It truly is more expensive. As techniques develop, and demand increases, and alternative marketing vehicles expand, price will come down. It is also cheaper to buy it directly from the farmer or a CO-OP. The "pick your own" farms want $2.00/lb for tomatoes, where as the supermarket wants $4.00/lb for organic.
Also, it is not scarce in the United States. If it is scare where you hail from, then you should be able to get a reasonable price for your product. Supply and demand. So, I do not understand your argument.
As for the "First Worlders", there are some that incorrectly believe that they are the ones with the Diabetes as they are the ones that over eat. The PI is getting pasted with the stuff.
why is it valid to say there will be no farm inflow from the surrounding area?
if it doesn't happen that we can transport food into large cities then for sure people will be moving out. there are vast areas of the surrounds that could be used again for mixed agriculture. they are fallow in large part now because most people are happy with processed packaged chemfoods (derived from corn, soy, wheat and rice).
assuming people stay in place. as you probably know, when shit hits the fan, people start to migrate. when the sea levels increase we'll already have huge movements of people and will be forced to rebuild large chunks of infrastructure, wouldn't it be great if we actually built them with sustainability, efficiency and better land use policies for people who will walk, garden and have green spaces?
Many in public health believe that a major culprit is our sedentary lifestyle. Faced with relatively few physical demands today, our bodies burn fewer calories than they evolved to consume ? and those unspent calories pile up over time as fat. The World Health Organization, in discussing the root causes of obesity, has cited a ?decrease in physical activity due to the increasingly sedentary nature of many forms of work, changing modes of transportation and increasing urbanization.?
This is a nice theory. But is it true? To find out, my colleagues and I recently measured daily energy expenditure among the Hadza people of Tanzania, one of the few remaining populations of traditional hunter-gatherers. Would the Hadza, whose basic way of life is so similar to that of our distant ancestors, expend more energy than we do?
Our findings, published last month in the journal PLoS ONE, indicate that they don?t, suggesting that inactivity is not the source of modern obesity.
Studies on the Inuits and the Aleuts too. Returning to their ancestral diets gets rid of the diabetes.
Unfortunately for Diabetics, they are suffering from a lot of fat bigotry. T2 Diabetes is a simple injury caused by consuming unnatural amounts of carbohydrates. You can heal from it, but you have to stop the insult that caused it in the first place.
Here is the thing about fat bigots. They see the human body as, what we call in engineering terms, an "open loop" system. It is not. It is one of the most complex and wonder "closed loop" system ever created. And being "closed loop", your body compensates. This is why you can stand on two feet. This is also why skinny people don't get fat when they over eat.
The Fat Bigots want Diabetes and obesity to a "character flaw" in those they "condescend" on. It is a failure of the control system involved in the closed loop to compensate. The only "character flaw" is the bigotry.
I eat when I am hungry. Eat more at some meals, less at other, occasionally fast when I can't eat (on a customer's site, etc.). Somewhat similar to hunter-gathers.
When my wife or I cook something nice, I do tend to eat a bit more. Bear in mind that I can now taste my food much better.
It all works out. It is a closed loop system.
In the third world, were Diabetes is becoming a huge problem, they eat a hell of a lot less that I do and move a hell of a lot more. The problem is that they eat the same thing that injured me: healthy carbs.
Some NYC folks even grow their own stuff on their roofs! Great hobby and yummy.
Watched a documentary where they are trying to fish farm in their basements to cut the transportation time (bad fish stick!) on fish to market. Don't know how well that will turn out.
Those other crops (which other crops are they?) cannot produce anything like the calories per unit area that grains do. It's all about the efficiency to harvest sunshine. We are running out of arable land and losing much constantly while every day there are a few million more mouths to feed. Aside from the obvious that we cannot keep reproducing ourselves to extinction this implies the need for more food per acre of land not less.
Have you read about the green revolution? Start with Wikipedia. For the current situation go to the FAO they have been grappling with this for decades. Those are the kinds of figures that make your scheme impossible to apply generally. As Fran said, what you suggest is only possible in rich societies.
Assuming that what you say about yield and cost are true about California wine you cannot extrapolate this to your scheme to do away with carbohydrates as a major component of the world's diet. For a start their measure of success is to produce quality wine not feed the maximum people per acre.
No it isn't. You merely assert your case but I need you to produce some evidence.
I am mainly organic but I would describe my approach as eclectic with a bias towards recylcling and away from introduced inputs. I have no need of ammonium nitrate as I can get N from manures. But I will use Potassium sulphate as there is no other practical way to get K into my soil.
This is not relevant as I am not trying to feed a family on my vege plot.
Let us not get too distracted by the specifics of my garden, you need to show how the world can still eat by doing away with 2/3 of its calories that come from carbohydrates. And show the FAO how to find a way to feed those millions of poor buggers who already don't get three squares most days. And the millions extra that will be born daily until we get means of population control other than starvation and war.
Replace those calories with fat. It is the idea fuel for humans. And more calories per weight than carbs. Plus, no Diabetes. Hybridize the high carb foods for fat. Not addictive either, so there will be special interests and corrupt government agencies kicking and scratching not to do it.
Don't mistake initial iterations as the final end product. As we say in engineering: iterate, iterate, iterate. You would be amazed at what humans can do when they put their minds to it. We will find a way. Unleash the human spirit and you'd be surprised at ways we find to farm and do other things. Songbird's stuff may seem silly at first glance, but that is not the way to look at it. The way to look at it is that it is an initial iteration. Say to yourself "I wonder if this can be improved on by ...". Look at Songbird as a pioneer (who takes the arrows).
For example, we Nevadans benefit from world class cantaloupes grown in the "desert". (I get to eat a half of one at a sitting.) Definitely not "arable land", if your were to believe the naysayers.
As far as those starving in the world, you will find it is far more a product of stifling the human spirit (Socialism) than any other reason. Were free markets are allowed, supply and demand shift resources around automatically.
By the way, "Starvation" is one of the methods "the most" brutal empire in the history of the world used to subjugate the populace (the Soviet Union). Mainly so they could not fight back. So, your war argument doesn't hold. Starving people don't go to war -- they can't.
So, how will the problem be solved? Easy. The human spirit: the free and open exchange of goods and services between consenting parties.
You have to do some work in hybridizing. Or grow something else that isn't addictive.
Heard a Hemp advocate on the radio. Apparently much more effective that wheat per acre and half the water. But, I could not verify anything he said.
He also said that pollen from hemp would ruin Marijuana (another plus).
As for calories. Eat an avocado! I especially love the heirloom varieties. Haas are bland and twice as expensive.
Here is a good run down for you on fat vs carbs:
On the other hand, gram for gram, fats provide more energy than carbohydrates.
formatting link
The reason for this is the amount of oxidation that takes place as these compounds are converted to carbon dioxide and water. Carbon for carbon, fats require more oxidation to become CO2 and H2O than do carbohydrates. Roughly speaking, carbohydrates already have one oxygen for every carbon atom, thus, each carbon atom needs only one more oxygen and each pair of hydrogen atoms needs one more oxygen. However, almost every carbon atom in a fat molecule needs two oxygens instead of just one additional one, and each pair of hydrogen atoms still needs one more oxygen. So, just from counting the number of oxygens needed to be added, fats require about half again as much oxygen for the same number of carbon atoms. Because of this, the oxidation of fats takes longer, but it also gives off more energy.
When comparing gram to gram, instead of carbon to carbon, the effect is exaggerated. When you weigh a carbohydrate, more oxygen is included in that weight. When you weigh a fat, you get more carbon atoms per gram and therefore, gram for gram, the fats will give even more energy (over twice as much) than will the carbohydrates. Generally, fats provide about 9 kilocalories per gram and carbohydrates provide about 4 kilocalories per gram. (Using nutritional units, that is 9 Calories/gram for fats and 4 Calories/gram for carbohydrates.)
Did you catch the part about "9 Calories/gram for fats and 4 Calories/gram for carbohydrates"? That would over double the calories you are looking for!
As far as your question as to what to replace grain with, just look in your produce isle. If you have a Mexican grocery store, there are even more options. (I have a really great one filled with the nicest people. Love them dearly. Lots of neat stuff!)
What fat, where from, how much, what density of calories per acre can it yield? Did you even look at the FAO site?
You haven't even got to the feasibility study level how can you be talking about iterations.
Irrelevant, nothing like the density of food required and needs extensive irrigation which is getting more scarce by the day.
Idealogical clap-trap doesn't feed people. If you have been driven off your land and your sons forced into the army you don't give a shit about whether the warlord is a socialist, a martian. You don't care if they are philosophers or just of another tribe that thinks your tribe is scum to be cleared so they can take over.
I didn't say starving people go to war. You have this grossly over simplified (like the rest). Famine and war go together, each is a common cause of the other.
The last translates as "I haven't a clue how to do it in practice but I have much pious hope"
I think we leave it there (as predicted) there is no progress.
You are just frustrated because I am not agreeing with your argument.
I think the human spirit will surprise you. Remember when the patent office was closed as there was nothing new to discover? Humanity is not a static equation. We are dynamic. Don't be so negative. There is a lot of exciting things going on in the farming community right now -- a mixture of good old fashioned knowledge handed down and science
A lot of farmers are switching to organic because they can actually make a profit. Free and open competition is how it is done.
When people stop buying grains, farmers will stop producing them. They don't make squat off them anyway. Farming/ranching is hard work and they deserve to make a living.
As I have said before, for alternatives, just go to your local produce section and look around. When I am in the meat and produce sections, the only word I can describe it as is "joy!" (One of the produce ladies just smiles and shakes her head when she sees me pick up an eggplant. The eyes give me away.)
No it can't. Country where wheat and sheep are produced cannot grow vegetables. Our land, where we currently produce beef cattle, could not grow vegetables. We also cannot grow grapes successfully either.
It's all abbut the class of land (which relates to the quality of the land) and rainfall/water. The former is not high quality enough for the production of vegetables and the latter is just plain old deficient.
If he's anything like me he's probably frustrated by your failure to demonstrate that you have any capacity for critical analysis or ability to read and absorb anything that is not the latest fad in new age fluffyness.
You are correct. And, I also think you misunderstand me.
What I meant was that where wheat is grown, other crops can be substituted. Depends on consumer demand. Wheat farmer don't make squat off of wheat. Who grows wheat in the desert anyway? That is for livestock.
By the way, you can grow hemp on the same land as wheat with half the water and apparently, if you listen to their advocates, make twice the money per acre.
Where sheep and cattle are typically raised (my Nevada for example), the ground is only capable of producing cellulose (grass). The livestock then converts it into food for us.
But not always, you aught to try some of Fallon's cantaloupes. Grown right in the middle of the desert. (No doubt livestock scat has a great deal to do with it.)
In California's central valley (over the hill from us, the land of fruits and nuts -- I wonder if Higgs will catch that), they have all kinds of vegetables, wheat, etc., all mixed together.
On full circle farms, the do grow cows, sheep, turkeys, chickens, vegetables, and grass. But, that is on land with more water than our desert.
By the way, Fallon is about and hour and half drive away. None of us here can grow a cantaloupe for our lives! Life is cruel that way.
-T
Thank you by the way. Ranching in very difficult work and you don't get paid squat for it. Grass fed too! I have a lot of admiration for what you do.
Speaking of Fallon, Mori-Lahatton runs a ranch and his own butcher house. Grass fed only. He says he only gets 2 lbs a day versus 3 lbs a day with the chemicals. His cows are allowed to walk around and are not penned up where they can only lift theirs head up and down to eat.
He hangs his beef the old fashioned way. Tastes so good, you would not think it was the same animal as in the grocery store! And he and his whole family work the butt off.
Can you be more specific. Which fats do you say should be grown?
And how do you propose that anyone grows avacodoes in cereal producing country?
I especially love the heirloom
And where is the fat coming form? Specifically.
Jesus wept! Why on earth would you think David might have a Mexican grocery store near him? What do you say can replace grain? Be specific and if you don't know then say so because platitudes don't cut it.
LOL. Glad to hear that you are inspired :-)) I went for a walk this am with a group of women and a bunch of dogs. I took my dog but left him in the car as he gets anxious if expected to walk in unknown territory. We mostly walked in the middle of the road even though there were footpaths - it's great where I live as a couple of cars during the day is a traffic jam. After my walk, I left my car where it was and went to check out a house that may be coming on the market (we're thinking that we need to downsize soonish) and then I walked on to the library. I was glad that I had my backpack as I'd gone to pick up only 1 book I had ordered in on interlibrary loan and left with about 8 more books - a couple of really interesting looking gardening books amongst them.
Now you've got me wondering about one of my favourite rollicking yarn type authors - I can't recall if she wrote abut Santa Monica or some other west coastal area.
Just did a google - it was Santa Teresa she writes about.
to very big city, Los Angeles. Yeah, we have sidewalks, traffic lights; th e whole enchilada. But plenty of places to walk, esp. the sea cliff Promena de.
walking groups. Partly social, I would assume? But in this nice climate, why walk indoors?)
ity Council, resulting in even more traffic, also from people coming in fro m outside to work in high tech, medical, other (it's a desirable area). I' ll often walk downtown or if backpack overloaded,take the bus,just not to d eal with parking.
sidewalks! I kid you not! Those fortunate souls need never be crude pede strians. I vaguely understand that in the next county the car-oriented, ste rile fortress suburbs often have only driveways; no sidewalks
scribed; just takes determination. I go forth inspired!
I'm not sure there IS such a place. What is author's name?
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.