This is a beautiful graphic but it doesn’t explain the pros and cons of each fire type.
The Swedish torch is good for an efficient and contained fire, it’s controlled and good for cooking over and produces less light and heat than other fires. It can be difficult to keep going once you burn through the original log
The teepee is your traditional campfire. Good for heat and light not great for cooking, burns through fuel fairly quickly
The star fire is one of the slowest burning and not well protected but provides an even heat good for slow cooking and is excellent if you have limited fuel and need the protection a fire can provide
The lean to is a compact and efficient fire that evolves into a dense and hot bed of coals. The structure creates a good source of air flow which can help damp wood burn. A slightly better cooking fire that isn’t as bright. It also provides protection from wind on one side
The platform fire is incredibly hot and will create a very thick bed of coals but it doesn’t have a lot of air flow and is a little harder to get started.
The log cabin is big and bright and has lots of air flow which again is good for damp logs. You can also use this structure to start a smaller fire in the middle while drying out bigger logs. This fire will crumble into a messier bed of coals that don’t produce particularly even heat for cooking.
The modified leanto is excellent if you need it to perform multiple functions. The side with more fuel will burn bright and hot and the side with less fuel will burn less hot but more evenly and controlled, this gives you different cooking options.
reblogging for writing purposes. the exact reason will come soon enough.
[Images: Infographics for seven ways to build a good campfire, made by Rolling Fox. End ID.]
I’ve taken the liberty of turning @bear–hearted’s descriptions of the uses for these various campfire types into its own infographic, so it’d be easier for me to keep all the information in one place on my computer. Here it is for anyone else who likes to save infographics! The text is almost 100% copied word-for-word from above, with only minor tweaks, such as capitalizing and underlining the campfire setup names for ease of finding them.
Despite every moment of life being indescribably precious and a wondrous mystery, I will spend it caring about dividends and how many rental properties I have.
Rich people are truly dead inside.
I can’t imagine caring this much about numbers that absolutely will never impact my life. This person is making more in passive income than I’ve ever made in my life and he’s just like “but but I need more :(”.
I mean, fuck that guy, but psychologically it’s interesting.
Some desperate remnant of his soul knows what he needs. As soon as his debt is cleared, he goes on to live what many would call an utterly charmed life: working no more than 20 hours a week, travelling and spending time with friends (which he, at $150,000 a year and no mortgage, has ample money to do). He has a loving relationship also.
But his brain is so rotten that he cannot understand happiness anymore. He is incapable of conceptualising it other than in money.
A man who has everything except the ability to feel it.
How poetic.
But fuck that guy.
I want to hit this man.
I want to rob this man.
Meow appears beside Rogue, holding a sign: “Heist? Heist.”
This man is so so so close to realizing a fundamental truth to how humans operate, but I genuinely don’t think he’s going to get there. Although I’m not sure he realizes it this man views the money he earns as a direct translation of his sense of personal achievement and engagement.
Which means that when he says he regrets the months he didn’t pick up more hours to earn more money, what he’s describing here is boredom. He’s doing it in the crassest, shallowest, most income-obsessed and unattainable for most of us way possible, yes. But this man is expressing that once he achieved a certain financial goal he relaxed, enjoyed himself, got bored, realized on some level he was understimulated, and then started working more hours to meet whatever stimulated activity threshold he personally needs.
This is infuriating because this man experienced the counter-argument to that nonsensical talking point that if we meet people’s financial needs with a universal basic income they’ll grow lazy and won’t do anything.
Anyone trying to develop $200,000 in passive annual income is not working three minimum-wage jobs to live paycheck-to-paycheck. This man’s basic financial needs were met. Workingmore hours to make more money is just his own personal code for ‘I still needed to use my mind to do things’ (using what might be the only metric of personal achievement he might actually have). This man lived the argument for universal basic income and I genuinely don’t think he realizes that. Once his basic income needs were met he still needed to do things to keep himself stimulated and engaged with his own life.
You see a version of this play out with retirees who leave their jobs, go home, and very quickly find themselves in need of new activities or friends or engagements to keep them present and stimulated in their lives. Ensuring someone’s basic financial needs are met doesn’t make them stop doing things, humans don’t work that way.
Reblogging for the psychology lessons
There is, I believe, a line in an Agatha Christie story about a man so desperately unhappy he doesn’t know he’s unhappy. “Ah, a rich man,” responds the nun.
