Difference between revisions of "Talk:Food"

From AdCiv
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 1: Line 1:
 
I can't figure out how to transclude [[Fundamental resources/Water/Water-efficient agriculture]] as a panel--[[User:Balatro|Balatro]] 18:21, 20 May 2011 (CEST)
 
I can't figure out how to transclude [[Fundamental resources/Water/Water-efficient agriculture]] as a panel--[[User:Balatro|Balatro]] 18:21, 20 May 2011 (CEST)
 
: There are a few ways to do it, depending on whether you want it to appear in a frame or not, and whether it is an 'intro' frame of another compound page. The simplest method is to create a frame in the page you want it to appear, then in that frame simply put:
 
: There are a few ways to do it, depending on whether you want it to appear in a frame or not, and whether it is an 'intro' frame of another compound page. The simplest method is to create a frame in the page you want it to appear, then in that frame simply put:
:<code><nowiki>{{:Fundamental resources/Water/Water-efficient agriculture}}</nowiki></code>
+
#<code><nowiki>{{:Fundamental resources/Water/Water-efficient agriculture}}</nowiki></code>
: Or if you don't want in a frame but just a sub-section with a heading, write the heading, then underneath put the same code as above
+
# Or if you don't want in a frame but just a sub-section with a heading, write the heading, then underneath put the same code as above
: Or use the following template I have just made. Note it has two parameters - the sub-page title - which might have a long-winded path, and then the short text you actually want to appear as a title for that transcluded section:
+
# Or use this new template I have just made. Note it has two parameters - the sub-page title - which might have a long-winded path, and then the short text you actually want to appear as a title for that transcluded section:
 
:<code><nowiki>{{transclude|Fundamental resources/Water/Water-efficient agriculture|Water-efficient agriculture}}</nowiki></code>
 
:<code><nowiki>{{transclude|Fundamental resources/Water/Water-efficient agriculture|Water-efficient agriculture}}</nowiki></code>
 
:Shout if you want any more help with it!
 
:Shout if you want any more help with it!

Revision as of 13:16, 29 May 2011

I can't figure out how to transclude Fundamental resources/Water/Water-efficient agriculture as a panel--Balatro 18:21, 20 May 2011 (CEST)

There are a few ways to do it, depending on whether you want it to appear in a frame or not, and whether it is an 'intro' frame of another compound page. The simplest method is to create a frame in the page you want it to appear, then in that frame simply put:
  1. {{:Fundamental resources/Water/Water-efficient agriculture}}
  2. Or if you don't want in a frame but just a sub-section with a heading, write the heading, then underneath put the same code as above
  3. Or use this new template I have just made. Note it has two parameters - the sub-page title - which might have a long-winded path, and then the short text you actually want to appear as a title for that transcluded section:
{{transclude|Fundamental resources/Water/Water-efficient agriculture|Water-efficient agriculture}}
Shout if you want any more help with it!
CharlesC 14:14, 29 May 2011 (CEST)


  • Electroculture: stimulating plant growth using electricity. Sometimes using electric fields to ionize the air, sometimes DC current applied directly to the roots. [1][2][3][4]. Ionizing the air in a controlled-environment would help the vision of growing all your food in your kitchen.
  • The concept of agroecology is best illustrated by a web diagram.
  • Emphasize that a lot of these techniques are new and have a lot of unrealized potential
    • Aquaponics began in 1976
    • Aeroponics started in 1944, but the first commercial applications were in the mid 1980s
    • There were experimental seawater-irrigated farms in the mid-1960s and again in the 1990s, but the first productive farm was started as recently as 1998
    • Open-ocean farms are still in the experimental phase. Expect many more in the coming decade.
  • Vertical farms (feed 40,000-50,000 people)


  • Aquaculture is an important part of the puzzle. Yields are 4-20 times higher when you farm on water rather than land (source: Permaculture: A Designer's Manual by Bill Mollison). The principles of agroecology apply in exactly the same way as on land; in other words, what would be most productive is lakes, ponds, wetlands and oceans being treated as permaculture farms. Look up UN figures on how much area is available for this.
  • Automated agricultural equipment. Robot farmers
    • Tractors and combine harvesters could be fully automated with today's technology. Application of GPS, vision system and cut-off safety boundaries near roads and habitation.
  • Algae. Spirulina was called by the UN the 'best food for the future'. Small-scale local production of spirulina has promise in alleviating hunger.
  • Insects. Over 2000 species are edible. Feed conversion ratios better than 2:1. It is difficult to imagine people changing their tastes.
  • Mushrooms. If we got a larger proportion of our protein requirements from mushrooms, both our health and our farms would benefit
  • Panel on sustainable ranching. Mob-grazing. An area larger than Africa is covered by grassland; we need to convert this to food. By restoring these grasslands using mob-grazing, we can grow tons of food while also sequestering more carbon than is emitted worldwide by all the burning of fuel.
  • Can Britain Feed Itself? - a paper analyzing what level of local food-production would be required to feed Britain. In a similar vein Can Totnes feed Itself?. These papers conclude that self-sufficiency would be possible, but they wrangle with considerable difficulties regarding feeding cities. The missing element in their plans is controlled-environment growing - introduce decentralized aeroponics into kitchen cabinets, aquaponics in backyards and car parks etc. and it becomes much easier to see cities feeding themselves.
  • Cuba is a pretty interesting example of both decentralization and urban agriculture. It has a pretty high population density (over 100/km2) and 80% of the population is in urban centers, yet they are approaching total self-sufficiency in food. This is done through a combination of community gardens (including hydroponics), private gardens and farms. They also implement the ideas on DIY biotech.

How much land is needed to feed one person?

  • Growing Power apparently grows enough for ten thousand people on 5 acres[5] using aquaponics and other methods. That's about 2m2 per person
  • [6] "The data I keep coming across on the web and in gardening books suggests that, to provide an adequate, year-round vegetable diet (excluding grains) for a family of four using standardized organic gardening methods, you would need a garden plot about 4000-5000 square feet" That's 1000-1250 square feet per person, 93-116m2
  • [7] "On approximately two acres-- half of which was on a terraced 35 degree slope--I produced enough food to feed more than 300 people (with a peak of 450 people at one point), 49 weeks a year in my fully organic CSA on the edge of Silicon Valley . If I could do it there you can do it anywhere." 2 acres = 8094m2. For 300 people, that's 27m2 per person. For 450, it's 18m2. He goes on to say, "In a good but somewhat sloppy design, you need about 500 square feet ( 47m2 ) per person MAXIMUM. In a very good design, 200 square feet ( 19m2) will do the job."
  • Hydroponics: [8] "SH garden produces 2 kilos of vegetables a day per 20m2 space."
  • [9] 20m2, according to one of the guys who designed food production systems for NASA (probably aeroponics, though he doesn't specifically mention aeroponics in the video).
  • [10] ""It takes about 15,000 to 30,000 square feet of land to feed one person the average U.S. diet," he says. "I've figured out how to get it down to 4,000 square feet. How? I focus on growing soil, not crops." " 4000 square feet = 372m2
  • [11] "Ecology Action has dedicated almost a quarter-century to rediscovering the scientific principles that underlie these traditional systems. The people in Biosphere II in Arizona have been using techniques based on those outlined by Ecology Action: they raised 80 percent of their food for two years within a "closed system." Their experience demonstrates that a complete year's diet for one person can be raised on the equivalent of 3,403 square feet!" 3403 square feet = 316m2
  • [12] 1000 square feet = 93m2
  • At the very inefficient end of the spectrum: [13] "The current typical American’s food footprint load, including area left to meat, is approximately 2.1 acres. Traditional Victorian wisdom was that two acres would feed a person." 2 acres = 8094m2.
  • "Richard Bradfield has grown enough to feed 72 people per hectare [139m2 per person] by the techniques of double planting and multiple cropping, and with the use of cuttings for livestock feed. These results,8 as published and also as described to me by Bradfield, were obtained in the Phillipines, which has only a nine-month growing season and less than ideal weather conditions." The colonization of space by Gerard K. O'Neill

So figures vary wildly for organic farming. I tend to believe the higher estimates, 300-400m2, as there's a lot of hype around organic farming issues. (Though the quote from David Blume is interesting; he does seem authoritative.) For controlled-environment growing, figures are consistent at about 20m2, coming from credible sources based on actual experience. -- Balatro


Given the agricultural resources available and assuming population peaks at 20 billion, as long as the individual footprint is below 1550m2 we're fine.


A more detailed analysis would show how to provide people with -

  • Protein from meat, fish, eggs, dairy, nuts, seeds and mushrooms. Around 150g of meat (including fish) per person per day.
    • The protein requirements for one person can be met from 15m2 of aquaponics (UVI figures - see aquaponics article). This area is simultaneously growing vegetables/herbs
    • Less than 2m2 of indoor space would provide 100g of medicinal mushrooms per day. (It can be done in less than 1m2, but let's say 2.)
    • The presentation linked to in the article on ocean farming says 26m2 of ocean farm can grow enough seaweed to provide a person's protein requirements
    • Meat: With rotational cell grazing, land can simultaneously produce pigs, cows, rabbits, chickens (both for eggs and meat) and also trees for nuts and fruit. Cows demand the most land, so that will determine land requirement. Converting from these figures, 1000m2 of pasture can produce: 45kg beef, 32kg pork, 750 eggs, 50 meat chickens (say 75kg of meat), 2.5 turkeys (say 10kg of meat) and 2.5 rabbits (say 10kg of meat). If people eat 150g of meat a day, that's 54.75kg a year, and if we say a quarter comes from fish, 41kg a year. So that 1000m2 could provide meat for four people, a footprint of 250m2 each. There are 335,694 billion square meters of pasture in the world[14] - thousands per person no matter how explosive population growth is. The key is to convert as much pasture as possible to rotational cell grazing. --Balatro 21:36, 27 May 2011 (CEST)
    • A rabbitry can produce 2kg of meat per week (280g per day, enough for two people with no other protein source) in just a few square meters, say 10.
    • Spirulina - 100g/day/4m2
  • 1000g vegetables per person per day = 10m2 of simple hydroponic greenhouse space, 1.5m2 of vertical aeroponics
  • 600g of fruit per person per day = 73m2 @ 30t/ha yield. (This space can also be used for grazing)
  • 60g of legumes per person per day = 109.5m2 @ 2t/h yield. Probably less hydroponically, but I can't find any research about it --Balatro 21:36, 27 May 2011 (CEST)
  • Cereals to provide remaining carbohydrates. If people eat 400g rice/day and yield is 3t/ha, they need 487m2. However, people only eat that much rice because varied sources of carbohydrates are scarce. 150g (183m2) is better. Fish can be cultivated in rice paddies.
  • Total of 2700 calories per person per day

(These figures represent an abundant, rather than adequate, food supply. All that comes in at under 700m2 per person)

Aeroponics benefits summary

  • 98% water saving
  • 99% space saving
  • Energy-efficiency
  • No pesticide/ no crop lost to pests
  • No fertilizer
  • Local/ No transport
  • Fresh
  • Tastier
  • DIY/ swadeshi
  • Nutritiousness
  • High yield
  • Constant yield
  • Automation