It is my hypothesis that the winter of 2001 will be much worse than the winter of 2000.

The best way to think about this, (and to write about it) is to contrast the two.

Here are some examples:

In 1999, about 60% of Americans seemed to have heard about y2k, about 25-40% seemed to think that they should take some precautions. With the consensus that the problem was being worked on, most who did prepare only set aside a few extra days or weeks worth of provisions.

In 2000, about 99% of Americans will have heard about y2k, about 25-40% may have experienced some pretty scary events (like riots) or had to do without something like heating oil deliveries, food purchases, unleaded gasoline, paid employment, etc. With the consensus that there are still a lot of problems, a much larger fraction of the population will spend a much larger fraction of their disposable income buying up supplies for getting through the winter.

In 1999, the just in time economy purred along just fine. World trade was amazing. Companies were still making record profits. Almost everyone had jobs. Farmers were able to run at maximal productivity. Wish and it was fulfilled. Those preparing for a winter could still find goods and services even in late December.

In 2000, chronic logistical problems had created a just in case mentality. World trade was a trickle. The good companies were those who had only small losses. Many people did not have reliable jobs. Farmers were continually hard presses to find financing, fuel, and seed. A lot left to wish for. Those preparing for winter started in June.

Creative thinkers can find all sorts of comparisons...the end result is that the preparations of today should consider the fact that we should maybe be getting ready for 2 winters right now.

Thom

-- Thom Gilligan (thomgill@eznet.net), August 15, 1999

Answers

HI, Thom ! Congrates ! I think your thinking has begun to catch up to mine. But you should investigate those assumptions that 25-40% of the people can NOW (or ever could ) ' stock up ' for even this winter . Wrong, wrong, WRONG . JTI and farmers planting only what could sell THIS year ( they believed Billy & K. ) have sesaled our fates. Seed orders from overseas may not arrive in time AND may have been made on the assumption of ... " IT'S JUST A BUMP IN THE ROAD ". Get the picture ??? Eagle ( Got my NON hybrid seeds ; HAVE YOU ? )

-- Hal Walker (e999eagle@freewwweb.com), August 16, 1999.

I am the Exec. Dir. of two local non-profits serving agriculture. I have whined for a year, (to no avial,) trying to convince local and state leadership that y2k is not a hoax, that their businesses will be effected and that some of their equipment may malfunction due to imbedded system problems. To my knowledge, there has been very little attention paid to y2k in the production end of our industry.

To be fair, the last few years have been a regulatory and financial nightmare for ag. (It is as though family farms and ranches have been under intense seige.) I can understand that emphasis has been placed on the battles that mean survival this year.

I most lament the missed opportunities that might have been realized through an informed and proactive leadership in better times. Particularly, I would have liked to have seen a sea-change in California's acceptance of bio-diesel and greater support of and investment in cogeneration through conversion of agricultural bio-mass.

It is obvious that the availability of fuel will be a massive problem next year, as well as into the future. I can't help but feel that agriculture could have been a large part of the answer if R&D and investments could have been focussed in putting such solutions into place. Instead, we saw the California lobbyists working against us. I agree that 2001 will be a mean winter. I forsee a lot of very poor, cold and hungry people dependent upon shank's mare for transportation. To my mind this is criminal.

-- marsh (armstrng@sisqtel.net), August 16, 1999.

Thom,

I had not thought it through in the way you did, but I must say that your scenario sounds plausible to me. In fact, if it doesn't turn out that way I will be surprised. I had planned on a tough year in 2000 but I had not gotten it down to the specifics as you have. Thanks for those thoughts. I am going to adopt them now.

-- Gordon (gpconnolly@aol.com), August 16, 1999.

Thom,

Your point is well taken. We go into the new year reaping the fruits of a still operating transport system, with storehouses full of foodstuffs and this year's harvest not yet counted. How ever bad this winter is due to Y2K, any serious disruptions to agriculture and transport WILL see next winter make this one seem tame.

If the power grid fails for long enough to disrupt the production of fertilizer and other farm chemicals, if there's no fuel for transporting those products to farm, if the farmers get their seeds too late to plant on time, if there's no fuel to take crops to market, if the food processing plants can't run due to power or packaging shortages, if there are no people to run those plants, if there are no farmers because the government sends all the power to the cities this winter...

Y2K is going to be a one-two punch which many are not prepared for. Many people who are "prepping for Y2K" are concentrating on only the first hit; the rollover and its immediate aftermath. The second hit, the long term one is really where most of the suffering will come about.

Without long term preparations people are going to find out that they are woefully short of what it will take to survive. Getting thru whatever chaos rollover brings just means you've got to start a "normal" survival/pioneer lifestyle. Kinda like what the Pilgrims would have faced if the Mayflower had crashed against Plymouth Rock.

WW

-- Wildweasel (vtmldm@epix.net), August 16, 1999.

Wow, A lot of you are catching on to this idea.

To state it again in different terms - it is a double-whammy.

By the summer of 2000, it may be (1) a lot harder to reach levels of efficiency which we have today and (2) a lot more people may be trying to get their hands on things. In all scenarios higher than level 5, the "relative costs" of personally preparing for the winter of will be higher.

There is one obvious way to handle this, prepare for 10 years. Now, in some ways I am joking..it would be a waste money to buy 10 years worth of pinto beans or heating oil. But let me make the example more clear by using our home heating strategy:

Our house has an old fuel oil furnace that is almost up for replacement (it is certainly not very efficient) but it works fairly well. We have decided to supplement it with two wood burning stoves which cost us something to install and are inherantly more dangerous and work-intensive to use. The house has been equipped with a modest solar electric system (to run some lights and pumps). We have purchased a gas powered chain saw, an electric chain saw, and a couple hand saws for cutting 4-6" diameter logs. Now, if home heating oil is virtually unavailble for 10 years (or unaffordable to our family) we at least have the option of cutting firewood, even by hand. In a similar fashion, we didn't put in a big garden this year, but we did get seeds and we have the land to go larger if needed. But the only way for most of us to really have enough food is if the farmers are still able to get corn, soybeans, wheat, etc.

Back to the original posting on this thread. I pointed out two specific examples where I did point by point comparisons of 1999 and 2000 as related to the pending hardships of preparing for a winter. I would like to hope that other people posting to this string would offer some of their own....maybe Ed can use them in his book.

By the way, there may be reasons why late 2000 could be better...

like this one:

1999 - A small subset of the population was aware that the domino effect could put large numbers of people in serious trouble and although there were massive financial and physical resources available at-large during the year, there was such apathy in the populace that those who made sincere efforts at preparing were ridiculed and became frustrated to the point where they stopped sounding the alarm and in many cases gave up or reduced their preparations. They felt rather lonely.

2000 - The fact that the falling dominos could hurt was public knowledge and many people had experienced significant hardship. Even though there was a very limited amount of financial and physical resources available during the year the spirit of most people was to live frugally and save for the winter. Since most people realized that they could not make it alone, there was a lot of activity around preparing in groups which would support eachother and even though there was hunger, nobody who wanted to help had to feel lonely.

-- Thom Gilligan (thomgill@eznet.net), August 17, 1999.

One thing you forgot to mention is that the drought situation out East has done severe damage to many crops. Except for grains, which are monocultured in huge swaths of the Midwest, the US is on its way to being a net food importer. Nafta and Gatt have made it economical to ship produce from low wage countries like Mexico and Brazil. Look on a can of beef and it will likely be from Argentina. In the local stores here, you can find fresh lamb from New Zealand and lobster from Costa Rica, oranges from Brazil, and so on.

Most of the farming in the US is large monoculture, corporate farming. We still produce prodigious amounts of chicken and pork, but this comes from corporate hog and chicken farming for the most part. Bankruptcies in just a few, like Tyson Foods for instance, would reduce food output dramatically.

Also, we don't actually farm as great a variety of stuff as you might imagine. Out here in North Carolina, for instance, acidic soils and poor water percolation make it hostile for some crops such as barley or soybeans.

There is also the matter of chemical dependence. Few farmers spread manure anymore, which has to be 'fermented' before it can be used safely (for the water supply). Most use bottled nitrogen and chemical fertilizers. Without these and others such as pre-emergent herbicides and pesticides like Sevin, many acres of food would be destroyed or rendered unfit for anything but animal feed.

Our food chain from the farmer to the table is dependent on large corporations to an extent that makes y2k impacts in the food industry very scary. This could make the 2000 winter a challenge, much less '01.

Oh, and I forgot the hybrid seed issue. Hungry?

-- Forrest Covington (theforrest@mindspring.com), August 17, 1999.

In the difficult cases, I can see some hope for the winter of 2001 for the following reasons:

(1) Some critical infrastructure should be back up. In January/February of 2000, there won't have been enough time to repair, replace, or find alternatives to mission critical systems that failed. As time passes, alternatives and fixes will emerge.

(2) Government will intervene (this is definitely a two-edged sword). We may see rationing, drafts, and forced reallocations. Rationing could mean that everyone had some gasoline for critical/essential activities. On the other hand, price-fixing may mean that people are discouraged from creating new sources.

(3) While there may be some tendency to stock up on critical food supplies, petroleum products, etc., there will be a proportionate decrease in other expenditures. The critical supplies will probably increase in price (barring government fixed prices).

(4) There should be a substantial increase in local activities such as gardening, which should increase the local food supply. This would, in turn, reduce the demand pressure on the overall supply. This does presuppose that seeds are available. Since I think that some (albeit limited) distribution will be available, this seem logical. The mail will probably be slower, but I think that we will have some sort of mail service, for example.

(5) People will have adapted to some degree. Expectations will be lower.

Thus, I would believe that the winter of 2001 will be somewhat better for most people in the US than the winter of 2000. 2002 should be much better...

-- Mad Monk (madmonk@hawaiian.net), August 17, 1999.