Making predictions is hard, especially about the future.

All of us in this peak oil/climate change/relocalisation/down shifting movement have decided to think carefully about the future based on what we can learn today and to make adjustments to our outlooks and attitudes and to our practical living arrangements.

But more and more commentators in the area are helping us to keep our heads and not rush to extremes. Sharon Astyk stands out as a champion for common sense. Even if we are all heading to some kind of apocalypse there is a real downside to making (or trying to make) all the possible preparations too far ahead of the ideal time. For example if someone had known in 1920 that the depression was coming in 1929, then they would get no particular benefit selling all their shares in 1921 and sitting on the sidelines for nearly a decade. Apart from that it is easy to totally exhaust and depress yourself by doing too much at once.

Everything goes through phases and changes, and we need to respond not too soon and not too late to reap the benefits. Trends can also veer off in very different directions. At the moment the world financial system is teetering and lurching between deflation and inflation. Both problems require different personal approaches to minimise the damage inflicted. The direction things go at any particular time basically results from the politically motivated decisions of a small number of people who are far beyond our influence. In such uncertain times we can do well by choosing to protect ourselves partially against both extremes and place a bet each way, rather than assuming we have perfect knowledge of the future. The results may be less spectacular than choosing a winner, but they are certainly more pleasing than picking a loser.

In the spirit of this I have recently started persuing a career in the electricity industry. Given electricity can be produced and consumed in so many ways I believe it will be the eventual winner in the struggle to power our civilisation. This bet for a "techno utopia" will be balanced by the remainder of my time going into my partially self sufficient farm that represents my bet for the "stone age". Real life will continue to shift and lurch between the two, but I will win at least partially either way. Investing in such a divergent way means I have a foot in the door to respond to either eventuality. If "techno-utopia" prevails then I have a chance to define myself as an expert in the field. If it all goes to hell I can quickly scale up from feeding ~1 person year round to feeding the 5-10 people in my entire family. In the immediate time my life is more diverse and I can enjoy both sides. Each type of toil is a holiday from the other. Realistically I may have to keep holding down an increasingly stressful and poorly paid job, so that the family can keep the farm, while coordinating the family themselves to grow their own food. Other alternative job targets are in the water system and agriculture public service. Doing a major career shift like this is always a chancy affair, so I have to cast a fairly wide net until someone gives me a chance.

A similar tactic pays when gardening in a changeable and changing climate when you are using little inputs. Water is the main variable in eastern Australia, so having the ability to rapidly shift between water loving/tolerant crops and dry tolerant ones is very useful. Even understanding that you shouldnt expect to grow perfect lettuce every year is a major step in allowing you to adapt as things develop without falling into despair.