Ragnorak…

After reading the article thoroughly three times, and referring to various websites (NOAA, USGS, NCDC, NRC, and FEMA) for more in depth data, I find the contents of the article as presented by Ebert and Roensch to be extremely valid regardless of your climatic environment.

When one takes into accout the scientific studies clearly showing the ever increasing speed at which our environment is changing (whether from natural causes, man-made influences, or both, is really irrelevant at this juncture in our civilization’s history)… then it is best to assume that there are NO geological locations left on the planet which will be able to provide the security of “year-round temperatures (that) are livable.”

We’ve all seen how the weather patterns are changing, becoming more harsh and abrupt, with little forewarning, and bringing forth numerous hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, tsunamis, and other catastrophic devastation in frequencies and proportions the likes of which we in this era are not accustomed to… it is for that reason, and the current socio-economic decline the world is experiencing, that we should all pray for the best but plan for the worst.

Weather aside, which itself is hard enough to prepare for, the threat of energy depletion and growing civil unrest in many countries makes it pertinent that we as a society take any and all measure to equip our homes and our families appropriately if we are to survive these changes on the horizon and maintain our humanity.

Indeed, I commend the author and his guest for sharing their opinions and knowledge with their readership… knowledge is best honored when it is shared freely, and used as the recipient finds beneficial.

Respectfully,
JP

For example, it is not so that “off-the-grid” MUST equal well insulated. A good number of your 29 points assume an unfriendly climactic environment. There are a great many people living off the grid in places where this is simply not a concern – where year-round temperatures are livable. Which IS something to consider for those who are thinking about doing this and have the luxury of being able to relocate.

Then there is the issue of minimizing footprint (by going double story as you suggest) versus maximizing rainwater collection potential. These two concepts are in opposition. The smaller the roof the less rainwater you’ll collect. The bigger the roof the more heat you’ll lose. The appropriate choice would depend on local conditions. For my circumstances the answer is most definitely to have a single story with a large roof and BIG water tanks.

And yes, it is very possible to use rain-tank water for drinking and cooking if you take a little care with it.

But those issues aside I want to thank you for some really great tips.