Building living structures
Houses in cancerous society are generally too wasteful and built on anthropocentric principles, replacing wildlife and healthy environments with artificial, domesticated life and sterile
environments. That's bad.
A living house, precursor
Even while I was expressing polarized behavior I always liked wooden houses. I thought concrete houses are ugly, screaming with artificial crafting, colours and carefully guarded but wasted and dead
spaces in between calm natural greenery.
Now that I am conscious of my nature, I know why I felt that way. Houses built out of wood, soil and natural rock are generally non-cancerous and can be truly sustainable and non-expensive, compared
to expensive and sustainable or green houses made out of artificial materials.
Of course, depending on your desires, a wooden house can be more expensive than a concrete one, but that is only due to inverted values in society - sure, it is cheaper to buy an
industrial tomato than a homegrown one, but is it better and is it really cheaper in the long term? To eat subsidized chemically treated taste-lacking thing grown as a mono-culture on killed
wildlife? That's not cheaper, that's suicidal (it is cheaper, only because it is stimulated). The same goes for housing.
In any case, if you want sustainable living, you want symbiosis with environment and as much in situ production and waste consumption as possible.
If you want to build a sustainable house you should not think of it as a construction (modern constructions are generally contraptions), rather something that grows and adopts to you as much as
you grow and adopt to it.
A house of wood
If you're gonna make a house of wood, it should be made out of older trees. Old trees
radiate more CO2 than they absorb, so if you cut them down, you are killing them but you are not doing damage to the eco-system (this is why wild-fires in thick old forests are
good - they enable new young and CO2 absorbing trees to grow). Of course, sometimes this might require that you also plant some trees, in order to keep the system in balance (or restore
balance, as in current climate).
If you don't like killing trees, even old ones, you can try finding old and wounded ones, these might be easier for you to take, but trees are strongly introverted organisms, they do not fear
death and it is highly unlikely they feel physical deformation as strong pain (they are likely a precursor to hair). Even so, you may opt out to collect already dead trees, but you will probably
want to mix these with something else (soil) to build a house. It's good to search for dead trees after a storm, as there will usually be good wood lying around.
No need to use wood to build a sustainable house, ie. healthy and beautiful houses can
also be built using cob, adobe, rammed earth or straw bale.
And if such house is more expensive to construct than one out of concrete or anything similar, you are being cheated.
I find the best location for a sustainable house on a hill, or a mountain. It is more windy, which is healthy for the environment and it enables you to keep the air in your house fresh, with no need
for constant opening of doors and windows. Wooden walls also help here, keeping indoor air at good quality.
But this location is good for other reasons too - wastewater disposal.
Ideally, a water source should be nearby.
Suppose that your house is on a hill, up north.
If the forest is just south of your house (if not, you should plan to grow a small forest south or south-west, south-east of your house), it would be good for your waste disposal channels to lead
to this patch of land - this is where your feces, urine and other waste water should go (anything not rich in chemicals that badly affect wild-life).
In order to prevent piling up of waste, the leading channel should be split into multiple smaller channels leading to different parts of the land (1 channel per inhabitant should be enough, at least
in case of healthy inhabitants).
The channels may start underground from your house, but the waste should exit on land surface.
It takes 1 (one!) day for your standardly excreted faeces to be absorbed by the land on a healthy forest floor.
If you live sustainably, there should be no garbage in your waste. Everything should be bio-degradable within a reasonable time-frame, synchronized with production - ie. if you produce and
consume 10 products in a month, the waste from these 10 products should be gone (degraded) within a month - increasing accumulation of anything should not be an option.
Anything that has a big impact on environment should not be an option. A working wind turbine is affecting birds, insects and [important!] wind circulation patterns. Anything affecting birds and
insects is further affecting those who depend on them and due to universal entanglement of life, this can have far-reaching consequences. Generally, the larger wind turbine is the
more cost-effective it is, but again, the cost here is cost in absolute money, not long-term [or any] cost of impact on environment (life).
If you want a wind turbine, make sure it is cost-effective not cost-effective. If you're unsure of it, do not build one.
The similar can be applied to solar panels - they might not have a large impact on larger wildlife, but whatever you cover with solar panels you're preventing solar energy to interact with, and you
are affecting climate. The key is to be conscious of the magnitude of impact and is it cost-effective (sustainable in the long-term).
Solar panels as part of roof structure might sound good, but solar panels are also expensive and inefficient - it is better to cover your roof with soil and let plants grow there, providing you with
cheap but good isolation.
Don't use electricity where it's not needed. You should not be afraid to use your body parts to do some occasional work if you don't want to loose them completely.
Electricity from direct currents (such as those provided by solar panels) should mainly be used in electronic devices. Do not use large and
noisy machines (noise is a very underestimated factor when it comes to quality of life) - remember, if you are in a hurry, if you make jobs out of work, you're likely cancerous. You should not
have to work a lot, you should do satisfying work, not have, or strive to have a lot of space and material possessions for which you don't have time to care for.
If you're not cancerous your electricity demands will generally be low and could probably be satisfied with one small-scale low-impact electricity source or a combination of such sources.
To me, an ideal electricity source would be a small wooden turbine on spring water, with no forced accumulation of water.
While, a fusion reactor might be the ideal source of electricity, for now, too much brute force is still required to get something usable. While I am sure that
relativity to fusion reactor designs can improve the yield, I am not sure any more if that
energy source can be cost-effective for us or our scale of life. Sustainable energy source should not require so much brute force - if it does, then it certainly was not meant for us, but
for larger scale life-forms, such as the Sun. Sustainable energy sources are generally provided by your god organism (Earth, in our case).
However, it cannot be ruled out that a way to create and sustain fusion reactions more easily won't be found. I am still doing experiments with low-energy reactions.
In any case, high energy, thermo-nuclear fusion reactions are not meant for us and it is highly unlikely these will ever be cost-effective for humans.
In extremely cancerous society nothing is produced in situ. Everything is separated into specialized departments and there is no holistic approach to problem solving.
However, without such approach problems are rarely solved, more commonly, new problems are introduced - they are just not labelled as problems, rather as new jobs.
In such society no one is concerned about food when building a house. The values are so inverted that people care least for things they need the most.
If you don't want to be cancerous you will have to think a lot about food - how is it produced and where it comes from. You will want your food to be produced as close to your house as
The industry has taught you that it is hard to produce food. And that is true - as long as you keep poisoning the land and producing food primarily for profit.
But there are much easier, better and cheaper ways to produce food and you
should not be afraid to try them.
I am aware that most of us are already used not to do diverse work and most of us know least about food production. But that doesn't have to be a problem - it is not inherently bad to
specialize and not worry about food production, but you should care about its sustainability. Thus, not even industry has to be bad. As long as it doesn't care about profits and unlimited
growth it can be sustainable.
In any case, even if you don't think food production is something you could do, it would be good to try it - you might find it actually does make you happy. In fact, you might find that working
10 times more so you can afford the thing that looks perfect but has no taste (or has too much taste but low useful energy so it creates addiction rather than satisfaction) does not
make a lot of sense anymore.
Like a truly green and healthy house, truly green and healthy food is cheap to produce. If it is not cheap - you are being cheated. Perhaps not directly by the seller, but by your self - because
you have allowed the industry, government and banks to make you a fool.
Heating and cooking
Your house should be well isolated so you don't use a lot of energy on heating. If you build your house with thick walls using natural materials, you won't need a lot of energy for heating.
You can collect and burn dead wood or even chop old wood (as long as the eco-system remains in balance).
If one is still not convinced that all current green
production and care
about the climate and the planet are not fake, one just needs to take a look at how long we are aware of
problems and how we are still [not] solving them.
In 1975., almost 50 (!) years ago, M. Fukuoka, after decades of practice and experiments, has found a way to produce
natural (quality) food in simple, cheap and sustainable green way
that can satisfy the needs of all humanity for food.
He was ignored 50 years ago and likes of him are still ignored today - why? Because cancerous industry does not need a solution, the policy of unlimited economic growth requires creation of new
problems and new jobs.
When you read a book written 50 years ago and it feels like it was written tomorrow, then what is that progress everyone talks about?
Once a solution that works is found, anything beyond is not progress, you can call it modern and new, but calling it progress is a delusion. Sometimes, to progress, is to realize that further
progression is futile.
A lot of people own large [and often fenced] pieces of land which are unused (or used for mono-cultures) but where the grass is regularly trimmed and trees are not allowed to grow.
This is an enormous waste and non-sense if one wants to live sustainably. Growing forest on that piece of land would do wonders for you and other life.
You really should not be obsessed with cleaning, anything - it is simply unhealthy. If you don't use artificial chemicals anywhere, most if not all of your cleaning can be done using plain
water and natural materials.
I drink my water from the same glass for at least a month, although I do keep the glass with water in a fridge. I generally eat soup daily, but the pot and the spoon I use for it are washed
every 7 days or so - I simply cover the pot so flies don't get in there, but I see no reason for these to be washed every day.
It all depends on what you eat, but there is generally no need to constantly wash the dishes and do so thoroughly, it is generally better (cost-effective) not to do any cleaning thoroughly.
I have never been sick due to these habits and it is highly unlikely this ever had a bad effect on my health, more likely, it helps to keep me healthy. I am, generally, hardly ever sick. The
biggest problem I had with my health was skin allergy, which I have successfully solved once I have renounced polarized cancerous behaviour. Now, it only seldom appears in case I don't get
enough sleep, but, due to low intensity, it's not really an issue. And it seems even this low intensity is decreasing. Anyway, I'm sure it would be completely gone if I would move away from
cancerous humanity, closer to wild-life.
Cancerous individuals are diseases and attract diseases, perhaps that is why they can be obsessed with cleaning, but if you don't want to be cancerous, you will have to stop behaving like you
are eventually. And it is better to stop sooner than later, because it only gets harder.
Wood, rock and clay may not be the best materials for some constructions. But one should not be deceived with 100% recyclable materials. Aluminium is, for example, almost 100% recyclable, but mining
and extracting aluminium from ore is generally very environmentally expensive. Extraction of bits of material from tons of ore as part of an industrial process cannot ever
be environmentally friendly.
Therefore, if you believe you need a different material, it is not good to dig deep in search of it. Digging deep holes into tissue, muscle and bone is something
cancer does. Make it simple - materials (minerals, rocks) and fluids deep down surely do have some purpose but it is highly unlikely they are there waiting for you. If you really need them, they
will appear on surface eventually, either from below or in form of meteorites. That is, unless you are cancerous.
Added chapters Materials and A living house.
A living house
No matter what kind of house you have, if you live in symbiosis with your environment and your god [on whose surface you live], your house will only be a precursor to a living organic house which
will be, eventually, provided to you naturally. This should certainly occur once you evolve into homo.sapiens, however, it is possible that such houses (or precursors of these houses) will
be provided to some even before.
There is no better, more sustainable and renewable house than a living house.
If you are a precursor neuron protein, this house might have a pyramidal shape and it will likely be larger than your previous dead houses. It will be connected by veins to root
systems in the ground through which you will be provided cold and hot water. The house will also have a separate energy source and will eventually grow electrically conductive veins to
connect with other houses.
In any case, this will be a relatively closed ecosystem where all your needs for food, water and sharing of information will be satisfied.
Obviously, such houses most likely evolve from fusion of plant species.
If these houses do appear on the surface of god in limited number, most likely, polarized homo.beta will try to imitate the design, as it will be an optimal solution given the environmental
The key to sustainable living is proper appreciation of space and time. You should not abuse either, otherwise you will be accumulating stress and you will, not only have diseases, but become a
Space and time are generally entangled - if you don't have a lot of space you don't need a lot of time to care for it and you shouldn't feel the need for big and expensive machines
to care for it and to care for (when you do things in a hurry - you do not care for things, you do maintenance and pretend to care, even when you convince yourself it is not so).
It is easy to live in a sustainable way, but it requires a redefinition of success and a desire for a healthy life, lacking constant abuse of space and time.
Added chapter Construction. Chapter Energy updated.