Skip to main content

TR Memescape

  • Talk Rational: Be strong

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Alfonso Bivouac

1
Well one thing about your view is that it seems to provide a clear line of demarcation. And without some clear line of demarcation, it seems that we would be on a slippery slope  and we could end up in a very scary place.

Where, in the Hawkins Death Trap Hovel?
2
It's simple Dave. 

The pig fetus was born and then soon became a dead piglet.
The rabbit fetuses were born and became dead kits.

Get it now?
3
Here's my 10 acre parcel ...



Are you allowed to use the house at all?
No.  I just burn all this firewood that I've been telling borealis about just for the fun of it.

Yep, that about sums it all up.  Fucking about in the woods, occasionally allowing an animal to die due to militant incompetence.
4
Here's my 10 acre parcel ...



You can see the restoration and increase SOM from here.
5


Already way ahead of you bro. I have that spreadsheet in my head but there's no point in publishing it to this crowd. And also it will change.  The way I'm building this thing is similar to the way you imagine that life evolved.

Hahaha - because life evolved in squares and rectangles.

[/quote]

He's correct here re the comparison to evolution.  No direction whatsoever.  He bought three random tarps until he found one that worked and pretty soon the whole activity will become extinct.
6
Here's the full quote from Walter ...

Quote
Quote from: Walter Haugen on November 01, 2017, 04:48:01 PM
Someone asked about my numbers. I am retired now and we are trying to sell our small farm and move to France, so I am not in full production. I mostly just putter around. This year, I produced 795,172 kilocalories from 3,582 pounds of food, using one gallon of gasoline in a borrowed tiller and 200 hours of my labor, for an input of 56,500 kilocalories. That is an EROI of 14:1 or just 14 if you drop the colon. That makes me 98-140 times more efficient than industrial agriculture. The numbers are from the orchard and a few vegetables. I didn't even count several crops, like zucchini.

In 2016, I only worked 100 hours, since I didn't prune the orchard and didn't plant much. However, we had a bumper year in tree fruit and I got over 7,000 pounds of fruit in the orchard (60 trees with about 20 actually producing). My EROI was 38.47:1, or just 38.47. This is a very high number, twice as high as the current worldwide EROI of oil, but it is a special circumstance because of the bumper year. It is also lower than the best estimate of harvesting wild wheat 10,000 years ago in what is now Iran at 50:1.

   Virus-free. www.avast.com

It's obvious that these high EROI numbers are because of (a) "harvest only" labor and (b) high sugar content (calorie count) of fruit


Says the man who gets half his calories from goats milk.
7
I'm not even convinced that EROI is a particularly important metric. 

Human labour per calorie produced is clearly important, because  food produced overall has to at least equal the human labour to produce it, overall.

Mechanisation is important for a quite different reason.  Fossil fuels will eventually run out, and meanwhile, their use is increasing  GHGs.  Renewables do neither.  So mechanisation with renewables isn't really a problem.

And no, there isn't a theoretical reason why we can't use them for mechanisation of farming.  Farming itself is the process of using a renewable (solar energy) to make food (via photosynthesis).  LED hydroponics systems just add a couple of steps (solar power to power the LEDs; solar power to drive the winds that drive the wind-power).  And geothermal energy sources could be fine too.

If we can get renewables to produce liquid fuel, then why can't we use that fuel to power pea-harvesters for instance?  The result would be lots of calories and protein per acre, relatively little human labour, and no GHGs.

And it comes back to: the more calories you can produce per acre, the more acres you can devote to something other than producing calories.  E.g. forests.



Yep. I can't understand how Dave can see the recent fast adoption of electric cars, which can certainly be fueled by renewables in the form of wind, solar, hydro, tidal, wave, etc. power generation, and still assert that renewables can't have an effect on large scale farming practices.

I read recently that a robotic strawberry picker has been introduced. Harvesting soft fruits like strawberries has always been labour intensive because no machine could pick them without damaging them, or choose ripe ones over green ones. Advances in robotic vision and delicate handling abilities may soon eliminate those problems. And a UBI must surely be part of any solution to the ongoing and likely inevitable loss of employment.

You are talking to a man about technology, who thinks that shitting in a bucket is progress.
8
Dave, how are you recovering dryer heat?
Hahahaha

Alfonso take note.  If you're going to post garbage, at least make it funny like zombies does.

How is asking your weekly rabbit output garbage?

The answer will be, but not question.

So, how many rabbits produced each week?
9
Make your own settlement if you want legumes.

Welcome to "Settlers: Dave's Version"

I don't think this board game will sell well. 

A bit like the lack of business partners/anyone interested in joining a lone Jebus loving idiot fucking about in the woods with a bunch of animals, caged in something akin to a contraption in the movie franchise "Saw".
10
Alfonso, if you are going to post meaningless garbage, please at least try to be funny.  Or if you are not going to be funny, please keep it short so that we don't have to scroll so much to get past your post.

Yyyyyno.

So, how many rabbits for food each week do you produce?  Seems a a very on-topic question to me.
11
"Which one requires more travel?"

It depends on the details of the scenario.

Details.

Those things you don't like.




Unless you're talking about your 'big buttons'.
12
Ok here's my settlement diagram ... approx 500 acres ... 0.8 mile X 1 mile ... approx 40 dwellings ... half of them is elder housing at center ... other half out further ... 120 persons total ...  purposely did not draw roads or paths yet ... upper version is lots of small farmers ... lower version is 4 larger ones.


Now let's look at food production ... first we will consider a simple diet ... milk, meat, eggs, wheat, oats and potatoes  and later we can look at a more varied diet.  Also for simplicity we will assume that 50% of each person's food calories comes from milk, meat, and eggs, 25% comes from grains, and 25% comes from potatoes.  Let's assume that half of the farmers in each scenario are like me and like raising milk, eggs, and meat in a single integrated rotationally grazed system. And the other half are like Pingu and they raise the potatoes and the grains.  Now potatoes and grains are well suited for a single harvest every year and they store well.  Milk, meat, and eggs do not store well.  So now that I have stated some working assumptions, let's do some analysis and see if we can find out which system works best and why.

You like raising meat?  You haven't raised any meat yet as far as I can tell (apart from the dead piglet, but you're very coy in telling us what happened to that meat).

What's your weekly output of rabbit meat?
13
...and pretty much refutes Pingu's argument about historical  food surpluses  by farmers.  I think if Pingu looked at the details of historical surpluses, she would see an awful lot of slave labor.

Which is what you are proposing, Dave, remember? 

Dave, clearly, in the past, much of the physical work was done by humans and animals (horses, mules, oxen). Now it is done by machinery (using fossil fuels). 

That is problematic because of GHGs.  But farmers are very well placed to produce renewable energy (wind, solar, biofuels). 

Meanwhile your ruminants continue to fart.
I will talk about methane again later... Suffice to say now that it's not a problem with HMG.  That's already been studied.

Ha, good one Dave.
14
Well if you want to reduce your ecological footprint with respect to food production, and you are a plant food person like Pingu, then Walter Haugen's approach is probably the best.  I think his EROI in 2009 was something like 3.5 or so  compared to 0.10 for industrially produced plant foods.  His EROI in subsequent years was higher I believe, but I didn't see him state why... Presumably he became more efficient or perhaps he focused more on high calorie crops like potatoes.  You could obtain still higher EROI then Walter by eliminating the gas powered tiller  and using only hand tools, but then how many calories would you be able to produce in a year and how many hours would it take you?  Walter produced 2.1 million in 2009 and it took him 2000 labor hours to do it.

On the other hand, if you want to Save Agriculture (Thereby Saving The World) you might want to think about the Big Picture - the impact of your Sustainable Subdivisions on the actual structure of settlements and the impact of that on transport infracture and people's travel.

And if you are concerned with the GHGs from fossil fuels, then you should also consider the methane from your proposed ruminants.  You do know that methane is an incredibly potent GHG, right?

That'll earn a "lol".
15
Sounds lovely in theory.  But the devil is always in the details.

Except when you reject the details because Big Picture, right?

Could you give me ONE example of ONE  "plant food" that you think would be well-suited for your vision and describe to me how you think it should be grown and distributed?

No.  Because the whole fucking point of eating more plants is that you grow a VARIETY of plant foods, and that VARIETY will depend on the region!

You want VARIETY so as to give you a full range of nutrients and also because growing a VARIETY of plants is good for the soil (remember crop rotation?)

So here are some:

Beans and peas and pulses
Grains, including rice, wheat, oats
Fruit - citrus, apples, berries, grapes
Leafy veg including brassicas and salad veg
Orange food, including squashes
Roots, including carrots, potatoes, yams, sweet potatoes, carrots, radishes, beets
Alliums including onions, leeks, garlic
Tomatoes, peppers, aubergines, chiles
Nuts -  hazelnuts, almonds, chestnuts, walnuts
Oil producting plants - rapeseed, olives, sunflowers
Spices
Fungi

You grow it on farms and you sell it in local markets.
In short, what Walter Haugen is doing. Ok.  Do you favor Walter's technique of using primarily human energy to produce everything?  He burns only about 1 gallon of fossil fuel every year in his tiller.  In his best year, he produced enough food calories for about 2.5 people.  ( 2 if they burn as many calories as I do ) And he spent about 2000 hours that year producing it.  Or do you favor burning say 10 gallons of fossil fuel and producing enough for 10 people? Or what?

With those extra hours, Walter's getting a lot more soul food than you.

And maybe you'd cut the calories you use down a bit by getting less prostitutes.
16
Hmm ... she really does think those things ... no wonder she doesn't like Price honoring the Wisdom of Indigenous Peoples. And she thinks PRICE is the racist! Wow.

Is comparing black children's faces to a chimpanzee's racist Dave?
17
You are full of words, but very little action.
I wonder Dave, since you're not documenting any of the pertinent items on your experiments, when you wish to pass on all this derived and valuable information on the development of your HMG system are you then going to refer people to read and review this thread for your written ideas?

That would seem ... foolish considering what I know about the dialogue here.  But its the only historic document of your work you got.

Kind of a conundrum there for you.
Lol no.

TR for me is sort of a scratchpad. A whiteboard.

In my opinion, the best way to pass on knowledge is via apprenticeship / mentoring. 

I have already started doing that.

Oh?  Tell me more.
18
Sharper than you it seems. You haven't achieved anything close.

Yeah Pingu, once you've allowed a few animals to die due to militant incompetence, get back to us!
19
I would pay a local welder to make the bottom square of the cage with angle aluminum and front skids.
I almost went with  galvanized steel tube from the local fence supply at one point.  But I have found that wood is just so easy to work with, it's hard to beat. It's very easy to repair too. I've had three major mishaps with this thing  over the last year and a half -  One time the wind from a thunderstorm picked it up about 10 feet vertically and redeposited it about 30 feet away.  Another time I set the track too close to a telephone pole and one of the runners caught the telephone pole and you can imagine the damage that did.   Then we had some high north winds about a month ago  and I forgot to tie it down and it flipped the thing completely upside down it was pretty mangled.  But each time it took me only about an hour of labor and some screws and some baling wire and scrap wood to get it back to good condition.
Um, were your animals in it at the  time?
If so, were there casualties?
Yes. No.

So you were just lucky your incompetence didn't harm one or more of your animals.

Let's hope they're just as lucky next time.
20
You don't know?
I used the TLAR method.  I want to know what YOU would do.

Don't you mean you used the TARD method?
21
I would pay a local welder to make the bottom square of the cage with angle aluminum and front skids.
I almost went with  galvanized steel tube from the local fence supply at one point.  But I have found that wood is just so easy to work with, it's hard to beat. It's very easy to repair too. I've had three major mishaps with this thing  over the last year and a half -  One time the wind from a thunderstorm picked it up about 10 feet vertically and redeposited it about 30 feet away.  Another time I set the track too close to a telephone pole and one of the runners caught the telephone pole and you can imagine the damage that did.  Then we had some high north winds about a month ago  and I forgot to tie it down and it flipped the thing completely upside down it was pretty mangled.  But each time it took me only about an hour of labor and some screws and some baling wire and scrap wood to get it back to good condition.

This, together with the dead piglet, dead baby rabbits, escaped rabbits, not even feeding 1 person on 10 acres and most of that feed just being raw warm goats milk drank from cat-licked buckets and all ultimately shat into a bucket in the corner of the hovel, does not sound like a screaming success.

At least you got some prostitutes in the mix though.
22
Well I suppose there is that possibility. I've never done this before so we shall see. But I seriously doubt that will happen because the animals get trained to know that the sound of the motor turning on means fresh new grass.

Are you guys always this negative about things?   Whatever happened to "glass half full" attitudes instead of "glass half empty"?

Dave, you're a glass filled to the brim with hot steaming piss kind a guy.
24
Nope.  I'm quite happy with it the way it is.

But you could get more calories to feed humanity, surely?
25
I was low ... Chad Peterson get as high as 1.8 million lbs per acre at times.

http://magissues.farmprogress.com/BeefProducer/BP05May09/bp04.pdf
That is pretty insane. If it's 1,000 lbs per cow, that's only about 25 square feet per cow. That's too little room for a cow to even turn around in.

Note though:
Quote
He moves slowly, watching the cattle and mentally metering cattle movement and watching for signs of stress. He wants to see the cattle grazing but also exploring the new area. Too much grazing and not enough exploring means they were too hungry when moved, for example.

Both Peterson and his now former hired grazier, Nate Chisholm, are students of Bud Williams, the livestock handling guru now living at Bowie, Texas.

In fact, Peterson says, he tries to use Williams' concept of pressure and release throughout each day as he uses his highest stock densities in the morning and then decreases them somewhat through the day.

Hmm. Are you moving your goats slowly and watching for signs of stress during the move? Are you checking to see if they are exploring the new area rather than immediately grazing? Are you lowering stock density at any point in the day?
I did at first until I got the program adjusted.  I guess you ignored all those posts but now you think you're the expert and can  tell me how to do it.  What an asshole.

It's because he DIDN'T ignore those posts that he knows that you aren't doing it.

You are the asshole, Dave.  Ben just pointed out that you aren't doing what your claimed grand-guru advocates.
No. You're confused. He claimed that my density is insanely high so I pointed out that Chad Peterson's density is higher than mine.

How is your density high?

How many times per day are you currently moving your two goats inabox?
My density is about 4 pounds per square foot. Maybe 5. So that's under 200,000 pounds per acre.   Chad Peterson runs as high as 1.8 million pounds per acre at times.

Surely you could cram a few more goats in the cage then?  Five, maybe six more of the happiest goats on the planet.