Repair Cafés

The vegan to ecofascist pipeline

Plant Cuttings!

Most plants can be grown from cuttings meaning that, if you know what you’re doing, they’re a great way to rapidly grow a whole garden full of plants. Or a whole house full, if you’d prefer. 

The simplest type are stem cuttings, but many plants can be regrown from other parts like leaves or roots too. As long as there are stem cells in the cutting it’s possible to, with some care, regrow a full plant. In practice, how easy this is depends on the specific plant – but it never hurts to try!

So here are a bunch of how-to resources for anyone who wants to know more.

Basic how-to guide

More basic info

Detailed advice

Taking summer cuttings

Taking root cuttings

Taking leaf cuttings

Taking tip cuttings

Taking hardwood cuttings

Using potatoes to grow cuttings

Some plants which grow well from stem cuttings

Here are some random ideas of things to do with cuttings…

Buy a rose bush. The good ones like damask roses can be expensive, but that’s ok. Prune it extensively and plant the stems as cuttings. You’ll soon have a whole host of rose bushes! The same thing goes for any other bush or tree. Plant yourself an apple orchard or a raspberry grove!

Buy fresh herbs. Cook with the leaves. Save aside the stems. Grow them as cuttings. Create a herb garden in your windowsill.

Going out for a walk? Carry a small jar in your bag with some damp tissue in the bottom, and a small pair of study scissors. If you see any wild plants or trees you like the look of, snip off a small stem (from somewhere discrete!) and keep it in the jar. Grow it as a cutting when you get home. (Note: I’d advise against doing this in gardens, parks, or other privately owned areas. Technically, that’s theft.)

Grow kitchen scraps. 

When you buy potatoes, check them for sprouts. Sprouting potatoes can be cut up into pieces, so each piece has at least one sprout or eye. Leave them overnight to dry off a little, then plant them. Soon you’ll have a whole potato patch. Just like Mark Watney. 

If a friend has an interesting plant in their garden/home/office/wherever, ask them if you can take a small cutting. Most people won’t mind.

If there are trees or shrubs in your garden, you’ll probably need to prune them occasionally. Grow the pruned stems and branches as hardwood cuttings. If you don’t have space for more trees in your garden, they make good gifts once they’re established.

I… I spend a lot of time talking to my husband about climate change. 

Politics being what it is, I feel like societal change is where I can find hope.  And hey, if we all start making choices based on preparing for an oil-free world, we can actually make oil obsolete!

[On AO3]

7 reasons why solarpunk is the most important speculative fiction movement in the last 20 years

It’s hopeful. Solarpunk doesn’t require an apocalypse. It’s a world in which humans haven’t destroyed ourselves and our environment, where we’ve pulled back just in time to stop the slow destruction of our planet. We’ve learned to use science wisely, for the betterment of ourselves and our planet. We’re no longer overlords. We’re caretakers. We’re gardeners.

Scientists are heroes again. And not just physicists and astronomers. Knowledge of biology and earth sciences matter, they’re the building blocks for a future on Earth. Scientific literacy isn’t just for academics – it’s part of daily life. People know how the things they use work, and if they don’t, they can access that information. 

It’s diverse. Solarpunk is rooted in using the environment, so it looks different in different places. Alternative energy is best when specific to place (I imagine geothermal, wind, tidal, and hydroelectric energy sources are still used in certain places) so no overarching government system is needed. Communities can organize themselves, taking their own location and needs and history into account. Brazilian, Inuit, Egyptian, Pacific Northwest, and New Zealand solarpunk can all look very different, but be unified in resourceful, intentional, low impact living.

Individuality still matters. In a post-scarcity society, ingenuity and self-expression are not sacrificed on the altar of survival. With solar power there’s no reason not to go off grid, if that’s what you want to do. Communities can self-organize. You can find a community that suits you, or go live by yourself if that floats your boat.

There’s room for spirituality and science to coexist. Solarpunk is rooted in a deep understanding and reverence for natural processes. There’s room for spirituality there, be it pagan, Buddhist, Sufi, Transcendentalism – anything. There’s so much to explore, from nature worship to organized monotheistic religions, and how they interact with solarpunk.

It’s beautiful. The most common solarpunk aesthetic is art nouveau, but again there’s room for diversity, incorporating art styles from multiple cultures in respectful, non-appropriative ways. The most important aspect of solarpunk aesthetic is the melding of art and utility. The idea of intentional living is strong in art nouveau, but it’s not the only art movement with that philosophy.

We can make it happen. Now. Earthships. Permaculture. Aquaponics. Algae lighting. Compostable products that turn into fields of flowers. Buy Nothing organizations. Tiny, beautiful, efficient homes. Solar power cells you can see through. That’s all happening now. Solarpunk is within our grasp, at least on a personal level. I’m not saying there aren’t still big, ugly infrastructures devoted to unethical consumption, but we can start to tear them down. We can build a solarpunk world with stories and small changes. And small changes lead to big changes. That’s the real beauty of solarpunk. It’s not a post-apocalyptic power fantasy. It’s not a wistful daydream, or an elite future only for physicists. It’s something we can work towards right now. It’s tangible.

What if, instead of tropical fish tanks, you had a live video stream of a section of coral reef? Every time you “fed” the fish, it would be a button you clicked to donate to the reef’s protection. As more you “feed” the fish, you’re granted more access to other reefs. And nightvision cameras are included so you can see your wild pets at night too without disturbing them with harsh lighting.

Perfect for folks like me who love fish, but do not love cleaning tanks.

In all honesty, I’m assuming a 4-5% polling error in Trump’s favor. People have dismissed the “Shy” Trump voter. But, here’s the thing on that, I think someone in the burbs who wants to keep a reputation and all that and after everything that’s happened in the Trump Presidency (especially this past year), do you think they’d be going out and loudly declaring their love for Trump or even telling a pollster that? I think when these people get into the privacy of a voting booth (or the comfort of their own home for a mail in ballot), their ideology, partisanship, and/or reactionary tendencies will override and they’ll vote for Trump. They’ll save face at MacKaeylynanie’s Soccer practice (or zoom equivalent) and say they aren’t voting for Trump, because it’s embarrassing for them, but they’ll do it anyway.

So 4-5% in Trump’s favor. Enough to move Pennsylvania and Florida to Trump, but not Michigan or Wisconsin. And I think that’s really where we are. A coin flip. 

I think more people left of the American center need to do this. You need to mentally prepare yourself now on the very real possibility of a Trump win. I’m serious, I’m genuinely afraid for someone of y’all’s mental health if this breaks bad. 

Why Walkable Streets are More Economically Productive

3 dollars and cents arguments that definitively prove the need for people-oriented, walk-friendly places.

What is the value of a street where people can walk safely? Why build streets that are constructed with the needs of people in mind, not just the needs of cars?

   “Again and again, when we look at streets oriented toward people we find that they are more economically productive than any other style of development.”  

Many people concerned with pedestrian safety and “walkability” care about these issues because they feel that walking is good exercise or that walkable places are more attractive or that walking is better for the environment than driving.

These are all valid arguments and may convince some of those reading this article that walkability is important. But what I want to talk about today isn’t an argument based on values or aesthetics. It’s an argument based on pure dollars and cents — one that should convince people with a myriad of values and political leanings that people-oriented places must be a priority if we want our communities to be economically prosperous.

Again and again, when we look at streets oriented toward people — that is, streets where walking is safe and enjoyable, that people are drawn to visit on foot, and where fast and extensive car traffic is not the #1 priority — we find that they are more economically productive than any other style of development. This is particularly true when we compare people-oriented places to car-oriented places—think of that stretch of your town that effectively does everything possible to discourage walking and biking, including a street with multiple wide lanes to ensure fast car movement, acres of parking, and minimal (if any) sidewalks, bike lanes and crosswalks.

Walkable streets, on the other hand, encourage business activity, generate greater tax revenue per acre and offer a higher return on investment than auto-oriented streets.

The reason "We (USamericans) should reduce our personal consumption of resources to save the planet!" won't change anything, is that there is no "we."

The average American does X amount of unnecessary shopping, but collapsing the wide range of wealth inequality into an average creates a vague call to action that sufficiently motivates 0 people.

Poor people feel guilty about buying stuff already. Even essential stuff. They have very little ability to adjust the amount they consume, and any adjustments that are possible would be almost negligible.

The moderately affluent and up vastly overestimate the impact of small adjustments to their lifestyle, and think of denying themselves any indulgence as extreme frugality. This is often the group that uses the "we" pronoun in the statement "We should consume less."

Most of the USA's carbon emissions come from heating and cooling and from cars. Since homelessness is treated as a crime, houses are not made sustainably or constructed smaller than a certain size, and it is virtually impossible to work or obtain basic needs without a car, there is a very solid and nearly impenetrable bottom to the scale of individual consumption.

So much consumption is near 100% impossible to opt out of, which means of course that the money that goes to it is never really yours, it just happens to pass through you on its way to its true destination.

This is obscured by the fact that the more privileged can ride a cushioned elevator below that bottom, play for as long as it takes for them to feel good about themselves, and take the elevator back up, and then write an article saying "See! I lived on 3 cents a day/lived in a 100sqft house/didn't use electricity for a week, and here's what I learned!"

Sure, you tried living a frugal life for a while. But you never doubted that the elevator would be there to take you back when you were tired of playing. You never felt the Fear. That's why you learned nothing.

considering doing the 100 days of productivity to help me get back into the swing of university 🤔🤔 anyone wanna share tips?