[HARLAN] This is again about 'mitigation'
New ideasfrom Harlan Smith - very interesting! I recommend to read the whole articles.
John
_____
'....
The Perils of the Present Full Remediation Approach
Full Remediation is at High Risk of Failure, Leading us to Individual Survivalism
The reasons I strenuously object to the ideas of "individual survivalism" and "safe haven
alarmism" are as follows:
It focuses on abandonment of cities. Cities are not viable without the utility,
communication, transportation etc. infrastructures remaining viable. A city without a very
complex supporting infrastructure cannot function as a city or perhaps function to support
even a small part of its normal population.
This then implies that huge populations must move from the city to the country. While
perhaps possible, this would be an immense logistics challenge. It is not an option at all in
Europe.
Without countrywide coordination, that could only be accomplished by the Federal
Government and a lot of intense preparation, this concept could never work for the
majority of our population. Grass roots efforts, although worthy, will just not move fast
enough to cover more than a fraction of the population.
It ignores the fact that our present populations depend on a highly-computer-dependent
"food generation" capability, that would also have to be replaced with something very
different, also creating huge logistics problems. Possible but not likely.
It ignores the fact that if cities are abandoned and the teeming hordes flee to the
countryside, there will be no safe haven anywhere in the continental US.
It ignores the fact that all of us, and particularly those with serious medical problems, are
very dependent on sophisticated medical care and abandonment of our utility
infrastructure will pull the rug out from underneath our ability to maintain the capability to
provide this care.
It ignores the problem of providing medicines and drugs to those dependent on them for
survival and/or quality of life.
It does not provide a good recovery base in terms of utilities, personnel and complete
repair/remediation environment to restore our infrastructure.
It prematurely focuses on "contingency measures" (which are bordering on an
OXYMORON with regard to Y2K) as opposed to "mitigation" which is where almost all of
our energies should right now be concentrated.
It ignores the fact that we must maintain a robust economy and military infrastructure to
maintain protection from foreign predators.
It ignores the fact that we have built a Pandora's Box of nuclear, chemical and biological
hazard sites and only the presence of a vital infrastructure keeps the lid on that box. We
have set ourselves up for this and we are stuck with it.
In Summary:
Remediation - repair it, so it will continue to function as it does now. We don't have time
to complete this project.
Mitigation - find weak spots and modify the infrastructure to be less brittle and more
resistant to failure. Provide substitutes for elements of our infrastructure most likely to fail.
(FEMA equivalent -- move populations out of the flood plane)
Contingency Preparation - develop backup capability that will be used when the normal
infrastructure breaks (FEMA equivalent - feed, clothe, house people after they are flooded
out.)
We're locked into maintaining some good semblance of our present infrastructure. Without
precluding contingency preparation, the majority of our energies should be focused on
"Mitigation" as that will be the easiest and most feasible method of sustaining our population and
providing a recovery base to build back to our present infrastructure capabilities.
We could dispense with a lot of frills for 2 or 3 years or however long it takes, but we can't turn
our back on our infrastructure. We need a well-orchestrated, intensely-cooperative effort applied
to "mitigation". Fleeing to the countryside is not a viable solution for the majority and likely not a
solution for anyone.
...
scotsystems.com |
