Some outlandish claims about agriculture.

Mouthwash

Escaped Lunatic
Joined
Sep 26, 2011
Messages
9,370
Location
Hiding
So here's a guy called David Blume who thinks that modern farming techniques are a fraud and that permaculture (sustainable agriculture utilizing the whole ecosystem) is much more efficient. I know nothing on the topic and there's not much to be found online. His Wikipedia page doesn't even include a section for criticism.

My instinct in these matters is skepticism, but there genuinely seems to be no pushback. If he's right, then it would be a lot easier for us to revert to an agrarian-centered society (my pie-in-the-sky goal). I doubt anyone here has a background in farming, but what is your impression of his claims?
As far as I know I was one of the only farmers fully utilizing permaculture to produce surplus food for sale in the US as a full time occupation. 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.

If anyone here has a background in agriculture (not likely, but I thought I'd ask), what is your impression of this?

I did this for almost nine years until I lost the lease to my rented land. My yields were often 8 times what the USDA claims are possible per square foot. My soil fertility increased dramatically each year so I was not achieving my yields by mining my soil. On the contrary I built my soil from cement-hard adobe clay to its impressive state from scratch. By the end I was at over 22% organic matter with a cation exchange capacity (CEC) of over 25. CEC is an indirect measure of soil humus or the ability of the soil to hold nutrients available to crops. The higher the number the more nutrients are stored and available. For reference, most Class I commercial agricultural soil is lucky to hit 2% organic matter—the dividing line between a living and dead soil—with a CEC around 5.

At most times I had no more than half of my land under production with the rest in various stages of cover cropping. And I was only producing at a fraction of what would have been possible if I had owned the land and could have justified the investment into an overstory of integrated tree, berry, flower and nut crops along with the various vegetable and fruit crops. The farm produced so much income that I was routinely in the top 15% of organic farms in California (which has over 2000 organic farms) in most years on a fraction of the land that my colleagues were using. I grew over 45 different kinds of crops so my financial success cannot be attributed to growing a few high value crops like Yuppie Chow (salad mix).

Unlike other organic farmers, I almost never used even organic pesticides on my farm. The permaculture ecosystem I designed was so self-managing and self-maintaining with natural controls such as carnivorous insects, toads, lizards, snakes, owls, bats, and other allies, that it was rare that I needed to intervene (I can count the times on one hand that I intervened over 9 years). On the few occasions I did, I used coffee solution made from waste caf é coffee. You didn't think plants made caffeine to get you high did you? Caffeine is an extremely effective natural insecticide, which degrades in the sunlight or air in about 24 hours after use.

On the subsistence agriculture level, we permies regularly have designed productions systems around the world, which feed everyone living in a given house within a 50-foot radius of the house. This rule of thumb holds pretty well because the more folks who live there, the bigger the house, the larger the surface area, so no more than 50 feet is really necessary.

As a reality check, I'd like to remind everyone that in the 1850's, prior to refrigerated transport, New York City supplied all its food for a population of over a million from within 7 miles of the borders of the city. (It wasn't worth the cost of horse feed and time to go further than 7 miles to export food into the city). No one would discount a system of community food security for one million people as non-commercial.

So you say, "Well if you're such a wiseguy and you obviously would make so much more money from the greater yields of a simple three crop permaculture system, why don't corporations in the Midwest do it to make more money?" This gets to the core of the problem—which is not population/resources and/or biological models of overpopulation which typically apply to wild animals.

Capitalism is concerned with more than just making money. The reason why monocultures are favored by corporations EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE THE LEAST EFFICIENT WAY OF PRODUCING FOOD in pounds of food per acre is that it can be done with the least amount of labor. To harvest the three sisters you would need a digital harvester—i.e. two hands—not a combine. Even though the increased labor would be totally justified by the increased profit, corporations are totally allergic to dealing with labor. Labor is messy. It organizes, it wants a fair share of the profit, cities want tax money to pay for worker habitat infrastructure and other pesky things that corporations will avoid at all costs. Our current form of agribusiness is a textbook case of design maximizing the advantage of capital to the disadvantage of labor facilitated by the artificially low cost of energy.
 
Last edited:
I worked on a farm while younger

You can produce a lot more vegetables vs meat per acre.

Intensive dairy farming pollutes. Here we have trashed almost every river on the east coast of the South island. My local one I used to swim is as a kid has killed dogs drinking from it.

We found a clean one, upstream is a pine plantation. We grade them here the cleanest are the ones with native forests upstream followed by wood plantations them farm then fairy farms.

NZ can feed about 30 million people iirc. If we switched the vegetarian it's a lot more.

A small market garden farm where I worked on in the 90s can produce a huge amount of vegetables. A field of carrots is a lot of food.
 
I doubt anyone here has a background in farming, but what are your impressions of his claim?
Not sure if this will help...
I killed my front lawn 3 times before I got it right... but have been reading permaculture books since the mid 80's
when I finally retire in 2 years... I'm thinking of giving it a go... till i go broke
my daughter now has a 20 acre hobby farm established on those principles... so be careful what books you have on your bookshelf if you have kids
the principles are basically French from the early 1900's based on high production farming on small acreages
the cubans took it to a new level when they lost soviet subsidies... producing about half of their countries food needs from 'urban city farms'
Spoiler :



the US is taking it to a new level concentrating on the economics and with CSA's (Community-supported agriculture) and intense production ...with many examples suck as Neversink farms

my daughter makes slightly above the average wage... selling olive oil (main crop)doing farmers markets
and covers most of what people call day to day expenses (food/shelter/etc.) from her small holding
permaculture design works mainly on the principles of putting things you use the most close to your backdoor (herbs) then vegetables then chickens/ live stock then fruit trees till you get to the food forest and woodlot
most important is the protection of the soil fertility
Spoiler :

  • Observe and Interact – “Beauty is in the mind of the beholder” ...
  • Catch and Store Energy – “Make hay while the sun shines” ...
  • Obtain a yield – “You can't work on an empty stomach” ...
  • Apply Self Regulation and Accept Feedback – “The sins of the fathers are visited on the children of the seventh generation”
 
Last edited:
Urban agriculture seems more about city design.

A 100 metre by 100 metre field of carrots or brussel sprouts is huge amount of food. Lettuce and cabbage not so much.

We used to load up the truck and deliver same day to super market.
 
Last edited:
I'm sceptical by nature as well, but this sounds credible overall.
 
Urban agriculture seems more about city design.
that's true... I live in a city of about 4 million and twice a week in the evening tend to my raised organic veggie patch of about 2.4 meters (8 feet?) by 1.2 meters (4 feet) along with 20 others around the corner from where live in the local council owned and run community garden that covers about 2 house size blocks of land... there are 4 others that I know of within walking distance... I buy my carrots and potatoes if I don't swap them with other growers...I grow things like chilli capsicans and garlic mainly
 
that's true... I live in a city of about 4 million and twice a week in the evening tend to my raised organic veggie patch of about 2.4 meters (8 feet?) by 1.2 meters (4 feet) along with 20 others around the corner from where live in the local council owned and run community garden that covers about 2 house size blocks of land... there are 4 others that I know of within walking distance... I buy my carrots and potatoes if I don't swap them with other growers...I grow things like chilli capsicans and garlic mainly

Makes sense, we had a veggie garden here but don't really know what to do. My wife tried but didn't really recognise when lettuce was mature. Ours was something like 2 by 3 metres which covers a lot of your summer vegetables.

As a child our vege garden was a lot bigger. Potatoes, carrot, mint, herbs grown at home plus gooseberry and strawberries.

We have a plum tree, we let the neighbours help themselves but it's mostly bird food.
 
This is probably the future of farming with the way climate is heading.
It pretty impressive that they manage to produce 100 times the productivity of conventional farming.

 
Last edited:
New York sourcing its food from 7 miles away in the 1850s simply isn't true.

The Erie Canal was open by then and dry bulk goods like grain was being transported big distances from the Midwest to feed those horses and for flour.

Refrigeration didn't exist but live cattle driven in don't need refrigeration - they were raised elsewhere and then slaughtered locally.
 
That's Tokyo, you just need to ear less meat.

The amount of food you can produce on a small amount of land is impressive.

I used to pick vegetables as a kid, but something like a football field if carrots is a huge amount of food.

I think we produce enough to feed 10 times our population. If we switched from dairying to vegetables we could probably feed the UK.

Harvesting is a pain though. Labour intensive,hard work.
 
I am really sceptical of the numbers he gives. Up to 450 people fed with 2 acres. That is 1.1 million kilocalories per day, or from my rough calculation about 1.8% of the total insolation captured as human usable calories, whereas photosynthesis only captures about 1% of the light that falls on the chloroplast, and there are many other unavoidable losses. Without good evidence that is implausible. This guy provides no hard numbers to back up his claims, which he should have if he is able to calculate the numbers he claims.

Also the link to www.permaculture.com seems more about running your car of bioethanol, again with very little hard evidence and lots of claims.

Spoiler My working :
Human calorie consumption = 2,500 kcals / day
Solar insolation at 37 degrees latitude = ~9kWh/m2/day
1 kWh = 860 kcal
1 acre = 4046 m2
Solar insolation of plot = 2 * 4046 * 9 * 860 kcals = 62632080 kcals
450 people eat = 450 * 2500 kcals = 1125000 kcals
1125000/62632080 = 0.01796
 
Lol. Oh well, don't let it discourage you from gardening and local produce. We still need set-aside and a better sustainable inputs farm program. Which, just as a bracing point, costs money rather than miracle-ing it up.
 
Back
Top Bottom