Onionman

Before about ten thousand years ago, the conveyor used to stop regularly and there were swings in average European temperatures of 10deg C or so on a regular (couple of thousand year or so) basis. There's a good reason to believe that the stable nature of climate since then (due to a historically unusual stability in the North Atlantic Conveyor) allowed the growth of farming and civilisation in Northern Europe. In short, it's normal behaviour for the Gulf Stream to collapse regularly - we live in an unusually stable time. And climate change runs a small risk of tipping us back into instability.

It's fascinating to me that people are so one-sided on a subject like this. I'm old enough to remember British people in the 1990s travelling across to Belgium (in particular) to buy cars because all the manufacturers charged more for cars sold in the UK than in Europe. Then the bad old, nasty old EU stepped in and made it illegal for car manufacturers to do so. It's a decision that has probably saved UK consumers tens of thousands of pounds over the past twenty years (even if you buy used cars, the price has been depressed throughout the period by the lowered cost of new cars). That was a judgment where countries' rules were overruled by the joint sovereignty of the EU, completely and utterly to our benefit. But that's all in the past and conveniently forgotten when something like this doesn't go our way. No, it's the nasty old EU that never gives us nothin'. Just saying...

It's a recoloured photo so the proportions are unchanged from reality.

Glad you like it - I do! Mrs Onionman is a graphic designer. She took the pic and did an astounding amount of work in photoshop to get it to look right. She's a huge fan of the old railway posters, you know the kind.

The current Mrs Onionman made this faux 1920's travel style poster for me from our last holiday. Thought I'd share it...

CO2 forced global warming on Venus took it to 460 degrees C. Closer to the sun, but not much. The science is settled. The peripheral details may not be (they rarely are in science) but man made climate change is real.

I do have them occasionally. I'd say Tony's book is the best of the introductory books I've read; genuinely enjoyable just as a read in itself.

I speak as a non-owner (yet). If you look at managed boat share sites, often they'll have a detailed breakdown of annual running costs for their boats. You can knock off their management fee and you're left with the cost of running a boat that's in the water, being used pretty solidly, for 48 weeks a year. If you're only going to do 4 weeks a year you can work out which of the costs are pro-rata and which not. In "The Narrowboat Guide" by Tony Jones (a very readable guide), in 2016, he wrote that a survey of 13 respondents with different profiles came out at an average of £6,826. Were I buying a whole boat I'd put £8K a year aside and hope that we'd build up a surplus over time.

What do you want the politicians to do? The evidence is that population growth is slowing rapidly. Plenty of overseas aid funds go to birth-control measures. They also go to help people out of poverty (something that massively affects birth rates) yet many of the same people who complain about overpopulation also complain about Britain spending money on overseas aid. Who'd be in politics?

I find it's always best to deal with the world as is it, not as I would wish it to be.

Can't be done, I'm afraid; the universe doesn't let you get away with that particular trick. Some energy must be lost.

I've read that the added losses from running an electric motor as well as a diesel generator are more than compensated for by the fact that you can run the generator part of the setup at its most fuel-efficient speed. I certainly know that this was the thinking behind diesel-electric trains. Unfortunately the articles I've found on the subject have been too deeply technical so I have to take that headline at face value.

These guys might be worth a call: http://www.plasticwatertanks.co.uk/35.html

Thanks to you all for some excellent suggestions. I see it as a way to go from our occasional weeks to a cheap few years with the kids then a way to test the water with Mrs Onionman to see if four weeks away is blissful (as we hope) or puts us at risk of killing one another (I'm fine, she's the weird one). I wouldn't mention the possibility that we might sell soon; after all, four weeks a year might just turn out to be what we need long-term. I hadn't thought about the "learning maintenance" benefits of private shares but I can see it could teach us a great deal - also the reduced cost appeals. I'd written off private ownership by means of a decision a few weeks ago that had led me down that path. We dropped that requirement but I seem to have been mentally stuck with it. So private is definitely an option. Plenty to look at!

After yet another excellent hired narrowboat break (this time along the Kennet & Avon) we're looking to buy a share in a boat. In the long-term, Mrs Onionman and I see ourselves spending a great deal of time on a boat. I run a business that requires me to be at home for three weeks out of six and we think we might end up with two of the three "free" weeks on board. In that period, I'd need access to a laptop for about an hour a day along with phone and internet access. Then when retirement beckons (six or seven years) plenty of time on the water. In the short term, however, our kids are in the last couple of years of school so we ideally need school holiday dates for our trips. So, we're considering a 12th share in one of the many boats offered by Carefree (largely because they offer school holiday shares which would guarantee us a fortnight in the summer). In a couple of years when the kids have gone, I see us possibly sticking with a share for another year. If at the point we're chafing for more time we'll look to buy a boat and sell the share. If we're finding ourselves not using it, we'll probably consider selling the share and not buy a boat. If we just like doing four or so weeks a year we'll keep the share. I don't know how unusual it is to think of buying a share for maybe only three years. Can anyone see any particular pitfalls with taking that approach? Thanks.