Will organic farms takeover when oil becomes very expensive?

namenick · Heavy Crude Joined: Jan 04, 2008 Posts: 270

Thanks Ludi. I see that at 4000 sq. feet per person that it would take a little less than 10 acres to feed 100 people. If that's really good grazing land you can put about 30 cows on it but that's optimistic and it's probably closer to 20 in most cases with good pasture land and in each case they cows have to be rotated to an adjoining plot. The point I was making was that it's much more land intensive to grow steaks and hamburgers.

You asked:

namenick · Heavy Crude Joined: Jan 04, 2008 Posts: 270

Ludi wrote:

dohboi · Light Sweet Crude Joined: Dec 05, 2005 Posts: 1438

Good point. By one measure, reported in wwf's living planet report, Cuba has the most successful economy, in that they maintain certain minimal levels of quality of life (low infant mortality, high life expectancy, high literacy...) while keeping a low ecological footprint.

Quote from page 19:

"Countries’ progress towards sustainable
development can be assessed using the United
Nations Development Programme’s (UNDP)
Human Development Index (HDI) as an
indicator of well-being, and the footprint as
a measure of demand on the biosphere. The
HDI is calculated from life expectancy,
literacy and education, and per capita GDP.
UNDP considers an HDI value of more
than 0.8 to be “high human development”.
Meanwhile, a footprint lower than 1.8 global
hectares per person, the average biocapacity
available per person on the planet, could
denote sustainability at the global level.
Successful sustainable development
requires that the world, on average, meets
at a minimum these two criteria, with
countries moving into the blue quadrant
shown in Figure 22. As world population
grows, less biocapacity is available per
person and the quadrant’s height shrinks.
In 2003, Asia-Pacific and Africa were
using less than world average per person
biocapacity, while the EU and North America
had crossed the threshold for high human
development. No region, nor the world as
a whole, met both criteria for sustainable
development. Cuba alone did, based on the
data it reports to the United Nations."

wwf's living planet report

patience · Expert Joined: Jan 04, 2008 Posts: 1683

Whatever the PO-induced changes to farming are, let's hope we save something to fuel the tractors. I've done some hobby farming and logging with draft horses, and it is not a fun prospect to be plowing all winter, whenever the ground is thawed. It takes some of that to max out the usefullness of horses, since a pair of them may do only 1 to 3 acres in a day, AFTER you get 'em in shape. (They are athletes, really.) A pair can disc about twice that in a day, in our heavy clay soil. Adjust for your soil conditions. And cut it in half or less, if the ground has been farmed with tractors, at least for the first couple years horse farming, because tractors compact the soil so much, the plowing is tough going. Bear in mind that, when we speak of organic farming, tillage (plowing) is a prerequisite, compared to current no-till farming that kills weeds with chemicals, and at best runs a disc over it to cut up cornstalks that won't rot because the chemicals killed the soil bacteria.

I think the one mule for 20 acres rule is based on the idea that you don't have to plow all of it every year, due to some of it being in pasture and hay to feed the mule and the milk cow. Note that we are talking about horses here that weigh 1,200 to 1,800 lbs., not the 900 lb. riding horses with dainty feet.

I would like to see some numbers on current fuel usage per acre of tillage. I seem to recall something around 1 to 2 gallons of gasoline to plow an acre, when that was the fuel of choice. Correct me here, if you know better. And my wife burns 2 gallons of gas a day going 28 miles to work. It seems to me that we have the emphasis wrong when we burn tanks of gas pleasure driving and commuting, then have to burn FOOD CROPS to fuel this idiocy?

What terrifies me, is that some bureaucrat may choose to ration fuel to SUV's at the expense of farmers' needs who FEED them, and that only because only 1%? of the population are farmers, thus not a plurality of voters.

dohboi · Light Sweet Crude Joined: Dec 05, 2005 Posts: 1438

Must no-till farming use chemical pesticides and herbicides? Put another way, can an organic farm be also no-till?

My ignorance in this area is vast, so any insights would be greatly valued.

On the political front, big agribusinuss--conagra, adm, monsanto...--has lots of political clout, but their interests are not necessarily identical to the interests of individual farmers, to say the least.

patience · Expert Joined: Jan 04, 2008 Posts: 1683

dohboi,
Plowing digs up the earth to about 6" to 8" deep, in a turnover process that both loosens the earth for new seedlings to grow more easily, allow rain to soak in, and to bury/kill weeds that would otherwise out-compete the desired crop seedlings. Burying the weeds that grew in between crops, along with dead stalks from the previous crop, puts organic matter into the soil in reach of bacteria that convert it into chemically available nutrients for successive plant growth. It is a mixed blessing, as loosening the earth also allows wind and rain to blow and wash away a certain amount of topsoil, especially if the ground is sandy, or sloping. On reasonably level ground, this is less of a concern.

No-till means no plowing, instead, relying on a row planter that digs only a narrow trench a couple inches deep to plant the seeds. Any weeds must be killed before planting by what is called a "burndown", by spraying a water-mixed poison some time before planting. If there are cornstalks or bean stalk residue on the ground, it is commonly cut up with a rolling gang of sharp discs that do a sliight amount of digging, but much less than plowing, thus with a tremendous fuel and time saving. Plowing is akin to earthmoving for heavy construction. It requires huge amounts of energy to accomplish, by comparison.

This all applies primarily to corn and soybeans, not wheat or grass crops, where discing is usually sufficient prior to planting with a "drill", an implement similiar to the no-till planter in operation, but spacing rows 6"-8" apart instead of 24" or more for corn and beans.

In any case, if you don't kill the weeds, you won't have a crop.

dohboi · Light Sweet Crude Joined: Dec 05, 2005 Posts: 1438

Thanks loads, patience.

Would it be possible in principle to spread a heavy layer of weed-smothering mulch over the ground, then open up small spots in the mulch where you also make your seed holes?

I imagine that such a process would involve many complications, but perhaps on smaller scales could be doable (with sufficient mulch). I'm more of a gardener than a farmer, and I know not all practices are easily transferable to the scale of most farms.

Thanks again,

Dohboi

Ludi

Ludi

Ludi

patience · Expert Joined: Jan 04, 2008 Posts: 1683

Ludi,
I think a good interim solution would be to reserve biofuels for farm use, to secure our food supply. It's feasible, and going on now on a small scale in the grain belt. One big wheat farmer in Farm Show magazine reported that he hired a man to do nothing but make biodiesel from oilseed crops, sunflowers, I think. At least this would assure us something to eat while we work on longer term solutions.

One seldom recognized issue is the energy cost of making farm equipment. One of the better surveys regarding cars and energy use put manufacture at about 17%?? of lifetime energy usage for a car. Whatever the actual number, it can't be done for free. If we change over to significant use of draft animals, which fit well with the organic concept, the machinery used with them is different, and smaller, generally, so there is an energy changeover cost there, also.

dohboi,
Mulch works, but the problem of scale is where to get that much of it? Typically, as in my garden, the mulch is taken from my grass clippings, trimmings and imported from the neighbor's hayfield and cowbarn. It works on the garden.

For large areas, the idea of "sheet composting" has been used to good effect in soil improvement, plowing under cover crops and manures, etc.. But it's not enough for weed control. Vegetable farmers here use strips of black plastic in the way you described, to smother weeds in rows.

Ludi

patience · Expert Joined: Jan 04, 2008 Posts: 1683

Ludi,
It's energy gained from the sun, stored in plants.
Some VERY conservative numbers:

A bushel of soybeans, double pressed, yields up to 1.2 gallons of diesel per bushel. At a very MODEST 40 bushels of beans/acre, that is 48 gallons of diesel/acre. Rapeseed and sunflowers are more productive than soybeans, for oil. 48 gallons of diesel will farm a lot more than the one acre that grew it! I'll have to ask someone for help here, on exactly how many acres, but I know for a fact that I could plow an acre, disc and plant an acre with around 2-3 gals. of gasoline, a lower energy fuel. Yes, it does work out. No, there's not enough acres in the country to fuel all the SUV's and other bad habits we have. But, it can FEED us.

Ludi

patience, I'm afraid I will have to see it to believe it. All the biofuels are currently grown and processed with petroleum. We've discussed extensively here that they may not even be energy positive. I'm just not convinced by this technology.

Sorry, just feeling in a poopy mood about all this. I will believe in solutions when they begin to look like they will actually solve the problems, instead of causing more. Currently, biofuels promise to cause more problems than they solve, as far as I can see. We've been talking about this issue for years here.
_________________
"...powerdown so soft and fluffy you'll think you're living in a pillow." - jboogy

patience · Expert Joined: Jan 04, 2008 Posts: 1683

Ludi,
You're right about the greater labor required for organic farming, particularly if it is done with draft animals, or if the crops are more labor-intensive fruits and vegetables. I wouldn't be surprised to see a return to the days of the live-in farmhand, or "hired man" as in the days of horse farming. It's a grind of work, from "can see to can't see", every day in the warm months, and near that in cold weather. Been there, done that, got the damned t-shirt, (thread bare) and wouldn't go back to it at gunpoint. The Little House on The Prairie folks can have all that.

Maybe we can find some unemployed bankers and real estate agents to do some of that?