GandK said: I suddenly feel as though my diet is under-designed.
Lol- Well, I am in the empty-nest pre-Grandma phase of life, so I have a lot of spare time on my hands. Seriously, like many of you thoughtful frugal folk, over the years, I have given consideration to such puzzles as "ideal diet for my own health and fitness", "planning menus to feed my family of four on $40/week", and "planning a vegetable garden according to the square foot method, and in alignment with what the people I will be feeding will actually eat ,and what I can actually grow without too much hassle in my micro-climate." On paper, or software, trying to optimize the overall system by maximizing nutrition and meeting personal preferences while minimizing cost and hassle is difficult enough. When you switch into real world mode and have to deal with "hottest June ever", "child who gags on beans", "husband who gets rash from tomatoes", "absent-minded cook who forgets to turn on crock-pot before leaving for work", "major infestation of fruit flies" , "preparing something resembling traditional Thanksgiving dinner for 13 people, including two vegan nieces, one paleo sister who doesn't eat any sugar/white foods, and two terrible foodie snobs for less than $5/person" etc. etc. etc. you learn that you also have to leave a huge margin for error.
One thing I recently re-learned about complexity is that it arises from the repetition of simple rules. Snowflakes, DNA, traffic lights, etc. I am not trying to be holier than thou when I make the observation that if any simple rule or set of rules (whether initial intention is good or evil) regarding what people eat is applied over and over again within a large population, there will be consequences. More like I am thinking "Isn't it interesting how this might work out?"
EMJ said: Here's a "agri-food innovation" European project - 2,000 square meters - grow your own food
Interesting. I especially like this:
Kitchens, canteens, restaurants and supermarkets – these are the places where we manage our 2000m² field: Every meal we eat, every food purchase we make, can be seen as an indirect order to our agricultural producers.
OTOH, IMO,like most models like this (although far better than current reality!), I have seen it errs a bit on the side of conventional organic farming of annual staple crops towards vegan diet. IOW, the part of the model where you either till a field and plant it with corn and feed it to humans, or you till a field and plant it with corn, and then feed it to hogs, is not validated in the real world where many animals can digest foods that humans can't digest. For simple instance, on my tiny urban homestead, I could feed mulberry leaves to meat rabbits, but not to myself. I could also ride my bicycle to the river and forage my fair share of fish from the wilderness. Also, the boxes where I am growing arugula near the kitchen door, the mini-orchard or food forest where I am growing fruit , the rough patch where I am growing potatoes this year, and the patch I might fine till in order to experiment with growing some oats next year, are not most efficiently or healthily managed through application of the same methods.
brute isn't very often interested in these type of Kantian "could the whole world do it" solutions. the whole world couldn't be a psychoanalyst or philosopher, either, but that doesn't mean those aren't good choices.
Well, I was suggesting a model based on parameters of my choosing in alignment with my "Adventure-Cottage-Library" lifestyle ideal. BRUTE and chicago81 might prefer something like these premises suggested as the basis for a Non-Hierarcchical Paleo Permaculture Hunter-Gatherer Intentional Community
Premises
1. A hunter-gatherer lifeway represents a peak in the psychological flourishing (happiness, well-being, etc.) of individuals. [3, 5]
2. Hunter-gatherers represent a peak in human physical health [7, 8, 9]
-- basis for antifragility: genus Homo lived as hunter-gatherers for at least 2,000,000 years, starting in the paleolithic, and some persisting until today. [4, 6]
3. Egalitarian social relationships (anarchy) represents a peak in human social interaction [4, 6]
-- basis for antifragility: genus Homo actively fostered egalitarian and anarchist social relationships for at least 2,000,000 years, starting in the paleolithic, and some persisting until today. [3, 4, 6]
4. Agriculture and its unintended consequences (slavery, the state, patriarchy, hierarchy, feudalism, control culture, false theistic religions, disease, malnutrition) destroy all of the above [5, 6, 7, 8, 9]
-- a. Flourishing
-- b. Health
-- c. Social Relationships
5. Agriculture is inherently destructive, as every farm--by definition--displaces a wild ecosystem.
6. Permaculture can restore human flourishing, health, and social relationships by acting as a bridge over the chasm of agriculture to the restoration of land and lifeways for human and non-human animals.
Okay. Let's assume in the world of the future, I have bequeathed my permaculture project to my two theoretical grandchildren, sturdy Iskra and lithe Woody, who choose to follow the basic dietary/lifestyle models below.
Iskra Dietary Requirements
Basal Metabolism: 180 X10
Agricultural Labor: 900
Squats: 200
Protein: .8 X 180 = 144 grams/day
TOTAL: 2900 dietary calories and 144 grams protein/day
Woody Dietary Requirements
Basal Metabolism: 160 x 10
Cello Practice: 300
Bicycle to Rehearsal Space: 300
Protein: .4 X 180 = 72 grams/day
TOTAL: 2200 dietary calories and 72 grams protein/day
Will they be able to survive on the solar energy that shines down upon the acreage I have bequeathed to them in combination with some sustainable foraging in the surrounding commons? We shall assume that Woody's community symphony cellist stipend is just enough to cover property taxes which are just enough to cover maintenance of community bicycle paths and performance space etc.etc.etc. We must remember that energy must also be allocated for the processing, preparation and storage of foodstuffs, soil must be preserved or amended, some crops should be rotated, even apple trees have a limited productive life-cycle, hoe and cello and variety of other tools must be produced on-site or received in trade, etc. etc. etc.