaded onto big ugly trucks. Once a year. She still has brothers and friends in Alaska. And their opinion is that the number of people trying to live “off the grid” there is diminishing, not increasing.
Makes me wonder if this “environmental scientist and co-founder of the Rizoma Field School” has even been to Alaska. Their website says they are in Uruguay. Why not write about that? Sounds interesting. But surely off the grid in a climate like Uruguay is going to work a little better than in most of Alaska.
Nik Jewell
8 months ago
I sincerely hope it works out for them. In the future we will all have to become far more self-reliant as the elites destroy our food supply.
Nik Jewell
8 months ago
I sincerely hope it works out for them. In the future we will all have to become far more self-reliant as the elites destroy our food supply.
Cho Jinn
8 months ago
Inconnu, great fish.
Cho Jinn
8 months ago
Inconnu, great fish.
Simon Blanchard
8 months ago
Great stuff. For an English approach, see also Maximus Ironthumper’s charming Youtube channel.
Simon Blanchard
8 months ago
Great stuff. For an English approach, see also Maximus Ironthumper’s charming Youtube channel.
Robbie K
8 months ago
Sounds romantic, I suspect the reality however is a miserable existence in such an environment. I’m a fan of the series ‘Alone’ which is set in places such as this and the participants usually tap out within 4-6 weeks emaciated. On that note there was a family in Colorado that tried this quite unprepared and unfortunately they all died. https://coloradosun.com/2023/07/25/three-people-found-dead-at-colorado-campsite-sisters-14-year-old-boy/
Robbie K
8 months ago
Sounds romantic, I suspect the reality however is a miserable existence in such an environment. I’m a fan of the series ‘Alone’ which is set in places such as this and the participants usually tap out within 4-6 weeks emaciated. On that note there was a family in Colorado that tried this quite unprepared and unfortunately they all died. https://coloradosun.com/2023/07/25/three-people-found-dead-at-colorado-campsite-sisters-14-year-old-boy/
Andrew Fisher
8 months ago
Interesting article but this phrase really is extremely and absurdly loaded:
“those who are shackled by the ideology of mass affluence” !.
It is just about possible for a significant though still small minority to live this way in North America; it is completely impossible in Europe and the UK. OK, so it sounds more honest to advocate a drastic reduction in population to go with the lifestyle.
These people have a lot more courage and resiliency than I could ever muster. Congrats to them for living the life they want.
These people have a lot more courage and resiliency than I could ever muster. Congrats to them for living the life they want.
In June 2023, Ofgem (the UK’s electricity market regulator) ruled that minimum grid inertia requirement will be reduced. This got no coverage in the news, and no doubt it might seem quite irrelevant to write about it here. Bear with me.
Grid inertia is what keeps the nation’s lights on when a power plant (or its connection to the grid) trips. Grid inertia supplies electrical power to the system for a few seconds to fill the gap and hold up the electrical frequency above 49.2Hz, enough time to restore a plant’s grid connection or bring online an alternative power plant. This is really important; if the electrical power gap is not closed in time, the grid collapses, and there is a blackout affecting millions. If, even just moments later, the electrical power gap is closed to allow the lights to go back on, they can’t be. You see, grid inertia is needed to switch the grid back on. Without grid inertia, you also can’t re-power the grid all at once. Without grid inertia you need to progressively re-connect parts of the grid. Scotland’s entire grid would take over a week to switch back on. That is for some homes, businesses, water plants and hospitals a week without electricity.
Ofgem recored its reason to reduce the minimum grid inertia requirement as follows: “operating a low inertia system is necessary in order to meet net-zero targets”. The minimum grid inertia requirement had to be lowered due to renewables, and will be further lowered as more renewables storage is added.
So what is the risk of one of these outages? Much depends on the weather, demand, where the trip occurs, and what back up plant is available. 49.2Hz is the magic number, and Ofgem estimate there is now a 1 in 10 years event likelihood of the grid frequency collapsing below this. It was 1 in 600 years in the 2000s. It will become more frequent as grid inertia is lowered again in the future.
A likelihood of 1 in 10 years makes it a near certainty large parts of the UK will be without power due to the difficulty of managing the renewables grid, and it may take weeks to reconnect some areas. That would be apocalyptic for those affected, breakdown of society type stuff. And this has been planned by those governing us.
The unease many of us feel about the future is real. Whether shutting fertiliser plants necessary for feeding half of us, or catastrophically weakening our electricity networks, we can see the very foundations of modern society being deliberately damaged by policies driven by nihilists. Guy Alaska can live without modern industrial society. We can’t.
The idea of switching off “Scotland’s entire grid” sounds very attractive indeed, and no doubt would yield enormous environmental benefits.
Perhaps we might also ‘switch off’ the ludicrous Barnett Formula which keeps too many ungrateful Scots in clover.*
(*No pun intended.)
lol
lol
Thanks Neill,
Very interesting, and extremely concerning, but as you point out these major issues that have massive implications for society as a whole are simply not reported.
As we saw during Covid, the false narratives of the ruling class echoed by a compliant MSM are only half the problem, the other half is the failure to report news that does not support the narratives.
I live in Australia, and having seen the issues of relying on unreliable renewables created across Europe, are ruling elites seem determined to follow the same path.
In addition making everyone switch to vehicles, and heat their houses with electric heat pumps, etc, makes the electrical grid a single point of failure for our whole society.
Great comment. I already agreed with you on this but thanks for fleshing out the case with these – very concerning – numbers.
The idea of switching off “Scotland’s entire grid” sounds very attractive indeed, and no doubt would yield enormous environmental benefits.
Perhaps we might also ‘switch off’ the ludicrous Barnett Formula which keeps too many ungrateful Scots in clover.*
(*No pun intended.)
Thanks Neill,
Very interesting, and extremely concerning, but as you point out these major issues that have massive implications for society as a whole are simply not reported.
As we saw during Covid, the false narratives of the ruling class echoed by a compliant MSM are only half the problem, the other half is the failure to report news that does not support the narratives.
I live in Australia, and having seen the issues of relying on unreliable renewables created across Europe, are ruling elites seem determined to follow the same path.
In addition making everyone switch to vehicles, and heat their houses with electric heat pumps, etc, makes the electrical grid a single point of failure for our whole society.
Great comment. I already agreed with you on this but thanks for fleshing out the case with these – very concerning – numbers.
In June 2023, Ofgem (the UK’s electricity market regulator) ruled that minimum grid inertia requirement will be reduced. This got no coverage in the news, and no doubt it might seem quite irrelevant to write about it here. Bear with me.
Grid inertia is what keeps the nation’s lights on when a power plant (or its connection to the grid) trips. Grid inertia supplies electrical power to the system for a few seconds to fill the gap and hold up the electrical frequency above 49.2Hz, enough time to restore a plant’s grid connection or bring online an alternative power plant. This is really important; if the electrical power gap is not closed in time, the grid collapses, and there is a blackout affecting millions. If, even just moments later, the electrical power gap is closed to allow the lights to go back on, they can’t be. You see, grid inertia is needed to switch the grid back on. Without grid inertia, you also can’t re-power the grid all at once. Without grid inertia you need to progressively re-connect parts of the grid. Scotland’s entire grid would take over a week to switch back on. That is for some homes, businesses, water plants and hospitals a week without electricity.
Ofgem recored its reason to reduce the minimum grid inertia requirement as follows: “operating a low inertia system is necessary in order to meet net-zero targets”. The minimum grid inertia requirement had to be lowered due to renewables, and will be further lowered as more renewables storage is added.
So what is the risk of one of these outages? Much depends on the weather, demand, where the trip occurs, and what back up plant is available. 49.2Hz is the magic number, and Ofgem estimate there is now a 1 in 10 years event likelihood of the grid frequency collapsing below this. It was 1 in 600 years in the 2000s. It will become more frequent as grid inertia is lowered again in the future.
A likelihood of 1 in 10 years makes it a near certainty large parts of the UK will be without power due to the difficulty of managing the renewables grid, and it may take weeks to reconnect some areas. That would be apocalyptic for those affected, breakdown of society type stuff. And this has been planned by those governing us.
The unease many of us feel about the future is real. Whether shutting fertiliser plants necessary for feeding half of us, or catastrophically weakening our electricity networks, we can see the very foundations of modern society being deliberately damaged by policies driven by nihilists. Guy Alaska can live without modern industrial society. We can’t.
After all the fun of 2020 and the failures of government and corporate America since, it seems like just about everybody is stocking up. Democrats are buying guns and ammo, city dwellers are buying generators, and rural people are trying to increase the self-sufficiently of their land. Everyone is buying food. It’s not a panic or anything like that. There is just a profound sense of unease about the future and it seems like no one in charge has even noticed.
Well that is a good thing. I have spent a lot of time in the Canadian remote wilderness and you learn a bit about reality. If you can’t find water you are immediately in a serious crisis. If you get soaked in rain and the temperature drops you have to get warm. Which can be really hard to do in some conditions. We live in an earthquake zone and it amazes me how few people have done even modest preparations to be self sufficient.
My acupuncturist has bought herself a pistol as well as a shotgun
Well that is a good thing. I have spent a lot of time in the Canadian remote wilderness and you learn a bit about reality. If you can’t find water you are immediately in a serious crisis. If you get soaked in rain and the temperature drops you have to get warm. Which can be really hard to do in some conditions. We live in an earthquake zone and it amazes me how few people have done even modest preparations to be self sufficient.
My acupuncturist has bought herself a pistol as well as a shotgun
After all the fun of 2020 and the failures of government and corporate America since, it seems like just about everybody is stocking up. Democrats are buying guns and ammo, city dwellers are buying generators, and rural people are trying to increase the self-sufficiently of their land. Everyone is buying food. It’s not a panic or anything like that. There is just a profound sense of unease about the future and it seems like no one in charge has even noticed.
The subtitle says: “Americans are increasingly vanishing into the wilderness”. The article is entirely about one family from Michigan that moved to Alaska. There is not a single statistic in it to suggest they are part of an “increasing” number of people doing this. Nothing. Total clickbait BS. I find this really tiresome.
My wife lived in Alaska a number of years. She managed a bulk healthfood store in Anchorage that did a large business with the kind of people this article pretends to be about. I showed her the picture accompanying the article and she scoffed dismissively. “That’s a sports tourist up on a fishing trip. The guide took the picture. Look at those sunglasses. The cigarette. The clothes. The real off-the-grid people don’t look anything like that.” Her customers came in wearing homemade clothes, with beards and hair, smelled like they looked; they bought pallets full of supplies they loaded onto big ugly trucks. Once a year. She still has brothers and friends in Alaska. And their opinion is that the number of people trying to live “off the grid” there is diminishing, not increasing.
Makes me wonder if this “environmental scientist and co-founder of the Rizoma Field School” has even been to Alaska. Their website says they are in Uruguay. Why not write about that? Sounds interesting. But surely off the grid in a climate like Uruguay is going to work a little better than in most of Alaska.
And the part where she lists all the things things he’s built in the last 2 yrs. How does someone with absolutely no money build a 75 sq meter cabin in that timeframe. I do lots of homesteading type projects and it’s not cheap to plant a hayfield or create a garden when you’re just getting started.
Too much animus but the points are valid
editor will have chosen the title.
And the part where she lists all the things things he’s built in the last 2 yrs. How does someone with absolutely no money build a 75 sq meter cabin in that timeframe. I do lots of homesteading type projects and it’s not cheap to plant a hayfield or create a garden when you’re just getting started.
Too much animus but the points are valid
editor will have chosen the title.
The subtitle says: “Americans are increasingly vanishing into the wilderness”. The article is entirely about one family from Michigan that moved to Alaska. There is not a single statistic in it to suggest they are part of an “increasing” number of people doing this. Nothing. Total clickbait BS. I find this really tiresome.
My wife lived in Alaska a number of years. She managed a bulk healthfood store in Anchorage that did a large business with the kind of people this article pretends to be about. I showed her the picture accompanying the article and she scoffed dismissively. “That’s a sports tourist up on a fishing trip. The guide took the picture. Look at those sunglasses. The cigarette. The clothes. The real off-the-grid people don’t look anything like that.” Her customers came in wearing homemade clothes, with beards and hair, smelled like they looked; they bought pallets full of supplies they loaded onto big ugly trucks. Once a year. She still has brothers and friends in Alaska. And their opinion is that the number of people trying to live “off the grid” there is diminishing, not increasing.
Makes me wonder if this “environmental scientist and co-founder of the Rizoma Field School” has even been to Alaska. Their website says they are in Uruguay. Why not write about that? Sounds interesting. But surely off the grid in a climate like Uruguay is going to work a little better than in most of Alaska.
I sincerely hope it works out for them. In the future we will all have to become far more self-reliant as the elites destroy our food supply.
I sincerely hope it works out for them. In the future we will all have to become far more self-reliant as the elites destroy our food supply.
Inconnu, great fish.
Inconnu, great fish.
Great stuff. For an English approach, see also Maximus Ironthumper’s charming Youtube channel.
Great stuff. For an English approach, see also Maximus Ironthumper’s charming Youtube channel.
Sounds romantic, I suspect the reality however is a miserable existence in such an environment. I’m a fan of the series ‘Alone’ which is set in places such as this and the participants usually tap out within 4-6 weeks emaciated. On that note there was a family in Colorado that tried this quite unprepared and unfortunately they all died.
https://coloradosun.com/2023/07/25/three-people-found-dead-at-colorado-campsite-sisters-14-year-old-boy/
Sounds romantic, I suspect the reality however is a miserable existence in such an environment. I’m a fan of the series ‘Alone’ which is set in places such as this and the participants usually tap out within 4-6 weeks emaciated. On that note there was a family in Colorado that tried this quite unprepared and unfortunately they all died.
https://coloradosun.com/2023/07/25/three-people-found-dead-at-colorado-campsite-sisters-14-year-old-boy/
Interesting article but this phrase really is extremely and absurdly loaded:
“those who are shackled by the ideology of mass affluence” !.
It is just about possible for a significant though still small minority to live this way in North America; it is completely impossible in Europe and the UK. OK, so it sounds more honest to advocate a drastic reduction in population to go with the lifestyle.