So does running water include bottled water, water in other things, etc?
I would choose running water because I can shower other places. Even if that's not allowed, I'd still choose it.
Last edited by Agoonga; 2012-11-28 at 11:54 AM.
The only good choice here is #1. 2 is not an option to give up, electricity is highly useful and fossil fuels are generally used to create electricity, so I think I'd rather cut out one source of electricity than cut it out altogether.
I voted electricity, but after thinking about this a little more, I think I made the wrong choice. Probably should have voted fossil fuels.
I voted for fossil fuels. I live next to a river full of salmon and loads of forest wildlife. Getting food wont be much of a problem.
Stove and oven are both electric, as are all the heaters in my house. With running water I can even have hot bath (boiling water in a kettle) and everything.
Sound good enough for me. Sure, the car wont be running for a year, but then at least I might lose a few kilos :P
i5 2500K | Gigabyte GeForce GTX 760 2GB | 2x4GB Kingston HyperX 1600MHz
Combustable Gases & Fossil Fuels.
We have a fireplace here, and plenty of wood that would keep us warm and let us boil water and wash. I would be just fine getting by on a Bike, as the local stores in the Village are almost as good as supermarkets. I'm also fairly fit, so running and walking a lot to get what I needed would be no issue for me.
Except the oven, I already live without 1. I have electric heaters and walk a lot or take tram/subway. So, getting an electric oven isn't such a big deal.
Running water, I don't understand how anyone can answer any other. There's always water in the stores you can buy, you don't need running water of your own for that. Yea, I wouldn't bother washing every day and it would be smelly but it would be okay. Without fossil fuels I'd probably die to starvation like everyone else around me.
Yes, giving up fossils would be best in the long run, but considering that the topic sounds more like a sudden choice, I don't consider it to be a viable option at all. Basically there would be no food in your local store. Most of the electricity in your area is probably also fueled by those, so good luck having any heating during winter. And so forth.
So many people here seem to forget that big part of their electricity comes from gas/fossil fuels.
running water. i could always go to the store and get bottled water
Probably running water. I would just stock up on bottled water, and the only other thing I would have to worry about would be finding a place to take regular showers. If I got desperate, I suppose I could always settle for a lake or river.
The answer has to be running water. Why? Because, without fossil fuels, there will be a HUGE electricity shortage. Without electricity, you cannot have running water.
So yeah, it has to be running water.
But electricity is produced with "Combustible Gases + Fossil Fuels"... and they're also used to run the process that gives most of us running (clean) water, nevermind food, and everything else that society depends upon. You also couldn't ride your bike, built as it is out of materials created with the use of those products, nevermind assembled, and shipped around the world, and...
"Running water" isn't anywhere even close to in the same league as the other two.
"Why make trillions when we could make... billions??"
I can't decide, mainly because all those are connected to each other. If one goes down, all go down and society as we know it will collapse. Better question would be:
no hot running water
no electric thingies
0/2 = 0 , ∞/2 = ∞
2/0 = error , 2/∞ = error
0*2 = 0 , ∞*2 = ∞
I almost have no running water here in China. I have to wash my veggies in bottled water for safety. I'm sure I could sponge bath for a year with no issue at all. Same with gas. So many eatieres near me I could get takeout for a year and eat raw foods. Guess I could be a double threat!
My Cracked articles, writing blog, and Twitter.
The problem with the internet is parallel to its greatest achievement: it has given the little man an outlet where he can be heard. Most of the time however, the little man is a little man because he is not worth hearing.
Want to chat with people who aren't idiots? Join our IRC.
Out of the three, realistically, probably running water.
City so fossil fuels are kinda needed to get access to food (Farmers Market only are around about 6 months out of the year, and even then they are transported from farms technically.)
Electricity is necessary as well, city and the like, no wood burning or the like here.
Water I would have to make due with sponge baths and bottled water, but it would be livable, if a bit annoying.
Uh, I'm going to go all nitpicky about this.
If you take the "no combustible gases & fossil fuels" rule to it's logical conclusion, I'd reckon for a lot of countries that would mean no electricity and no running water either. For example the US produces something like 70% of it's electricity with the aforementioned fuels. Take them out of the equation and the entire infrastructure falls apart.
Then again "no electricity" would essentially mean the same thing, given how all modern combustion engines rely on electricity (batteries, sparkplugs) and the water distribution system relies on it at some point as well (I'm pretty sure).
So the only option that doesn't practically include all other options as well is running water.
To do a proper poll, you'd need to list exactly what you give up with each option. Because as it stands, the absence of either electricity or fuels means you'd die pretty quickly, because no one has any means to get you your food. Also, no electricity means no fuels, and vice versa. That is if you consider the whole chain.
Lol if you get rid of fossil fuels you also get rid of electricity.