Ego said: The op is nothing more than a magnificent rationalization for self-harm.
Nope, 'cause I am an elitist too
I've just been trying to do the math related to my stated goals of successful completion of perma-culture project, financial independence, and achieving something resembling the hip-healthy (healthy, hip) fitness profile of Iskra Lawrence on or before Autumnal Equinox 2022. IOW, part of what I am doing is trying to figure out which particular version of Elitist Diet will not prove counter-productive to the above goals, and be in best alignment with my other preferences. At the moment, it's looking something like Fructo-Pescetarian-Freegan/Scavenger.
OTOH, according to the internet, table sugar (from cane and beets, not even including corn syrup etc.) currently accounts for 325 calories/day of the average American's diet. Since the average American is probably 20 or 30 lbs overweight, in theory, dependence on table sugar could simply be eliminated and both the health of American's and the health of the rain forests (level of atmospheric CO2 processing) could be improved. However, since the U.S. only imports around 15% of the table sugar we eat, most of the massive world-wide production of cane sugar must be consumed mostly by poorer residents of poorer countries. If sugar cane currently provides just 10% of the calories of the average human, and those calories were to be replaced by lentil calories, since lentils are 1/10th as efficient at photosynthesis, overall agricultural land use would have to be doubled!!!
ThisDinosaur said: 7, what else, besides sugar, are you growing in your permaculture project? How much land do you have and how many people are you planning to support? (I think you had said just yourself +/- one maybe grandkid.)
I am way too lazy to process sugar beets, so I have no plans to grow them. I currently own about 1/3 acre which is almost all vacant and sunny except for my small camper footprint. My goal is to meet the nutritional needs of 2 humans with a mostly closed loop system on this small acreage. It is not my intention to only eat what I grow or raise, but I am currently experimenting with altering my diet to maximize self or local-within-bike distance food-sufficiency.
The sugar issue comes into the equation(s) because I am already successfully growing a heck of a lot of fruit, and I have foraging/scavenging access to even more. So far, I have sour cherries, apples, wild plums, black raspberries, blackberries, red raspberries, gooseberries, black currants, mulberries, apricots, blueberries, grapes, strawberries, hardy figs, hardy kiwis, olives (marginal greenhouse),hops and rhubarb . My annual crops this year were tomatoes, peppers, eggplant, potatoes, arugula, mesclun mix, onions, shallots, basil, acorn squash, patty pan squash, mystery squash, bush beans, variety herbs. I tried to establish almonds, hazelnuts and heart nut (Japanese sport walnut), but only the heart nuts survived. Next year, I intend to establish more nuts, asparagus, paw-paws and a variety of vines and ground-cover crops. On my third lot which I didn't even touch this year, I plan to try staple crops of hull-less oats, corn and beans that are good for drying, and more winter squash.
So, I am going to have very little problem meeting the nutritional requirement of 16 servings /day of variety of fruits and vegetables needed by two humans. I am going to have some problem coming up with the total calories required by two humans (especially if 1 human is doing some manual labor to grow/harvest/process food), and meeting fat and protein needs is almost certainly going to be problematic (especially if 1 human wants to attain elite fitness profile of Iskra Lawrence) unless something like fishing the Detroit river or raising meat rabbits is added to the cycle.
IlliniDave said: I think using sugar cane's energy efficiency to make electricity to electrify fences to keep the beef cattle from getting away would be a happy compromise
They won't let me keep a cow in the city. Photo-voltaic cells are much more efficient at converting sunlight into electricity than photosynthesis followed by burning. Although, of course, as Jacob noted, producing the cells is energy intensive, so they are expensive to purchase. So far, I only have a 60 watt portable unit, 85Whr lithium battery bank, a crude makeshift solar food drying unit, and a clothes-line. I eventually plan on adding a water pump and gravity battery, because it would be super-cool, although not very efficient. If I want to survive the Michigan winter in my camper, I will have to use propane. So, I am thinking I will migrate south via Megabus and bike, but I haven't done the math yet.
MZMpac said: Hunting is great, but poses some opportunity cost problems. 1) you need to know how to hunt; 2) you need to have land access to a productive area without too much public competition; 3) you need to have a strategy WRT when and how you hunt; and 4) hunting trips cost money.
True. In theory, there are enough deer in Michigan that every citizen could cull a goodly portion of venison per year, but I do not see me doing that. However, if I am successful at even closely approximating my fitness goal, I see little problem in continuing to engage in primal barter with the men of my region to acquire some of my protein requirements until I reach the age at which I am due to collect Social Security payments. I also own a copy of a book entitled "Basic Fishing: A Beginner's Guide", and it is possible that I will raise quail and/or rabbits.
chicago81 said: After I switched to a diet much higher in fat, and with almost no sugar or carbs (except from nutrient-dense green veggies), it cleared up just about all of those issues.
BRUTE said: and as brighteye said, the nutritionism-based view that "animals==protein" and "plants==carbohydrate" is unproductive. animals have tons of fat, which is very healthy and contains more than 2x the energy per weight that carbohydrates or proteins contain. there are also some healthy plant fats that can be used to supplement energy, like coconut oil, avocado, olive oil..
I am planning on growing nuts and sunflower and squash seeds, and experimenting with processing them into oil, although it does seem like a lot of work for somebody as lazy as me. I have a friend within biking distance who raises goats, chickens and hogs on his urban farm, so barter is another possibility.
RiggerJack said: My point was that if you look at marginal farm country, you will see circular crops. It's not that the land is in short supply, but that the cheapest irrigation system is just a sprinkler system on a pipe that moves in a circle. We are nowhere near capacity in agriculture. When prices go up, irrigation will improve. There is no need to factor calories per acre to feed the masses. Farmers will just grow whatever they think will make them money with the fewest risks. When rainfalls get less dependable, irrigation systems will advance. And then farmland will expand.
Where will the water for irrigation come from? Studies have already been done to research ridiculous mega-projects such as somehow funneling the fresh water from the Great Lakes westward, and they have been found to be not viable. Conventional agriculture wastes a lot of water and soil due to run-off. The first objective in any permaculture project is to figure out how to increase the water vector and close the water cycle. This is relatively easy to do in Michigan due to steady moderate precipitation throughout the year, and ready availability of materials with which to amend soils towards humus/loam, but much more difficult in other regions. Storing water in the soil itself, which is possible if it is amended towards humus, sponge-like consistency, is the best method. Creating swales, ponds and other reservoir systems can also help. Thickly planted perennial tree crops also create micro-systems that greatly conserve and recycle water due to alteration of evaporation/respiration processes versus conventional annual mono-crop. That's why a human diet that is more heavily based on fruits (fructose) and nuts may prove more sustainable.