upworthy
Heroes

Scotland has the largest oil reserve in the E.U. They just proved they don't need it.

What were you doing on Sunday, Aug. 7, 2016?

I cleaned my apartment and made some amazing curry. Meanwhile, the world was pretty active too. Thailand approved a new constitution, for instance. And down in Rio, it was day two of the Olympics, featuring archery, diving, and weightlifting.

If you were in Scotland, however, you might have been distracted from the Olympics by the gigantic winds. Aug. 7 was a very blustery day for Scotland. The winds reached 115 mph in some places!

For many people, the high winds were problematic. Some bridges had to be closed, for example, and ferry and train services were affected.

But the winds also contributed something awesome for Scotland:

The wind on Sunday produced enough electricity to completely power Scotland. All of it. With zero fossil fuels.

Photo by Jeff J Mitchell/Getty Images.

An analysis of WeatherEnergy data by WWF Scotland suggested that wind power produced 106% of Scotland's energy needs. That's enough to not only run the country, but to power over 75,000 homes as well!*

It's worth noting that this was kind of a magical confluence of factors: The extreme wind certainly helped, but energy demands are typically lower during the weekend. Still, it's a huge milestone for a seriously cool country.

Scotland's got some serious renewable chops going on.

Photo by Jeff J Mitchell/Getty Images.

Though Scotland is estimated to have the largest oil reserves in the E.U., they're seriously dedicated to renewables. In fact, renewables contribute about half of Scotland's electricity — dwarfing both nuclear (33%) and fossil fuels (28%)!

Scotland's government plans to generate the equivalent of 100% of its electricity needs through renewables by 2020.

Wind makes up most of Scotland's renewables, but they're also using wave and tidal energy, as well as hydroelectric.

When they were unveiled in 2010, Scotland's AK-1000 turbines were thought to be the largest tidal generators in the world. Photo by Jeff J Mitchell/Getty Images.

We still need better infrastructure for renewable energy as a whole, but Scotland's epic day shows the power of renewables.

One of the things keeping solar, wind, and other forms of renewable energy from completely taking over the grid in many places is the lack of infrastructure. We need to build up our grid to take better advantage of peaks like these while also buffering it for the low days.

But on Aug. 7, 2016, Scotland proved that renewables can provide more than enough electricity. Now we just need the will and infrastructure to bring it everywhere.

Movies

Julie Andrews said she literally could "feel the evil" when visiting the Von Trapp house

The story behind the movie might be more interesting than the movie itself.

Image via Wikicommons

Julie Andrews in The Sound of Music

Sometimes the story behind the movie is more interesting than the story in the movie.

In her autobiography, Home Work, Julie Andrews shared some of her experiences filming The Sound of Music. Andrews spoke with BuzzFeed News about her book, revealing her thoughts on the actual von Trapp family house. The movie musical, which is based on a section of the real-life Maria von Trapp's book, The Story of the Trapp Family Singers, was shot in a Hollywood studio.

The classic scene of Julie Andrews spinning in a meadow was shot in Bavaria, and the exteriors of the von Trapp house were filmed at a different house entirely.


- YouTubewww.youtube.com


Andrews did visit the von Trapp house in Salzburg, Austria later on in her life.

"It wasn't until much later that I happened to visit the real villa where they actually lived," she told BuzzFeed News. During her visit, Andrews said she could "feel the evil that once permeated those walls." The evil Andrews refers to is, of course, the Nazis. "Because after they fled the country, which they had to do, as in the film, [Heinrich] Himmler took over that villa, and the atrocities there were just terrible," she continued.

The story behind the von Trapp house is much darker than what's touched on in the splashy Hollywood musical. The actual von Trapp family lived in the house from 1923 until they fled Austria in 1938. In 1938, the Nazis annexed Austria, making life hard for the singing family. Georg von Trapp refused to fly the Nazi flag on his house, and declined a request to sing at Hilter's birthday party. There was fear their neighbors would spy on them and their children would become brainwashed by Nazi politics. Even though the family was offered fame, they decided to stay true to their principals and leave Austria.

Julie Andrews, The Sound of Music, musicals, Germany, World War 2, Nazi Germany, Von TrappChristopher Plummer and Julie Andrews on location in Salzburg, 1964upload.wikimedia.org

Not one year later, the house was occupied by Nazis. Heinrich Himmler used the house as his summer residence until 1945.

Himmler was the second most powerful man of the Third Reich. Himmler set up and ran the Nazi concentration camps. The house was surrounded by armed guards and barbed wires. A barracks for the SS was built in the garden. Himmler also built the white wall around the house using slave labor. After the wall was completed, he had those who constructed the wall shot. Very monstrous.

Now, the von Trapp house is a more peaceful place. In 1947, the property was purchased from the von Trapp family by the Missionaries of the Precious Blood. In 2008, it opened to the public as a hotel.


- YouTubewww.youtube.com

While the house has a heavy history, the previous residents of the property took satisfaction in knowing the von Trapps resisted the Nazi party. "What Himmler did here is a heavy weight on the house," Precious Blood Fr. Andreas Hasenburger, the rector of the Kolleg St. Josef, told the National Catholic Reporter. "But we are also proud to live in the von Trapp house, the house of the man who said no to the Führer."

It takes a lot of guts to stand up for what you believe in, especially when you're pressured to forfeit your integrity. Knowing that the family gave up their life to stay true to their principals makes The Sound of Music so much better.

This article originally appeared five years ago.

From Your Site Articles
Sustainability

Former Levi's CEO Charles Bergh settled the debate on how often you should wash your jeans

"We don’t need to wash jeans as often as most people think we do.”

via Levi Strauss and Ricardo Gomez Angel/Unsplash

Levi's CEO Charles Bergh settles the jean washing debate

Social media has become a fertile breeding ground for conversations about hygiene. Whether it’s celebrities bragging about how little their family bathes or battles over how often people should wash their sheets or bras.

One of the debates that gets the most diverse responses is how often people wash their denim jeans.

Denim atelier Benjamin Talley Smith tells Today that jeans should be washed "as little as possible, if at all.” Laundry expert Patric Richardson adds they should be cleaned “after nine or 10 wearings, like to me, that is the ideal." At that point, they probably have stains and are "a little sweaty by that point, so you need to wash 'em," Richardson says.

Still, some people wash and dry them after every wear while others will hand wash and never hang dry. With all these significant differences of opinion, there must be a correct answer somewhere, right?

The former CEO of Levi Strauss, Charles Bergh, has stepped up to set the record straight on when and how to wash your jeans. He caused a stir in 2014 when he said he only washes his jeans once a year, but it was for environmental reasons more than hygiene.


He later clarified his thoughts in a blog post, “The Dirty Jean Manifesto” he posted to LinkedIn.

“I made this provocative statement because I believe strongly in what our brands stand for: quality, durability and lasting products made sustainably. I also said it because I believe we don’t need to wash jeans as often as most people think we do,” Bergh wrote.

"We learned that an average pair of jeans consumes roughly 3,500 liters of water — and that is after only two years of use, washing the jeans once a week," Bergh wrote. "Nearly half of the total water consumption, or 1,600 liters, is the consumer throwing the jeans in the washing machine. That’s equivalent to 6,700 glasses of drinking water!"

To add to the problem, denim jeans are often manufactured in places where water is scarce, such as India, Pakistan, Mexico, China and parts of California.

Bergh recently spoke with CNBC’s Christine Tan and clarified his thoughts on jean cleanliness.

“True denim heads, people that really love their denim, will tell you to never put your denim into a washing machine. So that’s what I do,” Bergh explained. “If I drop some curry on my jeans, I’m gonna clean it. But I’ll spot-clean it. And if they get really gross you know, if I’ve been out sweating or something and they get really gross, I’ll wash them in the shower.”

However, when Bergh washes his jeans in the shower, he does it while wearing them and washing them with soap. The image that the scene conjures is of a cowboy bathing in a cartoon, clothes on and all.

There are a lot of different opinions on how often one should wash and dry their jeans and many of them boil down to personal preference. But the debate on the topic has brought up one very big point we should all consider: when choosing how often we wash our jeans, a big part of the decision should be considering the amount of water we use.

This article originally appeared two years ago.

From Your Site Articles
life hacks
Science

Forget what you know about bed bugs. Avoiding and getting rid of them is pretty simple.

And thankfully, there are no toxic chemicals involved.

Mark Rober/YouTube

Mark Rober subjected himself to bed bug bites in the name of science.

"Good night! Sleep tight! Don't let the bed bugs bite!" This sing-songy rhyme that has been around for centuries alludes to the fact that bed bugs were prevalent in the past. After a significant decrease post-WWII, however, the sneaky pests have been making a comeback. Since the 1990s, bed bug infestations have risen dramatically, leading people to look for ways to avoid and get rid of the blood-sucking little buggers.

Unfortunately, a lot of the information about how to do that is flat-out wrong. Popular YouTube science communicator Mark Rober invites viewers to forget what we think we know and go on an educational journey with the leading bed bug researchers at Rutgers University's urban entomology lab. Not only did Rober subject himself to bed bug bites on purpose to see what happens when they feed, but he also conducted a series of experiments in the lab to find out what is actually effective at killing them and what is not.

Bed Bugs Belarus GIFGiphy

Bed bugs have a reputation for being nearly impossible to get rid of, which isn't really the case, according to Rober. When you know what works, it's actually a fairly simple process to kill an infestation. And the good news is that it doesn't entail any toxic chemicals—in fact the pest control chemicals sold for bed bugs don't work at all, according to Rober's tests.

In the process of learning about bed bugs, Rober shared a few "super wild" facts about the infamous creatures.

Fact #1: Bed bugs can live 3 to 10 months without feeding.

Eek. No wonder it seems like it's impossible to get rid of them. Starving them doesn't work. They can live in the resting stage for 3 to 6 months, and if the environment is cold enough, they can survive around 300 days, or 10 months, without eating.

- YouTubewww.youtube.com

Fact #2: Bed bugs don't transmit disease

Some good news here: Unlike blood-sucking mosquitoes, bed bugs don't carry or transmit disease. The bad news on the front is that because they don't pose a disease threat, only an annoyance, there's not a big incentive to fund research to eradicate them.

Fact #3: Bed bugs are attracted to vertical objects

In one of Rober's experiments, he placed a dish with a cylindrical vertical post inside it an a dish without a column, and nearly all of the bed bugs in the enclosure ended up in the dish with the column. "If you think about it, humans sleep at the highest elevation any given room. So their logic is just crawl up any vertical surface you see until you eventually find a warm-blooded meal at the top."

Part of how they find humans is by smell, which is why certain strong-smelling items can act as a deterrent for bed bugs. In Rober's experiment, Bounce dryer sheets, moth balls, baking soda, and essential oils all seemed to repel bed bugs (as opposed to ultrasonic pest repellers, which appeared to have no effect). However, none of those things did anything to kill them.

bed bugs, bed bug infestation, how to spot bed bugsBed bugs are about the size of an apple seed.Photo credit: Canva

Fact #4: Before 1950, one in three homes had bed bugs

Yikes. Even with the resurgence, we're still nowhere near those numbers, thank goodness.

Fact #5: The way bed bugs mate is weird

The term used to describe it is called "traumatic insemination," and really, you should just let Mark Rober explain it with his visual metaphor. Start at minute 11:30.

bug GIFGiphy

Two things work well to kill bed bugs—diatomaceous earth and heat

In testing chemical sprays, foggers, and other items marketed for killing bed bugs, Rober found a "superstar" in a natural, non-toxic substance. Diatomaceous earth—pulverized fossilized remains of tiny aquatic organisms called diatoms—was the most effective at killing the buggers with a 90% mortality rate after 10 days as opposed to 12% with the Hot Shot bed bug spray. Diatomaceous earth is mostly silica, which absorbs moisture, and when the silica dust sticks to the bed bugs as the walk through it, it dehydrates them. A light dusting of diatomaceous earth around all the cracks and crevices of a room is one way to kill off an infestation, though that process can take days.

The other way to kill bed bugs is heat. Steam kills bed bugs, as does heating up a room to over 122 degrees Fahrenheit does the trick. Temps over 122 degrees kills bed bugs instantly, and as Rober points out, there's no way for them to build immunity to this kind of treatment. So steamers and clothes dryers set to high are the average person's best bet for killing off bed bugs if they have them. The "nuclear option" is to have a pro come in with big heaters and cook your home for a day.

checking for bed bugs, bed bug poop, bed bugs in mattressChecking mattresses for signs of bed bugs at a hotel can help you avoid bringing them home.Photo credit: Canva

How do you avoid getting bed bugs in the first place?

An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure, and that's true for bed bugs especially. Avoiding an infestation if there's already one in your apartment building is trickier, but a lot of people inadvertently bring bed bugs home from hotel stays. Checking the underside of a hotel mattress as soon as you come in the room is a good habit to be in. Bed bugs poop a lot, and there will be spots along the edges of the mattress if bed bugs are present.

The other tip is to use the luggage rack to store your suitcase instead of leaving it on the floor or furniture and to hang clothes on the closet hangers instead of putting them into the hotel room's dresser drawers. Some people may even put their suitcase in the bathtub, at least until they've checked the bed for signs of poop.

Nobody wants to deal with bed bugs, but at least now we have clear evidence of what actually works to get rid of them and what doesn't. Cook them with heat/steam and dehydrate them with diatomaceous earth, and take some simple steps when traveling to lessen your chances of getting them in the first place.

Sleep tight, everyone!

From Your Site Articles
health
Modern Families

Woman goes to great lengths to adopt baby from husband's ex-wife to save him from foster care

"At the time, it just made sense."

via Christie Werts/TikTok and Christie Werts/TikTok

Christie Werts and her son, Levi

Christie and Wesley Werts have taken the idea of a blended family to the next level. When the couple fell in love five years ago and married, they brought together her children, Megan and Vance, and his children, Austin and Dakota.

As of January, the Ohio family has five children after adopting young Levi, 2. Levi is the son of Wesley’s ex-wife, who passed away four days after the child was born. The ex-wife had the boy prematurely, at 33 weeks, and died soon after from drug addiction and complications of COVID-19.

When Levi was born, he was a ward of the state with no first name or birth certificate.

“When I heard about Levi, without hesitation, I said we should take him,” Christie said, according to The Daily Mail, and her reason went far beyond the fact that the child was the half-brother to two of her recently adopted children. “I myself was a foster kid and, although for the most part, I had a great experience, I did not want him going to foster care,” Christie said.



@cjthemom5

Replying to @Journey♥️ Yes, they will always know of her and ill be there for every emotion good or bad. But im also mom, ive been to every game, every doctors appt, sat with them if they needed an ear loved unconditional . I am mom also. #adoption #srorytime #siblings #foryou #loveislove


Before the family knew of Levi’s birth, Christie had a recurring dream about a blue-eyed, blonde-haired boy.

"Before Levi, we had wanted to try to have a child of our own," she told Newsweek. "I'm in my forties, so we knew that we would probably need fertility treatment, so I thought let's just think about it and what will be will be."

The problem was that Levi was in Texas, so the family sold their house and moved to the Lone Star State to go through the arduous adoption process. The situation was further complicated because Levi’s biological father had parental rights even though he had substance abuse problems. The family couldn’t move out of Texas until his rights were legally terminated.

But after a 16-month process, in January 2023, Levi became a legal family member. Christie understands that adopting her husband’s ex-wife’s baby may seem unusual to some people. "It's a lot to process for a lot of people, but honestly, it seems a lot crazier than it was. At the time, it just made sense," she said.



@cjthemom5

Our adoption is official !!! after 17 months!!! #adoption #son #loveyou #ourstory#foryou #fyp


Even though Christie knew in her heart that she must adopt Levi, she wasn’t without reservations. “'If I said I did not [have concerns beforehand], that would not be honest,” she told The Daily Mail. “This was different—I was going to walk into a child I never met and was worried the circumstances would hinder this instant love. But [...] he stole my heart. I also felt this intense need to protect him.”

These days, Levi fits right in with the family, and the rest of the kids are happy to be back to living an everyday life without any caseworkers or inspections.

“He's great, he is the king of the house! We are all very close. He won't understand the journey right now, but someday, I will let him know we fought for him!” Christie said.

This article originally appeared two years ago.

From Your Site Articles
family
Parenting

Someone filmed unsupervised young girls and boys for five days and revealed exactly what happened

This is what kids really do when no one is watching.

Photo credit: Canva

Experiment of boys and girls left unsupervised return eyeopening results

In 2016, Boys Alone (Social Experiment Documentary) took 10 boys ages 11-12 and left them unsupervised in a house for five days. Before the boys were left alone they were given cooking classes and other life skills lessons to give them all a more even starting ground.

They repeated the social experiment with girls in Girls Alone (Social Experiment Documentary). The girls are given the same life skills lessons as the boys before being left to their own devices for the better part of a week. Both groups of children were left with cameras watching their every move as adults monitored from outside of the home. But there was no interference and when the camera crew was present they did not interact or attempt to parent the children in any way.

Recently clips of these experiments resurfaced on social media when a guy with the username Mr. Cult Daddy uploaded it to share with his 508k followers. His condensed version of the clips along with his commentary gave viewers a quick overview of the vastly different results.



@mrcultdaddy

Replying to @mrcultdaddy In contrast, the girls displayed more responsibility and cooperation. They created a chore chart, divided up tasks, and took turns cooking meals. They even organized a DIY beauty salon to cheer up a girl who was feeling down. While the girls had some disagreements, they handled them more maturely and left the house in a clean and orderly state. The experiment showcased a sense of teamwork and care, unlike the boys' experience​ #boysvsgirls #patriarchy #psychologyfacts #greenscreenvideo

"Imagine this, 10 boys all from the ages of 11 and 12 were put into a house with no adult supervision for five days. And if you heard me say that and thought to yourself that sounds like a total 'Lord of the Flies' situation, you're not wrong because it did not take long for them to completely descend into chaos," the creator shares.



Boys playing, boys, children, unsupervised kids, parenting, modern parenting shallow focus photo of boy in red crew-neck T-shirtPhoto by Tolga Ahmetler on Unsplash


He explains that the boys essentially destroyed the house by drawing on the walls, flipping furniture and "trashing everything." The boys didn't use their new cooking skills, relying solely on snacks and sodas. Eventually the chaotic fun turned into power struggles, breaking into different groups fighting each other, even tying someone to a chair.

"But what's interesting about this whole thing is just how quickly their social structure that they developed just completely fell apart. What started out as excitement turned into isolation depression," the man says.

The TikTok creator jumps into sharing the commentary from others around the societal expectations of boys being able to get away with more which people feel had an impact on the way these boys behaved. On the flip side, the girls experiment had wildly different results. The girls were the same age as the boys but instead of immediately descending into chaos, they actually worked together.

One commenter writes about the boys, "Grown men live like this too. It’s not an age thing," with another person saying, "That’s the least shocking outcome ever."



kids, children, unsupervised children, parenting, modern parenting, parenting advice, parenting hacksTeens playing table tennisPhoto by Nima Sarram on Unsplash


"As we know the boys descended into chaos relatively quickly so you might say to yourself, 'oh we can expect the same things from these girls,' no. From the start the girls organize themselves. They made a freaking chore chart, took turns cooking, cleaning. meals were planned, they didn't just survive off the snacks like the boys did. They really created this team," he shares.

The girls also painted on the walls but it was productive paintings like murals and not painting to make a mess. Evidently the girls all worked together and provided each other emotional support according to the creator. They even cleaned the house before they left. It would seem that people in the comments were not at all surprised by the stark contrast between the girls and boys experiment.

One woman tells the creator, "by 12 I could have run a whole household."

"I think it's probably 15-20% prefrontal cortex and 75-80% conditioning. I was expected to wash the dishes every night by myself from a young age while my male sibling went to bed. I was made to do his homework, even tho I was 2y younger, so he'd have free time to "be a typical boy." I'm the reason he passed elementary school, but I refused after that and his grades crashed," another woman reveals.



children, raising children, unsupervised children, parents, parenting, modern parenting two girl in pink and green shirts sitting on wall shelfPhoto by Cristina Gottardi on Unsplash


"I think it shows the difference in raising. Girls are taught to behave, be smart. Boys tend to be spoiled by moms and dads. They don’t usually receive the learning of being nice, cordial," someone else shares.

"It's conditioning (at least 80%) my brother is 9 years older and I had to teach him how to do his own laundry when I was 14 (he was ripe ol' age of 23) bc my mom taught me from a young age and didn't," one commenter explains.

While many people agree that the culprit is social conditioning combined with brain development while others pointed out that it may simply be American culture. That also likely plays a large role in the outcome of these experiments, but what do you think? If the experiment was completed again today, would the results be the same?

You can watch the entire boys experiment here and the girls experiment here.

This article originally appeared last year.

From Your Site Articles
children
Trending Stories