Bayou Renaissance Man

I recently had an interesting exchange with a reader who was worried that most of her canned food emergency stash had "expired".  When asked what this meant, she said that the "best by" dates stamped on each can had all passed.  She had tried to donate those cans to a food bank, intending to replace them with newer, unexpired ones, but the food bank had told her it could not accept them because of the danger of disease from spoiled food.  She was almost panic-stricken.  Would she endanger her family if she used them in an emergency?

I was able to set her straight about that.  I routinely use cans that are up to ten years after their expiration date, and have never yet had a single problem with them.  Provided the can shows no signs of internal pressure or damage, it should be fine.  Obviously, some foods will keep longer than others, but the process of heat- and pressure-canning eliminates most food-borne poisons and diseases, and provided the can is airtight, will continue to do so until it's opened.

Here are a few articles covering the subject.  There are dozens more out there, as a quick Internet search will reveal.

Fellow blogger and "prepper" Commander Zero has taste-tested several older cans, and reports very few problems.  During years of trekking around Africa, in the most primitive environments, I had no problem (even in equatorial or desert heat and humidity, not the greatest of storage environments) eating canned foods up to a decade old or even older, provided there were no obvious signs of swelling, damage, etc.  Approaching old age, I'm still here to talk about it.  An expedition in Greenland in the 1960's left canned food behind, which was discovered (and eaten) by another expedition about 60 years later.  So much for expiration dates!  (For that matter, a 150-year-old (!!!) jar of pickles from the steamboat Arabia was taste-tested by one of the archaeologists on that project, and found to be perfectly edible.  My wife and I have visited the Arabia Steamboat Museum, and seen the recovered foodstuffs.  It's well worth a visit if you're in or near Kansas City.)

So, if your emergency preparations include "time-expired" tins of food, don't assume you have to throw them away.  Inspect them carefully for any signs of damage or spoilage.  If none are visible, go ahead and use them (although I'd taste-test older cans first, and possibly try some of their contents on animals to see if they have any odd reactions).

Peter

We've spoken often in these pages about preparing for emergencies.  Food supplies, weapons, security issues, and a host of other topics have been covered.  However, there are several areas that are seldom mentioned in "prepping" circles:  threats that are so everyday, so routine, that we lose sight of how they might escalate into a real problem - or make preparing for a real emergency harder to afford, because of other drains on our wallets.  I've been discussing some of them with correspondents in recent weeks, and in this article, I'd like to tackle a few of them.

Let's take property and vehicle insurance.  They've gone up a lot over the past few years:  I've seen estimates that they're up more than 25% since 2020, and some estimates put it at over 40%.  Certainly, my wife and I have seen ours go up steeply, but that's partly because our insurer calculates the replacement value of our home at a considerably higher figure than we do.  I'm in the process of discussing that with our insurer, citing local costs and sales prices to prove our point.  That should help to bring our premiums back down, but it won't erase the higher costs completely.

How does one "prepare" for such increased costs?  It's important to watch your premiums closely, particularly notices warning you of an increase.  Your insurer will rate the value of your home according to a formula for your area, which might add too much value for your specific town or location (e.g. a valuation formula for "Northern Texas" is not as focused as one for "Arlington TX" or "Muenster TX").  Don't be afraid to raise such issues with your insurer, and negotiate the replacement value of your home down to a more reasonable level - one that'll cost you less in premium increases.  By doing that every year or two, the cumulative increase in your insurance costs over several years might be quite a lot lower than if you didn't.

Another option is to buy less expensive vehicles;  either a smaller, cheaper new car, or a used vehicle at a lower price than a new one.  Their insurance rate is calculated according to their value.  Buying the higher-end model might cost as much as $50-$100 more per month to insure than buying the entry-level model - and does it really make that much difference to drive the less luxurious version?  When considered along with all the other increases, those savings start to look attractive.  (Until recently, given the outlandishly high prices being asked for used vehicles, it was in many cases cheaper to buy a lower-priced new one such as Kia's Soul or Ford's Maverick light pickup.  Not only did they cost less than a used smaller SUV, but they offered similar interior space for passengers, and depreciation losses in today's market are minimal compared to years past.  I know a number of families who did that, and they've generally been happy with the deals they got.)

How about electricity bills?  They've been rising pretty steeply in our part of the world.  Even though we aren't major consumers of electricity, we're paying several hundred dollars a month for it, particularly now as the heat of summer makes big demands on our HVAC system.  There are many ways to save electricity, from shutting off major appliances like water heaters, not using ovens to cook, adjusting the internal temperature to levels that don't require as much electricity to maintain, and so on.

I'm seriously considering installing a mini-split air conditioning system for our main room in addition to the central HVAC system, because the former functions off a 120-volt circuit instead of 240, and consumes less than a quarter of the power needed by the central system.  If we shut off our central HVAC system when we're out and about, and run only the smaller unit for six to eight hours a day, it'll keep the central part of the house at a comfortable temperature but consume a lot less electricity.  I figure that in two years, the savings will pay for the entire mini-split system, including installation, and after that the savings are all gravy, so to speak.  I've not made a final decision yet, but it's a tempting thought.

If your HVAC system is getting old and you're considering replacing it, it might be worth your while to look at installing two or more mini-split or multi-split systems instead of one big central system.  The cost of installing the former can be half to two-thirds the cost of the latter, and their power consumption, even taken together, will usually be at least a third less than a central system.  Add up those savings and it becomes a rather attractive option, provided your home is constructed in such a way that the smaller systems can be "plumbed into" it relatively easily.

What about municipal and/or county rates and taxes?  It's worth checking on their valuation of your home, and contesting any sudden increases.  Too many counties issue bonds to construct new infrastructure such as schools, emergency services, etc. and then clobber residents with big increases in their rates.  These can be contested, particularly if actual sales prices achieved by comparable properties in your area demonstrate that the valuation is too high.  A lower valuation leads to lower rates, saving you money.

These are just some ways one can economize on one's overall household expenditure.  I'm sure readers have more they can contribute.  If you do, please share them with us in Comments.  We're almost all finding it hard to make ends meet these days.  Why not help each other to make our dollars go further?

Peter

I've been in contact with friends and acquaintances in the Houston area since major storms hit that city a couple of weeks ago.  Most of the "lessons learned" in coping with a disaster are ones we've already discussed in these pages.  However, a number of folks had bought or installed power stations, whether stand-alone or "whole home" solutions, and they had interesting things to report.

First of all, these things are expensive.  A minimal setup to run a small home would be something like Bluetti's AC500, coupled with two B300S battery packs (that's just an example - there are equivalent systems from many other manufacturers and vendors).  That can produce up to 5,000 watts of power (double that for a startup load), and supply up to 6,144 watt-hours of power - enough to run most common electrical appliances for a couple of days, if one is judicious about not running too many of them at once.  Such a system typically costs $4,000 to $5,000, or a bit less if one looks for the frequent sales offered by such vendors.  That's far more expensive than a generator.

However, despite their cost, power stations offer advantages.

• The system can plug into a main electrical switchboard, using a connector that shuts off mains power when the backup is in use and vice versa.  That means one doesn't need extension cords running all over the place to be plugged in at a central location.  One can simply use the house's existing wiring and plugs.
• One doesn't have the constant noise, fuel consumption and inconvenience of a generator that requires relatively constant attention.  A small- to medium-size generator can be run once a day to charge the power station, and/or one can plug in solar panels (if necessary, together with the generator) to do the same thing.  I'm informed that 3-6 hours of generator use per day was enough to keep such power stations running.
• The relative lack of generator use meant that the house was not so noisy (and therefore noticeable to thieves and looters).  There was the usual rash of low-lifes trying to steal generators from homes that announced (by the noise) that they were running one.  Without that noise, there was less to alert them.  In a longer-term disaster, one could make sure that one's windows were "blacked out" so as not to reveal light at night, making it even safer.  (If one used solar panels exclusively, not running a generator at all, that would be even quieter.)
• Some of my contacts didn't have large power stations, but had one or two smaller ones, 500W to 2,000W (the sort one can take on a day trip, or camping, or to run a travel trailer's electrics).  They reported that while their smaller units could not run the whole house, they were nevertheless very useful.  One took a 550W unit into his garage, where he had two freezers, and ran them for an hour or two twice a day, which was enough to keep the food inside them safely frozen.  He recharged the small power station with a portable solar panel.  Others used them at night to power CPAP machines and the like.
• On the other hand, some people with large, immovable power stations (such as the Tesla Powerwall) reported that as the waters rose, they came up to the big battery packs mounted on the wall.  For fear of electrocution and other problems, they switched off their installations and did without power for as long as it took for the water to recede.  I know Tesla claims its installation is proof against up to two feet of water, but if I were in those owners' shoes, I'd also be wary of trusting that completely.  Those with more portable power stations simply wheeled them out of harm's way (losing power in the process, of course, but preserving them against future need).

Peter

I hope some of my readers will be knowledgable enough to help with information about a small solar power installation.  I don't want a whole-house, major-league installation:  just enough to charge a couple of power stations in case of need, and perhaps an additional storage battery in due course.

I note that most of the solar power vendors want to charge several times the actual cost of the solar panels, which can be determined easily enough through looking at importers' prices.  I object strenuously to being "milked" like a cow for all the money they can get out of me!  In particular, many of them won't sell solar panels alone - only as part of an overall "solution" that's far more than I either want or can afford.

I'm looking for panels that can generate 500W-1,000W on a good, clear day, although I can go a bit higher if necessary.  I'd prefer to use 2-4 panels, but not more, for ease of portability.  They'll be mounted on a frame (fixed or on wheels) in my back yard, not on the roof.  They have to conform to these specifications:

• Total voltage:12-150V.
• Total power: 3000W max.
• Uses MC4 connectors or adapters.

If I need to reduce the power to charge smaller power stations, or to connect the panels to a power station for charging it, I'll also need the necessary equipment to do that.  They'll be used with Ecoflow and/or Bluetti power stations ranging from 500W to 5,000W in capacity.

If any reader can advise a reasonably good quality solar panel/s to fit that need, please let us know in Comments.  Please also advise on the type of frame that would be most suitable for the back yard, but would allow the panels to be brought under cover or otherwise protected when a Texas hailstorm arrives.  (Those are no fun:  right now, as I write these words, a team of roofers is stomping back and forth over my head, replacing our shingles as a result of a hailstorm last month.)

Also, if any reader can recommend a good introductory text, or video, or Web site to help me better understand the ins and outs of solar power, I'd be grateful.  Right now, I know only enough to be dangerous.  Thanks!

Peter

Regular readers will know that I underwent a kidney procedure last week.  It's a problem that often creeps up on a victim unawares, not revealing itself until it's fairly advanced;  and the consequences of dealing with it may be very uncomfortable and potentially embarrassing.  I'm writing this in the hope it may help readers who may one day face the same problem, so that they have more information than the doctors typically provide.  (I've been very unhappy by the casual, offhand, uninformative way two urologists have dealt with me so far.  Professionalism, it ain't!)

My problem is known as hydronephrosis.  Unfortunately, it did not make its presence felt until it was relatively far advanced, making treatment more difficult and possibly having already caused at least some permanent kidney damage.  Coming on top of another serious medical condition (of which more later), it's an unwanted, unneeded and excessively painful irritation, to put it mildly.

The first procedure, last week, implanted a stent in my ureter (the tube between kidney and bladder) to promote drainage.  Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to have worked as planned.  There's still a blockage, and at least one more procedure will be needed to deal with it.  A third may be necessary, but we're hoping and praying not.  Provided the kidney is still functional, that may make an end to the problem;  if the accumulated damage is too great, removal may follow.

Unfortunately, one of the side-effects of the stent has been to render my bladder completely uncontrollable.  When there's urine in it, no matter how much or how little, it's going to flow, whether I like it or not!  (It's also a rather painful process, but that's beside the point.)  That applies particularly whenever I stand up from a seated or lying position.  Within ten seconds, the urge to urinate becomes unstoppable.  Since I can't always make it to a bathroom in time, that means I have to temporarily wear adult incontinence diapers.

I've been astonished at the varying (in)effectiveness of most of the half-dozen products I've tried.  They almost all displayed one or more problems;  inadequate absorption (leading to embarrassing leaks), tearing, poor fit, discomfort and other issues.  The only one that (in my limited experience) fully lived up to its billing and worked exactly as advertised is the Tranquility Premium Overnight brand.

It's sizing chart was accurate, and its biggest size is definitely adequate for large people (something all other brands of similar size got wrong).  The wrapping claims absorption of up to 34 oz (approximately one quart) or 1,005 ml (approximately one liter), and it lives up to its claim.  Even under the heaviest flows, it stays in place and soaks them up without fuss or bother.  (A daytime version of the same product does almost as well, but the overnight version offers greater absorption, so it's the one I prefer to use).  It's relatively comfortable to wear, although conventional underwear should be worn on top in order to hold it in place, particularly when weighed down by contents, so to speak.

I was disappointed and frustrated to find that other brands simply did not live up to their claims.  I won't list all those I tried, because I don't see any point - none of them were worth what I paid for them.  The Tranquility product is the only one where I've been willing, after trying it, to place a bulk order in the confidence that it'll do the job.  Those of you who may face the need for incontinence diapers at some stage might want to make a note of the name, rather than waste your money on less effective products.  (No, Tranquility isn't paying me in cash or in kind to promote their diapers.  They don't even know I'm writing this.  I just want to let my friends and readers know about something that may be important to them if things go wrong - and believe me, something like this is a pretty fundamental need at times like that!)

I see the urologist again today to discuss the next procedure.  Hopefully, after that's done and time has been allowed for healing, I won't need these any more.  I'll cross my fingers and tie knots in what I can't cross, hoping for the best!

Peter

Several recent blog posts by friends and fellow bloggers made their way onto my "Blog Fodder" list over the past couple of weeks.  I thought I'd toss them out there for you to enjoy.  They're all useful.

Eaton Rapids Joe brings us a very useful tip on how to put on socks if bending is a problem for you.  It sure is for me, with the "hinge point" of my spine fused, and nerve damage in my left hip and leg.  I tried this trick, and it worked reasonably well.  Thanks, Joe!

Borepatch has two interesting articles.  The first points out that global warming is a politically correct invention, involving falsifying past data to make it conform with the preferred narrative.  The second discusses computer security and online privacy, and provides two recent examples where it was breached.  Money quote:  "OPSEC [operations security] is a stone cold bitch of a problem.  You have to be right 100% of the time, and dropping that to 99.99% means that you lose."

Divemedic points out that "The government is out there trying to 'nudge' people into breaking the law. IOW- entrapping them."  He's not wrong.  Go watch the linked video clip, and realize that this puts us all at risk.

Alma Boykin provides us with a history of spring-cleaning, and why it was very important from both a practical and a cultural perspective.  I didn't know a lot of what she mentions.  Interesting stuff, and it'll feed future novels (I hope).

Finally, SNAFU links to a video clip of a slingshot made with simple PVC pipe, the kind of thing you can buy at almost any hardware or home improvement store.  It shoots arrows.  He provides illustrations of some of the very nasty-looking (and presumably very lethal) arrow heads one can buy over the counter today.  I'd surely hate to be targeted by someone using something like that at night, while I walked or checked my garden.  I'd never know what hit me.  As he points out, "With so many new immigrants coming to our shores we're about to see some different weapons come to the front ... The gangs of thieves from S. America will either stay up north or get rounded up when they head south.  Not so much a worry. Its some of the others that pause me up. New arrivals equal new dangers but the public ain't talking about it yet."  Having seen bows and arrows used in combat in Africa, he's not wrong.  They remain very deadly weapons in skilled hands.  (The full version of the video to which he links, showing how the slingshot is made, may be found here.  There are many other similar videos out there.  Remember, such instruments may also be useful to us as defensive tools;  they're not just threats in the hands of criminals.)

Thanks to all the bloggers mentioned above for their useful information.

Peter

Following the series of posts I've put up in recent weeks about various aspects of emergency preparations, I've been surprised by some of the feedback I've received.  Some readers are annoyed that I haven't addressed long-term survival by growing our own food;  others think that buying this, or that, or the other gadget(s) will solve all their problems and guarantee they'll survive;  and yet more think that they can continue to enjoy a risk-free existence if some form of disaster continues beyond a few days or a couple of weeks.  They're all wrong.

There are practical realities we have to keep in mind when planning for emergencies.  If we ignore them, we're living in a fool's paradise;  thinking we're prepared, but in fact being blind to reality.  In this post, I'll try to address some basic, fundamental issues that underpin all our emergency preparations.

The first is our own health and fitness.  How healthy are we?  If we have no major medical issues, that's great.  However, the older we get, the more likely such issues become.  If we're fit and strong right now, that's also great:  but the risk of injury, illness, etc. will become much greater if we have to do more and more emergency-related work (e.g. cutting firewood;  fetching and carrying heavy supplies such as water;  exposure to severe weather, insects, pollution, etc.;  diseases spreading among the victims of an emergency situation;  and so on).  A healthy, fit person has an excellent foundation for coming through such circumstances without too much difficulty;  but the longer they go on, the more likely it becomes that our foundation will deteriorate - sometimes a lot more quickly than we would believe.  (That also raises the question of prescription medicines, which we covered a short while ago;  add to that analgesics, allergy medications, laxatives, anti-diarrhea and other over-the-counter medications that address common conditions, because those are likely to become more common in an extended emergency.)

Let's face it:  death is the normal, inevitable end to life, and it comes to us all sooner or later.  While I'm all in favor of postponing that as long as possible, death remains inevitable.  We should not fear what we cannot avoid.  Instead, let's plan to avoid it as long as possible.  That means keeping ourselves as fit and healthy as possible, and stockpiling things that can help us achieve that.

That said, we need to be realistic in making preparations that are consistent with our health and strength.  I'll use myself as an example.  I was left semi-crippled by a work-related accident two decades ago.  My mobility is very limited, and my permanent pain level is high.  As a result, I'm very unfit (because it hurts to exercise), and have no effective way of regaining a reasonable level of fitness - my body will go on strike if I try too hard.  (I know this.  I've tried.)  Those factors mean there's no way I can keep up with a group trying to evacuate to a safer area if that relies on physical exertion (walking, running, climbing, carrying a heavy load, and so on).  Vehicular traffic is going to be extremely limited by factors such as limited fuel supply, obstacles blocking roads, and interference by those who didn't make any preparations for an emergency, trying to take what they need from those who did.  (If you think that won't happen, there's this bridge in Brooklyn, NYC I'd like to sell you . . . )  Therefore, I have little choice but to "bug in":  stay where I am and try to ride out the problem.  That decision alone already eliminates many approaches to emergencies, and forces me to concentrate on others.  Those who don't share my health issues will, of course, make choices appropriate to their own status.

Next, we have to choose emergency foods that are suitable for our likely needs.  If we may have to "bug out" to another area, we need foods that are relatively light for ease of carrying;  take up as little space as possible;  and are easy to prepare, so as to avoid needing heavy, bulky kitchen equipment.  Freeze-dried foods fit those requirements pretty well, but they're also very expensive on a per-calorie basis, which might be a serious disadvantage if money is tight.  Canned foods are bulkier and heavier, not helpful in a "bug out" situation:  but they cost a lot less on a per-calorie basis, making them a lot more affordable if you're "bugging in".  Many of them can also be eaten cold, straight out of the can if necessary, avoiding the need to prepare them.

Let's take an example from current pricing at Walmart.  Dinty Moore beef stew in a 2½-serving can (200 calories per serving) costs $3.32.  Mountain House freeze-dried beef stew in a 2-serving pack (210 calories per serving) costs $11.26.  (Given our calorie intake needs, both containers realistically offer only a single main course for one person - half that if we're expending a lot of energy, working hard to stay alive - and therefore should be supplemented by other foods as well.)  The freeze-dried meal costs almost 3½ times more than the canned meal.  How much of that cost differential can your wallet afford?  That's a major factor in emergency preparations.  Spend each penny wisely, because they're in limited supply for most of us!

I won't go into details of what foods to choose, how to store them, and all that.  We've covered most of it in earlier articles, and there's a wealth of information online.  The main thing is to choose foods suitable for our plan to deal with emergencies (i.e. "bugging out" or "bugging in"), that we can afford, and that offer as much nutrition as possible for our dollars and cents.

We've spoken about water needs quite a lot in recent weeks, so I won't duplicate those posts here.  Follow the links in this paragraph to read them.

Next, what sort of weather and environmental conditions are we likely to encounter in an emergency?  This is important whether we're "bugging out" or "bugging in".  Remember, the power's likely to be out, so our normal standbys of air-conditioning, heating, etc. are almost certainly not going to be available.  Do we live in an area where winters are cold, snowy, icy?  Then we're going to need a lot more warm clothes, indoors or outside, to keep going (that includes warm bedclothes, wraps, etc.).  Are we in an area with very warm summers?  Then we'll need clothing that allows sweat to evaporate, but also protects us against the sun, insect bites, etc.  We'll also need a lot of it, because normal laundry facilities will most likely not be functioning, and it's a lot of hard work (and water, and detergent) to wash clothes by hand, rinse them, and hang them out to dry.  If the weather doesn't help the drying process, it may be several days before they're fit to wear again.  Our footwear and work clothing needs to suit our climate, and additionally provide protection when we're more physically active than usual (e.g. chopping firewood, collecting water from nearby sources, walking longer and further than usual, etc.)  The factors mentioned in this paragraph also mean we need to add reserve supplies of laundry detergent, insect repellent, sun block, personal hygiene items, etc. to our emergency stash:  also, perhaps, overalls, work gloves and boots, hard hats, sun hats, etc.

There's also the question of the duration of an emergency.  If it's something like a large coronal mass ejection (a so-called "Carrington Event") or major nuclear war, then the effects will be felt for not just years, but decades.  There's no way we can stockpile enough supplies to cater for something like that.  Those who can farm, growing their own food, will have an edge:  but everyone else who survives will be doing their best to raid farms for food, so keeping it is likely to be a very serious problem.  Certainly, if we are not already growing at least some of our own food, we're very unlikely to be able to grow enough from scratch to survive.  We lack the knowledge, tools, seeds, and experience to do so.  Tempting advertisements to buy a certain brand of seed, or a particular tool, or land on which to establish an "emergency farm", are likely to benefit only those selling them.  Realistically, most of us can afford to plan, and stockpile supplies, for an emergency lasting from a few weeks to a year.  Anything beyond that . . . well, it's unlikely we'll live through it.  That's just the way it is.

What about transport and travel?  Sure, we can stockpile a certain amount of gasoline or diesel;  but it won't last forever, and besides, we'll need to power our generators and other engines.  Even if you put 100 gallons of fuel in your stash (which is far more than most of us are legally allowed to store at home), that's only a few tanks' worth for most modern vehicles, and when it's gone, it's gone.  That's why a small electrically-powered vehicle such as an e-bike, a golf cart or a tiny electric car or truck actually makes sense in a "bug in" situation, if we can afford it.  They can be recharged via solar panels or generators, and run around the neighborhood (e.g. to fetch water from a pond or stream).  They may be very practical local emergency vehicles.  (On the other hand, when no other vehicles are running, our electric vehicles will become very tempting targets for looters, whether official or criminal.  We should plan our security arrangements accordingly, and use the vehicles as little as possible to avoid such encounters.)

I could go on, but I hope the examples I've provided illustrate how we need to be extremely practical in our emergency planning.  It's no good planning for pie in the sky when there won't be much pie, and the sky will have fallen!  We should also accept that we'll never get everything right.  There are bound to be things - some of them very important - that we forget, or ignore, or of which we don't stockpile enough.  No sense in kicking ourselves about that when the time comes.  Instead, let's do what we can to stockpile what we're most likely to need in our own situation in life, and then get on with the business of living through hard times using what we've got.  As the late President Theodore Roosevelt put it:

Words to live by.

Peter

Following my recent article titled "Building a reserve supply of prescription medications", reader Spark21 sent me an e-mail pointing out that medical devices, such as spectacles and contact lenses, should be included as well.  I thought my readers might be interested in it, too.

You had a recent article on building up a reserve of prescription meds.

As a person who also prepares for thing and used to be in the business (my current career is in law enforcement), I would like to add something you may wish to use or share with your readers:

Contacts and glasses.

Glasses and contacts may be found for low cost at Costco, Sam's, Walmart, and a few smaller opticals. During a SHTF time, having spare prescription glasses and/or contacts is a huge must!

I will focus on contacts here and my personal experience. I am not a doctor, nor an optical specialist.

I have found that daily contacts, weekly, and monthly contacts (standard and for astigmatism) are made the exact same way, just packaged differently. If you clean contacts daily, regardless of the type (daily, monthly, yearly), I have been able to get up to more than a month of wear from a single pair.

Now, if you get a prescription for contacts (ask your optometrist for a daily wear prescription), go to a place like Coscto or 1800contacts (online) and price your contacts for a years supply of daily wear lenses. Now order via the best cost method and store them in a room temp or slightly cooler space. If you do like I have found, your 'daily wear' lenses can last months and your years worth of lenses can be stretched to several years of use (or more!).

Now over the years I have had a dry out rate of stored lenses about 10%-12%. And you must keep cleaning solution on hand as well. I use Costco/Kirkland for the price and no one bats an eye at bulk purchases at Costco.

I personally ran this experiment for just under six years. I am on my next about grouping in which there are two years worth of 'daily' units for testing until I retire in about six years.

For glasses: any older frames that are in good condition get new lenses for a small fee. I also make sure to have minimum five pair on hand (I currently have 11). I use contacts normally, but keep glasses in my car kit, bug out bag, office, and at the homes of a few family members and friends.

Good advice from Spark21, for which my grateful thanks.  I don't need prescription glasses for normal everyday use, but I use reading glasses, plus a couple of computer glasses with special focus and tint needs.  I'll plan to stock up on those things.

Peter

Following my recent articles about emergency food and water, and answering some reader questions about them, I had other queries to which I responded.  I thought some of you might be interested in reading some of them.

Q:  My red dot sights for my rifle and shotgun use coin-style batteries.  I guess, in an emergency, those won't be all that readily available.  Can I safely store them for long-term use?

A:  I honestly don't know.  A lot of batteries advertise that they have a certain shelf life, but experience with them shows that those claims are frequently wildly optimistic (if not fraudulent).  They leak all over the place within a year or two.  (I'm looking at you, Duracell!)  My suggestion would be three-fold:

• By all means keep a stash of coin-style batteries to fit your existing sights.
• If your budget allows, get a couple of red dot sights that work on standard AA batteries.  (Sightmark's Wolverine series aren't too expensive:  they're a bit larger and heavier than today's teeny-weeny red dots, but have worked well in my experience.)  You can use your lighter, smaller, more sophisticated sights while coin-type batteries are readily available, and switch to one of the AA-battery units when they're not.  Lay in some rechargeable AA-size batteries while you're at it (don't buy cheap crap:  ENELOOP is a trustworthy brand, at least so far), plus a solar charger for them, to ensure you'll always have power for your sights and other tools.
• The time may come when any battery is hard to find, not to mention there will be many appliances and items of gear needing them.  A couple of simple telescopic sights are worth having under such circumstances, because they need no batteries at all.  Don't buy cheap junk, but there are some adequate-quality sights out there at reasonable prices.  (For example, see my recent review of a Primary Arms offering.)  Lower-powered scopes are most suited to "tactical" use;  higher-powered scopes are for hunting or precision marksmanship.

Q:  When you spoke about emergency water supplies, you didn't say how much is needed for washing your cooking and eating utensils.

A:  That's because I've already recommended in several previous articles that you keep a stash of paper plates and bowls, and plastic knives, forks and spoons, for use in an emergency.  I suggest enough for at least 30 days, possibly for a longer period if you have storage space available.  This saves a great deal of water, and also a lot of time, in that you don't have to wash and dry crockery and cutlery several times a day.  Used paper bowls and plates can be scraped clean (or licked clean by your pets), then dried, torn into strips, and used as fire-lighters.  In the same way, paper cups can be used for cool drinks.  That leaves only pots and pans to be washed.

Q:  How many buckets should I buy for water storage?

A:  When it comes to 5-gallon buckets, I don't think one can have too many (provided you have storage for them all).  Food-safe buckets can be used to store dry food as well as water (line them with mylar bags and heat-seal the latter if necessary), and their lids will do for both purposes.  Non-food-safe buckets are useful to water plants, hand out washing water to individuals, launder clothes, and a host of other tasks.  They also make very good trading material in an emergency, because a lot of people don't have enough (perhaps none at all), and they'll need them for all those tasks.  I currently have 40-50 5-, 3½- and 2-gallon buckets and lids of all types, and if I get the chance to lay in a few more at low cost I'll take it.  (Look for free buckets from bakeries that buy icing in them.  All they need is a good wash, and they're good to go.  Buy different color buckets if you want the color to indicate what's stored inside.)

Q:  I don't have enough storage space in my small house to store emergency supplies.  What do I do?

A:  Use every scrap of available space.  For example:

• In your garage, fasten shelves on brackets to the wall above the roofline of your vehicle(s), and store totes and other supplies on them.  If there's enough vertical space, stack two or three of them on top of each other, using a stepladder to reach the top one if necessary.  You may have to move your vehicle(s) out to get at those supplies, but they'll be there when you need them.  (If you live in earthquake country, don't forget to adequately secure what's on those shelves!)
• See how much you can put under your bed(s).  If necessary, replace solid box springs with metal bed frames.  You can get them from 12" to 18" in height, and in varying widths.  You can fit a lot of containers underneath them, from shallow underbed units to full-height storage totes.  (Shop for totes at your local Walmart, Lowes, Home Depot or equivalent store;  they're usually cheaper there than buying them online and paying for shipping.)
• A lot of drawer units use drawers that don't take up the full depth of the unit.  See whether you can store water bottles (upright, of course, so they don't spill) or shallow upright storage containers behind them.
• Use the back of pantry cupboards, shelving units, etc. to do the same thing.  I once stored three or four dozen #10 cans of freeze-dried food, stacked 2 high, at the back of shelves containing kitchen plastic bags and wraps, salad bowls and similar items.
• Consider your attic.  It may not be configured to store anything, but if you can get a few planks and nail them across rafters, you can make space to fit several totes or plastic bags.
• Consider renting a small storage unit, sharing the cost with friends, so that each of you can store a few cubic feet of emergency supplies there.  This isn't an optimal choice, because in an emergency you may not be able to get to the unit quickly or easily (and storage units will be prime targets for looters), but it may be the only solution you can find for larger items.

Q:  I barely make ends meet on my salary.  I can't afford emergency preparations!

A:  I feel your pain.  Many of us are in the same boat:  for a long time, they included my wife and I.  However, as the saying goes, "The longest journey begins with a single step".

• Buy one or two extra cans of goods every time you shop for groceries, and put it/them away.  Vary that by buying an extra packet of pasta or an extra bag of rice now and then.  In two to three months, you'll have a full box of food.  That's the start of your emergency pantry.
• Ask your friends to save you half-liter, or one-liter, or two-liter soda bottles (with their caps) when they finish their contents.  Wash them out carefully, rinse thoroughly, and fill them with water.  In two to three months, you'll have two to three days' worth of emergency water supplies.
• If friends of yours buy their household needs from stores such as Costco or Sams Club, save up your pennies and ask them to buy you one of those stores' bulk packs of toilet rolls or paper towels.  (If that's too much, ask your friends if you can contribute a few dollars to the cost of those bulk packs and get a pro rata share of their contents.)  The cost per roll is so much lower than buying just a couple at a time that you'll be able to put aside a roll or two each month towards an emergency.
• If you can't afford plastic storage totes, use cardboard boxes.  They're not ideal, and they do perish over time, but they're a lot better than nothing.
• Look for stores that want to get rid of things you can use.  I mentioned earlier bakeries that get five-gallon buckets full of icing sugar, pre-mixed.  I know some just throw away those buckets.  Why not ask the bakery(ies) for a few?  If they say "No", you've lost nothing;  but if they say "Yes", you've got some very useful containers.
• Give up a few small luxuries (e.g. one or two cans of soda per week, or one take-out coffee per week, or take a paper-bag home-made lunch to work instead of buying it from a vendor) and use that money to expand your emergency supplies.

Peter

Yesterday I said, when speaking about a Canadian forecast for foreseeable problems over the next few years:

For several years I've seen to it that my wife and I have a six-month supply of every long-term prescription medication we take.  I'm now doubling that, to a year's supply, and adding to it a selection of antibiotics that we've used in the past for common conditions and that we might need again.  I think I'd be irresponsible not to do so when the health care system can't guarantee their availability.

In a comment to that article, reader coyoteken48 asked:

One question though, where do you get the stockpile of prescription drugs?

This article will try to answer that question, as far as US residents are concerned.

First off, there are legal ways to accumulate such a stockpile, and there are illegal ways, in terms of US law.  I am not, repeat, NOT advocating that my readers break the law.  It would be irresponsible for me to do that, and it would make me an accessory before the fact to any crime any reader might choose to commit in that regard.  Therefore, if anyone decides to skirt the edges of the law in dealing with this . . . you're on your own.  Don't blame me.

That said, let's look at a couple of legal solutions.  The simplest (although it takes quite a long time) is to refill your prescriptions on the very first day that your health insurance will agree to pay for them.  Typically, the insurer will pay for a refill between 7 and 10 days before the old prescription runs out.  You can then stash the last few pills of the old prescription, and begin using the new one.  Over time, as you do this, your reserve supply grows - but, as I say, it's a very slow way to achieve that.  Mark on your calendar the day on which you obtained a refill of every prescription, and then ask the pharmacy for the date on which your insurer will cover the next refill.  Mark that on the calendar too, and the day before, call the pharmacy and arrange to pick up the refill on that date.  It's not difficult.

There's a faster, easier and more convenient way, if you can afford it.  You have to ask your healthcare provider to give you one or more additional prescription(s) for your medication(s), in quantities sufficient to build up your stash.  Many of them will not do this, for reasons that doubtless seem good to them:  but others are OK with it, provided you explain not only what you want, but why you want it.  Our health care provider was more than willing to help, particularly because many of their patients had experienced delays in getting their hands on critical medication(s) thanks to supply chain and other issues.  We were able to get extra prescriptions for an extra 90-day supply of our medications, which we filled, and then got another prescription and filled it in the same way.  It took about a year, but doing it that way provided the reserve supplies we needed, and did so legally.

Next, to fill those prescriptions, pay cash - don't charge them to your medical insurance.  The latter may consider it fraudulent for you to build up your reserve supply of medications at their expense, because they budget to pay only for an ongoing supply on a regular basis, not a reserve supply.  Also, your regular pharmacy may or may not be willing to fill extra prescriptions, even if you're paying cash, because they don't want to get crossways with your health insurance if the matter ever becomes public knowledge.  We chose to use a different pharmacy for our cash purchases, and paid in cash - not by credit card - to avoid any complications that might ensue.  Since we had a legal, legitimate prescription on every occasion, there were no problems.  (You'll have to ask your health care provider to phone through the extra prescriptions to the alternate source, not your primary pharmacy, but there are normally no problems with that if you have an understanding doctor or nurse practitioner.)

(Rotate your reserve supply of medication to use the oldest pills first, and reserve the newest ones for your stash.  However, don't be put off by expiration dates on a prescription bottle.  Many medications remain effective for a very long time..  For example, I'm using a pain medication pill right now that was prescribed for me in 2007!  The container was stored in a box and forgotten for many years, and I recently rediscovered it.  It still works well, and is effective at treating my condition.  I'm not complaining!  If you're in any doubt about the safety of using older medications, check with your health care provider or pharmacist;  but the practice is widespread, even official.)

Those are the legal options.  If you can follow them, I highly recommend doing so.  However, there are those whose health care providers won't cooperate, or who have other difficulties in getting what they need.  There are other options for them - but they involve breaking US law.  As I said above, I do NOT recommend these measures;  I'm just telling you about them for information's sake.

One approach, no longer generally available, used to be to purchase pharmaceutical-grade medications from suppliers of veterinary medicines.  However, it's illegal to sell animal medications for human use;  and there's also the problem that many agri-businesses have misused antibiotics, dosing animal herds with vast quantities of them and thereby encouraging the spread of antibiotic-resistant strains of various illnesses or infections.  The authorities have therefore made it very difficult to obtain such medications online or by mail.  I understand some people have friends who are farmers or ranchers, with prescriptions for their businesses, and get some medications from them;  but again, this is illegal, and could result in big trouble for both seller and purchaser.  I don't recommend it.

It's illegal for individuals to import their own scheduled (i.e. regulated) medication into the USA.  That doesn't stop literally hundreds of thousands of people doing it by visiting Mexico, across our southern border, as day tourists.  Many Mexican towns, particularly those with heavy tourist traffic, have pharmacies that are only too happy to take visitors' money and supply them with what they need, with or without a prescription, often at prices far cheaper than those charged in the USA.  Entire busloads of "pharmacy tourists" cross the border in places like San Diego, California, every day, and US customs officials often turn a blind eye to what they're carrying when they return.  It's official tolerance for something they couldn't stop even if they tried, because too many people are doing it.  Businesses in Mexico even advertise to Americans for their custom.

A slower and more complicated route, if you can't cross the border easily, is to order from pharmacies in other countries.  Some Canadian and Indian pharmacies are well-known for their willingness to assist US customers, and there are other countries doing the same thing.  Many will not ask for a prescription from their customers.  There are risks involved in ordering from a Third World pharmacy;  one can't be sure of the quality or purity of the medications involved, which can be actively dangerous to your health.  On the other hand, there are pharmacies who derive most of their business from such orders, and who take great care to "keep the customer satisfied", because if they don't, they'll go out of business.  Customers who take care to patronize only the latter, and who check references with other customers online, have generally had good experiences.  Read this article for a good summary of what's involved.    (During the height of the COVID-19 epidemic, thanks to often misguided and ill-informed official restrictions, medications such as Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine were often only available to US consumers through such sellers.  That introduced many new customers to such pharmacies, who've done a roaring trade with them ever since.)

As to which international pharmacy to choose, do your own search, something like this example.  You'll find plenty of results online.  I obviously can't recommend any particular provider, partly for legal reasons (because I can't and don't advocate breaking the law), partly because I never recommend any supplier I haven't used myself and therefore have reason to trust.  I understand there are forums online (here's one example) that discuss such pharmacies and their merits or flaws.  Some Web sites also recommend certain providers in their responses to reader questions (for example, here or here.)

Bear in mind that if US Customs detects medication being imported from foreign countries, they may confiscate it;  and, if they're not in a forgiving mood, they may investigate further and prosecute the person importing it.  I understand this happens very seldom, but that doesn't mean it never happens.  Caveat emptor.

Well, there you are.  Ways and means to build up a reserve supply of essential medications.  Let me close by saying again that you should not break the law, and I'm not recommending that you do so.  Don't blame me if you choose to disregard that!

Peter

If you're in the market for a .22LR semi-auto rifle, CDNN Sports has a great deal for the next couple of days on the Winchester Wildcat.

I like the Wildcat as, basically, a cheaper clone of the very well-known Ruger 10/22.  It even accepts magazines for the latter rifle, including Ruger's 25-round BX.  It's not as customizable as the 10/22, but as a plinker and all-round useful .22LR rifle, it's more than adequate out of the box, without add-ons.  I've used them to introduce disabled students to rifle shooting, with considerable success.  If you'd like to learn more about them, Shooting Times' review is here, and Guns & Ammo's review is here.

CDNN is offering a discounted price, plus on top of that there's a $25 rebate from Winchester - but the latter is only valid until March 26th, so if you want it, you'll have to move fast.  They have three models available;  click each link to take a closer look.

Wildcat with olive drab green stock:  $174.99 after rebate

Wildcat with Truetimber Strata camo stock:  $174.99 after rebate

Wildcat with black stock and Reflex sight:  $199.99 after rebate

I'm not being compensated in any way by CDNN or Winchester for recommending this:  in fact, they don't know I'm doing so.  I just like to pass on to my readers good deals that I find.  I'm certainly going to take advantage of this one for myself, too.

Remember, you have to order by tomorrow to get the Winchester rebate.

Peter

My recent review of Primary Arms' 3-9x44 scope generated some correspondence with readers.  Among other things, it seems that too few people have heard about the use of a fishing reel attachment tool known as a "Coaster" to make an improvised scope magnification adjustment device.  I wrote about it three years ago.  Here's an excerpt from that earlier post.

 I'm sure many readers interested in the shooting sports are familiar with the "throw lever" sometimes integrated into the power ring (i.e. the adjustment ring to vary the magnification) of telescopic sights.  They look something like this example, sticking up from the power ring of a Swampfox Optics Arrowhead tactical scope.  (Click any image for a larger view.)

Regular hunting- and target-style scopes don't usually have throw levers, but they've become very popular on tactical scopes.  They allow one to adjust the power very quickly with one hand, rather than fiddle with a power ring that doesn't offer easy purchase or a visual or tactile reference when the scope is being held to one's eye.  There are third-party, aftermarket throw levers available, but they can be expensive, and they only fit a limited range of sizes.

I recently came across a fishing accessory, originally designed to attach reels to rods.  It's called a "Coaster" ... They're made by Breakaway Tackle in England, and look like this.

The loop is placed around the fishing rod, over the mounting lugs of the reel:  then the arms are pulled tight through the vice block before the ring is screwed down on the block, its threads engaging the notches on the arms to tighten them further.  It's a bit like a double-ended cable tie.

Some bright spark figured out that the same tool could be used as a throw lever on rifle telescopic sights that lacked such a feature.  Intrigued, I tried it, and found it works like a charm.  Here's how the vendor illustrates it.

I modified that slightly, in that I cut off the arms a notch or so above the ring using cutting pliers, as low as I could manage, as illustrated above.  I then unscrewed the ring and took it off, cut the arms a notch or two shorter while holding the loop and vice block in place, and then reattached the ring and screwed it down moderately tightly (don't over-tighten it, as that will strip the threads).  That put the ends of the arms just beneath the surface of the ring, rather than above it, so they no longer scratched my fingers as I felt for the ring.  I found that a lot more comfortable, and it looked better, too.

There's more at the link, and in a follow-up post where a reader described having a problem fitting the "Coaster" to a very low-mounted scope.

Here's a video demonstrating how to install the Coaster on a scope.

This is a super-useful accessory to put on any scope with a variable power or focus ring.  The Coaster is also much lower cost than some of the made-for-purpose throw rings you'll find if you shop around (it's anywhere from a half to a tenth of their price), and it'll fit just about any scope, unlike some of the others that are restricted to scopes of a particular brand or size.  I've put them on my most-used scopes, and I'm in the process of installing them on the rest as well, for a uniform fit across all my long guns.  You'll find them on Amazon.

Highly recommended.

Peter

A very interesting Russian document has been made available in English translation by Lethal Minds Journal.  It's introduced as follows (translated from Russian):

I Live, I Fight, I Win : Rules of Life In War

Razumov A.N., Kryukov G.A., Kuznetsov A.N.

I live, I fight, I win! Rules of Life in War is a collection of recommendations based on the generalized experience of combatants in Afghanistan, the North Caucasus and Ukraine. The presentation is distinguished by a deep knowledge of the problem, brevity, accessibility for understanding, clarity of presentation.

The collection is intended for servicemen of the RF Armed Forces participating in a special military operation in Ukraine, conscripts, cadets of military educational institutions, employees of various law enforcement agencies.

I'm not going to provide excerpts here, because it's a long document with lots of detail.  However, I recommend all my current and former military readers to click over to Lethal Minds Journal and read it for themselves.  It's interesting to compare its combat doctrine to those we were taught from a Western mindset;  and it provides valuable insight into how Russian forces are operating today.  In a post-Ukraine War world, we might be seeing such tactics closer to home.  Who knows?

Peter

If you have a rifle or two you'd like to equip with a telescopic sight, but can't justify several hundred dollars for most of the offerings currently out there, Primary Arms has a good deal at the moment.  It's for their Classic Series 3-9x44 Rifle Scope, currently priced at just $94.99.

It has a 30mm scope tube, which transmits more light, more efficiently than the typical 1-inch tube used on most lower-cost commercial scopes.  That means using 30mm. mounts and/or rings, of course, which are a bit more expensive, but not too much so.  You'll have the opportunity to buy discounted scope covers and mounts if purchased with the sight, which is useful.  It uses a standard duplex reticle, with no bullet drop compensation or range-finding ability, but for its target market that's probably not a problem.  I intend it for use at up to 300 yards, and out to that range I can compensate for bullet drop and windage by eye.  Any competent rifleman should be able to do so, if he knows his firearm and ammunition.

I've been trying one out, and I'm pretty impressed by it.  It works just fine for cartridges from rimfire to .308 Winchester, and I presume it'll probably suffice for more powerful ones too, despite their heavier recoil.  At its price point it's probably unbeatable value right now.  I own several Nikon ProStaff scopes, which were (sadly) discontinued a few years ago, and always found them to be very good value for money.  Well, this Primary Arms scope is at least as good as them in terms of optics, gathers more light, and costs a lot less than they did.  I don't know how Primary Arms managed to hold this price point, but I'm not complaining!  I just bought a couple more to put on rifles that don't yet have scopes, because with my eyes getting as old as the rest of my body, iron sights are really not an option for me any more.

(No, Primary Arms isn't compensating me in any way to boost their products - they don't even know I'm writing this article.  I just like what I bought, and I like to tell my readers and friends about good deals when I find them.)

Recommended.

Peter

We've spoken before in these pages about the advisability (or otherwise) of downloading higher-capacity magazines by a round or two to increase firearm reliability and keep magazines in good condition.  I'm a fan.  I was taught in the South African military to download by plus-or-minus 10% for routine carry.  Thus, 10% of a 35-round R4 magazine would be 3.5 rounds:  therefore, it would be loaded with 32 rounds for routine everyday carry.  The older R1 rifle (a license-built version of the FN FAL) had a 20-round magazine, which I usually carried with 18 rounds in it.  In a combat area, where a fight was more likely, we'd download by only 5%, and some would load right up to capacity (although I never did, preferring to reduce the strain on the magazine spring and ease the cycling of the bolt).  I've continued the practice in civilian life, downloading most higher-capacity magazines by 5-10% on a routine basis.

(Another common practice in some military units was to load tracer for the last 2 or 3 rounds in the magazine, to provide a visual warning to the shooter that it was almost empty and he needed to reload.  I didn't do so, as the line showing the passage of a tracer bullet points right back to the shooter, and I didn't want to make myself an even more visible target, particularly at night.  Also, in bush warfare in Africa, tracer bullets had the upsetting habit of setting fire to dry grass and leaves - not a good idea if the prevailing wind blew the resulting bushfire in your direction!  In one incident, a fire started by a patrol during a firefight didn't bother them, but gained strength over the following day and intercepted their resupply truck that evening, destroying it and its cargo and forcing a premature end to their excursion.  There was a certain amount of consternation and monkeyhouse over that, particularly from the infuriated truck crew . . . )

In answer to a reader's question about functioning problems with fully loaded 17-round SIG handgun magazines, a recent article discusses the downloading question more fully.

The top round in a loaded magazine contacts the bottom of the slide when the slide is forward and the magazine is fully inserted into the magazine well of a semi-automatic pistol. Although there is normally friction on the bottom of the slide from contact with the top cartridge in the magazine, it has minimal effect on the movement of the slide if the ammunition stack can compress slightly back into the magazine body against the magazine spring. If there is no room for the ammunition stack to compress, the friction resistance of the top cartridge in the seated magazine is too great to allow the slide to cycle properly, which causes the phenomenon that you are experiencing with the slide failing to fully cycle.

I would first suggest that you load your magazines to their capacity of 17 rounds, and then apply pressure to the top cartridge with your thumb. The cartridge should move against the magazine spring until it is visibly clear of all contact with the feed lips at the top of the magazine. This small space is necessary for the magazine to seat properly in the magazine well, and also for the gun to cycle properly and shoot reliably.

If you download your magazines to 16 rounds, I suspect your gun will exhibit the reliability you expect from it.

This phenomenon is not only limited to pistols, but should also be considered when loading and topping off any firearm utilizing a spring-loaded, box-type magazine. For example, it is a somewhat common practice to download an AR-15-style rifle magazine (particularly military-surplus magazines) from 30 rounds to 28 rounds to enhance reliability by ensuring the magazine will seat properly in the magazine well and the top rounds in the magazine will flow through the gun without causing any restriction or stoppage.

There's more at the link.

I believe the practice also extends your magazine's life, in that the spring is not kept in a fully compressed condition for long periods.  I know many assert that modern magazine springs won't "take a set", as it used to be called, and be weakened by this;  but I've had some older magazines that did, even from original equipment manufacturers.  Third-party magazines. and some of Third World manufacture, may exhibit the problem more often.  For example, I can't comment on their more recent production, but in my experience some older magazines from ProMag and KKK appeared to suffer from that issue.  (YMMV, of course.)

Food for thought for those among us who rely on magazines to feed our firearms.

Peter

I'm sure we all know dehumidifiers as a means to reduce indoor humidity and produce drier, healthier air for our homes.  However, I'd never thought of them as a way to quickly, efficiently and cheaply dry laundry until I read this BBC report.

Given the high cost of electricity, tumble dryers have become much more expensive to use. Drying a single load of laundry could cost more than £1.50 (approximately US $1.91), according to the makers of energy tracking app Hugo. In comparison, a dehumidifier can help to dry clothes hung up indoors in just a few hours while only costing pennies.

Rachael Peterson, an electronics engineer who lives in Oxfordshire, uses her dehumidifier to dry out clothes hung up in an enclosure under her stairs. She does this overnight, on a cheaper electricity tariff, and says it costs less than 4p (about 5 US cents).

"The clothes are dried down there in a matter of hours," she tells BBC News. "Everything's dried properly."

There's more at the link.

I know a lot of people are battling to pay high electricity bills this winter.  Admittedly, it costs to buy a dehumidifier (prices on Amazon range from $45 up to several hundred dollars), but if one can be found at a reasonable price, the savings in electricity to dry one's laundry might pay for it relatively quickly - and from then on, it's gravy (financially speaking).  There are also the general health and environmental benefits to be considered.  Having just dried out our home after an incident with rather too much water, I'm keeping those firmly in mind!

Peter