bagatelle

Getting food would be the most important thing, if other goods were still available. Getting fresh water might be a problem too.

If the people were significantly fewer and there had been no damage to the nature, there would be land enough to produce food, but not all would be willing or capable of doing these tasks.

Canned and other preserved food would last for a while, but people would fight for sharing them, unless it can be controlled. Even though I had the means and possibility to produce food, I would likely have to share it with more people.

Managing depends a lot on your geographical location, we are in almost arctic conditions compared to some areas. Without electricity many houses would become impossible to keep warm. Even though we have wood to burn, the central heating will not work without electricity.

BG says it would take time to get to agriculture. From my viewpoint it's a bit different, since we are already doing it. The question is, with how many people would I have to share it, and would other people possibly come to seek for food - peacefully or not. But even us in the countryside could not survive from day one without cooperation with other people.

We have some hunting equipment also, rabbits running through garden, but it would be a task to catch them or go find a moose in the woods.

Who would take care of the huge amount of domestic animals? Or would they be gone too? There's meat available, but the stock has to be taken care of, that would be one of the first things to do.

I remember once hearing an estimate, that one hectare of farming land would be enough to produce food for an average family of 4 people. Hopefully my memory serves.

If the disaster would be quick, we would still have granaries left, but most of that would likely get wasted, when it couldn't be processed.

__________________