[HN Gopher] What is permaculture? (2015)
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       What is permaculture? (2015)
        
       Author : mooreds
       Score  : 171 points
       Date   : 2023-05-09 11:23 UTC (11 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.permaculturedesignmagazine.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.permaculturedesignmagazine.com)
        
       | aaron695 wrote:
       | [dead]
        
       | ankaAr wrote:
       | I will leave this here if you don't have "land" to grow your own
       | crops. It is in Spanish.
       | 
       | The guy is from buenos Aires, doing everything with our selling
       | anything and recycling everything with permacultura in mind.
       | 
       | As some of the comments said, it is more about how you see what
       | you are doing in relation with others and why.
       | 
       | https://m.youtube.com/@ElRecicladorUrbano/videos
        
       | antoniuschan99 wrote:
       | For space constrained you can stack oem aerogarden clones on a
       | bookshelf next to the window. It's great for lettuce, herbs, and
       | tomatoes.
        
       | cyberax wrote:
       | "Permaculture" (n) - growing things in your garden to eat
       | alongside supermarket-bought food, while pretending to be a good
       | green farmer.
       | 
       | Reality bites. You simply can not grow enough calories to feed
       | yourself, in a way that scales to the whole planet. Or even a
       | significant part of the planet. You need staple crops such as
       | beans, potatoes, wheat that are not fun to grow. You need fixed
       | nitrogen and likely phosphorus for fertilizer, unless you happen
       | to live on a very good soil.
        
         | awavering wrote:
         | Also, beans and potatoes _are_ fun to grow.
        
         | awavering wrote:
         | The vast majority of permaculturists don't do it with the goal
         | of 100% self-sufficiency. Interdependence is part of the game.
        
           | cyberax wrote:
           | How would "interdependence" help? If anything, it makes it
           | even worse. Growing enough staples even for yourself and your
           | family is hard, growing it for trade is even more
           | complicated.
           | 
           | Try it, and pretty soon you need to actually do real
           | agriculture.
        
       | carapace wrote:
       | I first learned about Permaculture from reading my parent's copy
       | of "The Next Whole Earth Catalog", which reviewed Mollison's
       | "Permaculture: A Designers' Manual" (which, BTW is one of the
       | greatest books on design that I've ever read, not just for
       | farms!)
       | 
       | So, to me, it's mixed up with things like Christopher Alexander's
       | "Pattern Language", and Bucky Fuller's synergistic "Dymaxion"
       | worldview.
       | 
       | Basically, in a nutshell, there is a possible (technically and
       | economically feasible) world that's much nicer than ours, just on
       | the other side of an imaginary barrier that exists only in the
       | human mind. Or so I believe...
       | 
       | We can provide for ourselves the lower levels of Maslow's
       | Hierarchy, "Physiological needs" (
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow%27s_hierarchy_of_needs ) in
       | a way that is fun, easy, harmonious with other living things,
       | deprives no one, etc. "and nobody has to get nailed to anything".
       | I don't know if this is true, but I don't see any physical
       | reasons why it wouldn't work. (Everybody always says "but what
       | about human nature" at this point, and I'll get to that in a
       | moment.)
       | 
       | I have finally, at long last, acquired some land with the express
       | purpose of testing out this hypothesis. (Twenty acres in N.
       | California.) I'm going to employ a mix of Permaculture, Syntropic
       | Agriculture, Alexander's Pattern Language, Bucky's ideas, etc.
       | and robots and automation to create a kind of bubble of this
       | alternate reality, or a time-warp (just a little one) to the Star
       | Trek-style future.
       | 
       | Assuming this works out, the idea then is to facilitate more
       | people and land living this way. I see this as a kind of economic
       | phase change that has to happen (I believe we have to live in
       | harmony with Nature or our civilization could collapse.)
       | 
       | If this sounds interesting to you, and you more-or-less have your
       | act together and would like to help out, let me know.
       | sforman@hushmail.com
       | 
       | - - - -
       | 
       | In re: the "but what about human nature?" argument against the
       | possibility of a better world:
       | 
       | First, as I get older I get much less sympathy for that in
       | general. Get over your bullshit and act like a decent human
       | being. It's not that hard and the rewards are worth the effort.
       | 
       | Second, I suspect that's what's really going on here: this is a
       | sim, and the win condition is just not to be quite such a
       | shithead. _Good Character_ is the only thing you take with you
       | when the game ends, so build it up now while you can!
       | 
       | Third, even though they don't get a lot of fanfare in the mass
       | media, there are numerous protocols and techniques for better
       | communication and mental and emotional healing. Things like Non-
       | Violent Communication, or the Core Transformation Process. I have
       | high hopes that the new talking computers will make inexpensive,
       | inexhaustible perfect therapists. I think the computers will talk
       | us down off the ledge, so to speak.
        
         | suoduandao2 wrote:
         | that sounds interesting! I'm in eastern Canada and would more
         | likely be helping out on my parents' permaculture homestead or
         | planting extra berries in my own suburban yard than helping
         | yourself, but if you're documenting the process I'd like to see
         | it!
        
           | carapace wrote:
           | Oh yeah, I'm going to document the hell out of it. I've got a
           | dozen little wi-fi cameras for streaming, etc. I'm also going
           | to run the project on a open books basis (another review from
           | TNWEC: "Honest Business: A Superior Strategy for Starting and
           | Managing Your Own Business" by Salli Rasberry and Michael
           | Phillips)
        
       | mythrwy wrote:
       | I'm suspicious of permaculture because I had a friend back in the
       | early 2000s that got into it with a local group and it seemed
       | almost like a cult and they didn't produce enough food to feed a
       | couple of hamsters that I saw.
       | 
       | He did buy all the Mollison books and talked about how he was
       | going to get land and hire people to do the work. I never figured
       | out how he was intending to pay the people with the 20 gallons of
       | persimmons he was optimistically going to get.
       | 
       | I'm an agronomist by training so it was especially irritating
       | arguing with him having been around at-scale food production, and
       | this went on for months as he was totally obsessed.
       | 
       | There are some interesting theories in it. Like catching water on
       | a hill with terraces. Which people did in earlier times and maybe
       | still do in certain parts of the world. A lot of things that
       | people living a simpler life found out a long time ago presented
       | as a "system".
       | 
       | My takeaway though is that (as practiced anyway) it's a bit of an
       | culty scam, but there are worse ones and people being outside and
       | around nature and growing things is in sum a good thing in my
       | opinion so maybe I'm being a bit harsh.
       | 
       | Anyway, I don't know everything, but it just doesn't seem
       | practical at any scale to provide calories. I'd probably feel
       | better about it had I not heard this guy's impractical cultish
       | preaching for months. I hope he is doing fine wherever he is and
       | got his land in the end.
        
       | vram22 wrote:
       | I had posted this comment on HN around 3 years ago, on a related
       | thread:
       | 
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24827234
       | 
       | Some people appreciated it, and one person said it gave them a
       | lot of material to work on (downthread).
       | 
       | I was only reporting on the work of other well-known
       | permaculturists and regenerative farmers , although I have an
       | interest in permaculture and had done some organic gardening for
       | a few years earlier. But that work I had done (literally hands-
       | on) gave me some background and perspective to be able to think
       | about their work as they talked about it through their videos,
       | which is why I decided to post that comment.
        
       | awhitty wrote:
       | I went to a small Montessori school on the Rio Grande while I was
       | growing up, and among the other "new age"-y things going on at
       | the school, we would spend half a day every week in permaculture
       | class. We spent that class doing things like gardening,
       | constructing adobe stuff like ovens and a gathering space shaped
       | like a turtle (the head formed a pizza oven too - it was really
       | cool), collecting eggs from a chicken coop, recycling fibers and
       | scrap paper into (very brittle) paper, and making tea out of the
       | herbs we grew - mint, chamomile, lavender, etc.
       | 
       | One of the most profound memories I have from that school is of
       | Ms. Susan teaching us to say "thank you" to the plants when we
       | took a few of their leaves for the tea. We'd look at the plant,
       | find some good leaves, pluck 'em off, and then say "thank you"
       | and move to the next one. It was kind of an intimate moment to
       | share with a mint plant haha. It was probably also very cute for
       | the teachers to watch a flock of kids roam around a garden and
       | stare intently at some herbs for an hour.
       | 
       | It was the kind of thing that really sinks in when you're a kid.
       | I didn't know it wasn't a "normal" kind of education, and I just
       | figured, "we take our time and say thank you to the plants when
       | take something from them" was a general rule of life that the
       | adults follow too. I really cherish those memories now! Sometimes
       | I thought they were boring af at the time - learning about
       | compositing toilets isn't really priority #1 for a 9 year-old -
       | but I hope other kids growing up are taught a similar connection
       | to nature today. We've gotta say thank you to the plants!
        
         | tpmx wrote:
         | It's messed up for a school to get children to verbally
         | apologize to plants. It implies that plants have feelings.
         | 
         | Plants don't have feelings. This is a fact that I hope even
         | most green activists on HN agree with, but perhaps not. It
         | would explain a lot of otherwise insane activities.
         | 
         | (and of course, you can't discuss this without being downvoted
         | to smithereens - in my case to such a level that I am not
         | allowed to respond; please do grow up, you lovely mysticists
         | who are at all not shutting those who disagree with you)
        
           | steve_adams_86 wrote:
           | Why not be grateful regardless of whether things have
           | feelings?
           | 
           | The practice of gratitude is a good one, internally and
           | externally, for the living and the inert. We don't have to
           | imagine the plants have souls; it's the simple act of
           | acknowledgment and appreciation that instills a sense of
           | value and importance upon the things that keep us alive.
        
           | badpun wrote:
           | They didn't apologize, they expressed gratitude (that's what
           | "thank you" means). Although the usage here was debatable, as
           | the plant didn't have any say in its leaves being cropped,
           | and of course it only makes sense to thank for a deliberate
           | act. So, in a way, these children were taught inconsistent
           | logic.
        
             | tough wrote:
             | It's like when you get a -Thank you for your services- note
             | while getting fired or layed off.
             | 
             | lmao
        
           | BoiledCabbage wrote:
           | It's really fascinating that you appear to register
           | 'thanking' as 'apologizing'.
           | 
           | And I thank you for that, as I think it just helped me better
           | understand a broad group of the general population I could
           | never quite figure out.
        
             | EatingWithForks wrote:
             | Could you share your understanding please? I can't quite
             | wrap my head around registering thanking as apologizing.
        
               | shagie wrote:
               | From the original post:
               | 
               | > One of the most profound memories I have from that
               | school is of Ms. Susan teaching us to say "thank you" to
               | the plants when we took a few of their leaves for the
               | tea. We'd look at the plant, find some good leaves, pluck
               | 'em off, and then say "thank you" and move to the next
               | one
               | 
               | And the response:
               | 
               | > It's messed up for a school to get children to verbally
               | apologize to plants. It implies that plants have
               | feelings.
               | 
               | The followup to that is about the confusion/"these are
               | the same things" for _thanking_ something being the same
               | as apologizing for that same thing - that gratitude is
               | the same as remorse.
               | 
               | ---
               | 
               | The difference is:
               | 
               | > Thank you for the leaf that I will use for tea
               | 
               | vs
               | 
               | > I'm sorry that I'm picking your leaf for my own
               | enjoyment
               | 
               | The first example here is thanking (a plant) and the
               | second example is apologizing for taking action implying
               | feeling sorry for the harm caused to the plant.
        
               | wccrawford wrote:
               | The original post only talked about thanking the plants.
               | The reply only talks about apologizing to the plants.
               | Clearly the reply thinks that's the same thing here.
        
           | awhitty wrote:
           | Ah, they didn't have us apologize to plants - only to thank
           | 'em. It wasn't a guilty thing we did, but it was a lesson to
           | appreciate that they were growing and that we could enjoy
           | them.
           | 
           | I'm surprised you didn't stop at the idea that it also
           | implies plants have hearing and can understand language and
           | process some kind of human meaning - I feel like those are
           | more absurd than the idea than a plant feels. (More organisms
           | on this planet demonstrate something like feelings than the
           | capacity to verbally communicate.) But yes, I project the
           | idea the plants have something like human feelings, and
           | that's definitely a product of that kind of education
           | reverberating through my life. It was a kind of spiritual
           | lesson, and the school incorporated other spiritual elements
           | like performing the Haudenosaunee Thanksgiving Address during
           | some school assemblies and camping trips. I'm not confused
           | about those as an adult.
           | 
           | I also know that a plant's experience on this planet is alien
           | to mine, and it's silly to apply human meaning to what I
           | think it's going through. I think our brains have enough
           | space to hold these ideas up there though and reflect on
           | them, and I think children deserve more than a functionalist
           | education. I don't think I'm messed up as a result of that
           | education, and I'm living a happy life - fair to say I had a
           | heck of a time catching up on math and language in middle
           | school though!
        
           | sgu999 wrote:
           | They don't learn to apologise to the plants, they just learn
           | to be grateful for what they can take for "free". That
           | probably doesn't fit into your tiny narrative of "green
           | activists" being all shamans who believe plants have
           | feelings, so you extrapolate, project and make a fool of
           | yourself.
        
           | willismichael wrote:
           | Please elaborate.
        
           | geph2021 wrote:
           | messed up for a school to get children to verbally apologize
           | to plants
           | 
           | interesting that you conflate thanking with apologizing.
        
           | bombcar wrote:
           | I remember a sci-fi book where the main character asked the
           | robot to do something, and the robot did, and the character
           | thanked it. And someone said "why did you thank it? It has no
           | feelings and can't understand it." The reply was something
           | along the lines of "the thanks comes from me, and if I stop
           | doing it for robots I'll stop doing it for people, too,
           | eventually."
        
             | awhitty wrote:
             | And here I am burning tokens on my GPT prompts with please-
             | and-thank-yous in 2023 haha
        
             | [deleted]
        
         | colordrops wrote:
         | Did they say thanks to the chickens as well?
        
           | agumonkey wrote:
           | birth of the kfcism religion
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | akira2501 wrote:
           | Every time I feed them. Chickens are generally inscrutable..
           | but the noises they make when the food comes out definitely
           | sound like unrestrained joy.
        
             | eschneider wrote:
             | Individual chickens definitely have personalities which
             | you'll get to know if you spend enough time with them.
        
           | awhitty wrote:
           | Haha, I have to assume so, but honestly I didn't spend much
           | time in the chicken coop because I thought it smelled bad.
           | I'm not sure where the eggs went, also. And yea, on
           | reflection, it probably wasn't, like, above-board to have
           | kids working with live animals in school? I remember a friend
           | getting pecked by a chicken once. This was a pretty agg-y
           | area in New Mexico and most everyone I grew up with had at
           | least some animals on their land, so it wasn't unusual.
        
             | markdown wrote:
             | > it probably wasn't, like, above-board to have kids
             | working with live animals in school.
             | 
             | These days there are American children as young as 13
             | washing down slaughterhouses on school nights and
             | sleepwalking to school. In a nation where child labor of
             | this kind is completely legal, I think it's fair to say
             | that a few chickens at school is just fine.
             | 
             | https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/feds-
             | find-100-children-...
        
             | jaggederest wrote:
             | > And yea, on reflection, it probably wasn't, like, above-
             | board to have kids working with live animals in school?
             | 
             | How will children learn to care for and appreciate animals
             | if they don't interact with them? I think, rather than "not
             | above-board", it's vital.
        
               | rcoveson wrote:
               | But what about the allergens? The risk of salmonella?
               | Have you seen the damage an angy chicken can do with
               | those claws? I've heard that Avian Influenza is on the
               | rise again. Can't they just learn about chickens on their
               | EduTablets?
               | 
               | ...is what I imagine I'd hear at the Parent/Teacher
               | conferences leading up to the average public school's
               | field trip to a local farm.
        
           | cjohnson318 wrote:
           | Why wouldn't you? Anyway, I don't think schools with farms in
           | the US regularly harvest poultry or livestock for their
           | students.
        
             | colordrops wrote:
             | They mention directly that they collected eggs from the
             | coup.
        
               | msla wrote:
               | > They mention directly that they collected eggs from the
               | coup.
               | 
               | And if they thanked their chickens more often, the
               | chickens wouldn't have staged a coup.
        
         | ecnahc515 wrote:
         | This reminds me of the lessons from the book "Ishmael" by
         | Daniel Quinn. One of the main characters is teaching another
         | lessons throughout the book using a Montessori approach. One of
         | the big lessons is to only take what you need, and to
         | appreciate these things we take for granted. I highly recommend
         | it if you haven't read it already.
        
         | throw8383833jj wrote:
         | that sounds like a fantastic way to grow up. I wish I could
         | raise my kid in this kind of community. permaculture has so
         | much to offer people.
        
       | viraj_shah wrote:
       | I am surprised and not surprised to see this here. I often see
       | themes of burnout, wanting to get back to nature, existential
       | questions surrounding tech and similar here on HN.
       | 
       | I took a permaculture class earlier this year, after having
       | researched it on the sidelines for a few years. It started from
       | looking at sustainability, agriculture, homesteading (wanting to
       | "leave it all behind") and blossomed into a wonderful learning
       | experience about a philosophy where I felt a little more at home.
       | It was great. It introduced me to a few really cool friends whose
       | values largely aligned with mine. Anyone interested in this,
       | please feel free to reach out.
        
         | tremon wrote:
         | I don't think it has necessarily to do with burnout, or even
         | with the more general notion "city-dwellers feel detached from
         | nature so they romanticize it". Apart from that, there is also
         | the entrepreneurial spirit (as well as the hacker spirit) of
         | wanting to do things yourself, either because you think you can
         | do better or because you want to decrease your reliance on
         | others. And those are very well represented here.
        
         | qubex wrote:
         | Permaculture is one of the ideas that fascinates me most.
        
         | qubex wrote:
         | What course did you take, and where, if I may be so
         | intrusive... you did mention to "reach out" if interested! I
         | also arrived at being fascinated by the concept by ideas of
         | sustainability and "getting away from it all".
        
           | oh_sigh wrote:
           | If you follow the link to his homepage in his profile, there
           | is a link to book a 30 minute meeting with him.
        
           | Jedd wrote:
           | Search for people running PDC's - Permaculture Design Courses
           | - in your area. These are variably well monitored /
           | established syllabus, usually run for 5 days or so. I'm sure
           | there's one-day intro courses, but I suspect you'd get a lot
           | more variability, and obviously a lot less value.
           | 
           | Most practicing permaculturists I've bumped into _tend_ to
           | eschew the woo, as it were, but you may want to validate that
           | before signing up to any particular course. (These branches
           | of study can attract certain types of people.)
           | 
           | I did a PDC here in Sydney AU about 15 years ago, and like GP
           | I found it a hugely interesting and engaging process. (The
           | one I went to was run by a lass who had studied under Bill
           | Mollison, which was kind of funky, but as a rule the material
           | covered is much more practical, rational, etc - than
           | deferential / by association to the two guys that kicked it
           | off.)
        
       | 11235813213455 wrote:
       | For permaculture I first need land, and its expensive where I
       | live (I can't go too far as I'm on 2 wheels without engine), so
       | I'm still saving for a few more years before planting fig,
       | persimmon, medlar, citrus, orange native trees, peppers, and all
       | easy to grow things, and sleeping around that in a small box!
        
         | mooreds wrote:
         | I took a permaculture course a while back and the instructor
         | addressed that specific issue. He said (paraphrasing): you can
         | buy really good tools and learn to use them, you can learn to
         | identify and grow annuals and smaller plants, you can keep
         | worms, you can observe and build invisible structures, all
         | without land.
         | 
         | Sure, keep saving to buy land, but don't forget it is something
         | you can practice in the middle of the city too.
        
         | CapstanRoller wrote:
         | Have you considered "guerrilla gardening" and repurposing
         | wasted space around you? Buying a large amount of personal land
         | is not a prerequisite.
         | 
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guerrilla_gardening
        
       | bovermyer wrote:
       | Permaculture is fascinating. I'm interested in how it behaves on
       | a macro scale, though; what would happen to the wider ecosystem
       | if you had a town full of permaculture lots instead of grass
       | yards?
        
         | KaiserPro wrote:
         | a whole town, depending on how things are done would look a bit
         | different, but would handle different too.
         | 
         | First, assuming that people are growing all sorts of things,
         | and not trying to monoculture, you will get an explosion in
         | different kinds of insects and their predators.
         | 
         | Second, you should get an explosion of colour
         | 
         | thirdly, assuming the growth of trees, creepers and other
         | vines, coolers daytime temperatures, and reduced winds
         | 
         | fourthly, and possibly more importantly, much higher water
         | retention.
        
         | tspike wrote:
         | I'd have a hard time thinking of a more wonderful experiment to
         | run.
        
         | photochemsyn wrote:
         | Every estimate I've seen points to a minimum requirement of ~1
         | hectare of arable land to feed one human for one year (on a
         | minimal vegetarian diet) and that estimate assumes highly
         | productive soils and minimal crop loss due to insects, drought,
         | or flood.
         | 
         | The idea with permaculture is that you minimize (ideally
         | eliminate) the need for fertilizer, herbicide and pesticide
         | imports using effective composting and crop rotation
         | (biological nitrogen fixation) and integrated pest management
         | (raising insects that eat crop pests etc.) and water recycling
         | systems and so on.
         | 
         | Scaling this approach to tens of thousands of acres for
         | reliably feeding even a medium-sized city seems challenging,
         | but there appear to be some 1000-acre permaculture farms out
         | there. However, yields are likely to be lower per acre with
         | this approach as practices like using high fertilizer imports
         | to allow double-cropping don't fit the permaculture model.
        
           | throwawaaarrgh wrote:
           | It's worth noting that permaculture is not just about farming
           | or homesteading. The point is mostly to have a balanced
           | ecology that humans can live in. You can still have large
           | farms, small farms, or no farms, and do permaculture.
           | 
           | The big mistake we made was building large cities that
           | required moving or reshaping the land, water, animals and
           | plants to support large cities. There really should not be
           | this many humans in the world, and certainly not with as many
           | huge cities as we have. We're becoming a species dependent on
           | a synthetic environment.
        
             | kamray23 wrote:
             | I find this idea of a "synthetic environment" kind of
             | strange in a way. We crossed that line twelve thousand
             | years ago when we started large-scale farming. That alone
             | was a transformation of nature which immensely upset the
             | previous natural order and caused human population to rise
             | immensely. But I wouldn't really consider that artificial
             | in a major way, and on some level we're also part of
             | nature. I don't think we are any more artificial in
             | building cities than bees are in building their hives.
             | There is a difference, but not one which matters for this
             | conversation, though I will mention that that difference
             | has to do with the fact that we picture an idea in our
             | heads before projecting it into reality through labour.
             | 
             | I don't think it's healthy to see the world as a struggle
             | between the natural and artificial, because it's so hard to
             | properly define. Humans are natural, making tools is in our
             | nature, so is constructing shelter. I think the proper way
             | to see the world is as this unity, humans exist within
             | nature and act to transform it, as does every other animal
             | species on this planet. The ecosystem would look wildly
             | different did termites and bees not transform it for their
             | own benefit, and similarly it is humans who transform
             | nature in their own ways for their own benefit.
             | 
             | This does not mean unconditional support for human
             | activity. Glass, concrete, and steel towers and spreading
             | suburbs are terrible transformations of nature. They are
             | terrible because of their destructive potential for no
             | gain, they are unsustainable by nature, they upset the
             | balance in a way which makes the land less fertile, less
             | capable of supporting life in general let alone humans, and
             | in the long term are a loss not only for natural diversity
             | but for the human species as well. There exists a rift due
             | to industrial agriculture where humans take from the earth
             | and give back to it from the mountains and the bedrock
             | while pushing waste into the oceans, which is unsustainable
             | and which has and will lead to ecological collapses. This
             | is but one part, industry in general, pollution, the carbon
             | cycle, land use change and associated environmental
             | effects, it all acts to lower the carrying capacity of this
             | Earth in the long term. This is how I believe it is best to
             | critique transformations of nature in this manner, because
             | terms are easy to define, the unsustainability is
             | scientifically provable, you have no such ambiguities as
             | when you talk about artificial and natural as two entirely
             | separate concepts.
             | 
             | This also gets you out of very bad ways of thinking. There
             | is no "natural carrying capacity" for this planet except
             | what it currently has. There is likely a theoretical
             | maximum and some day we might hit it. What's clear is that
             | we haven't hit it yet, we just fail to push the current
             | carrying capacity by transforming nature in an
             | unsustainable fashion for short-term benefit. You can no
             | longer say things like "There really should not be this
             | many humans in the world", since it's plainly not true.
             | There are supposed to be exactly as many humans as there
             | are, because humans naturally transform nature to support
             | themselves. It is our own nature, our species being, to
             | take those gifts of nature and use them to transform them,
             | through our own labour, into products which are use-values
             | to ourselves. This is just as it is the nature of bees to
             | pollinate and build hives, the nature of woodland animals
             | to eat their hives and the flowers they pollinate, and the
             | nature of elephants to topple trees to create for
             | themselves a grassland instead of a forest.
             | 
             | It is not that there are too many humans, even with our
             | unsustainable practices this planet easily currently
             | produces enough food for ten billion to live well-off. It
             | is not that there is artificial and natural, to make
             | natural artificial is natural, because to transform nature
             | is human nature. It is our current, wasteful and
             | unsustainable transformation of nature, no different to
             | those transformations that took place twelve thousand years
             | ago except in its unsustainability, which has been been
             | sucking the life out of this planet. But as humans, we have
             | the unique ability to both imagine and then through labour
             | project that ideal into reality, to once again transform
             | what was natural to something which suits our needs. Our
             | needs are, in the long term, sustainably keeping at the
             | very least ten billion people alive, and permaculture is
             | one of the ways in which we can both imagine that and start
             | to bring it into fruition. However, our own relations and
             | structures might prevent a total change in our
             | transformation of nature in its present state, which is why
             | political action is as important, if not more so, than
             | homesteading or community gardens.
             | 
             | Idk man, I don't think overpopulation is an issue and I
             | despise imagining that there is something uniquely bad
             | about artificial things and that they are somehow different
             | from nature. They are nature, their creation is our nature,
             | and we ourselves are creations of nature. It's only how we
             | have in the last few millenia, really even few centuries,
             | been doing those transformations which is the true issue.
             | 
             | End of insane HN rant I guess. There's obviously no
             | infinite growth, but we're also far from overpopulation.
             | The world is not a Malthusian nightmare, it's not that
             | resources cause population to explode and conditions to
             | worsen, we can see that in the richer nations of the Earth
             | where instead resources cause population to drop after a
             | point. We'll naturally reach our peak well within the
             | theoretical maximum carrying capacity of the Earth, that's
             | my point. Permaculture is one important step on that path.
             | Neo-Malthusians and genocidal maniacs and eco-fascists
             | disgust me to no end.
        
           | CapstanRoller wrote:
           | The thing people don't realize is that we waste so much space
           | and resources on useless crap.
           | 
           | 1 hectate per person is easy to get in any suburban
           | neighborhood if everyone can agree that a stable healthy food
           | supply is more important than endless lawns or empty lots.
           | 
           | The resources are all there, we just grossly misallocate and
           | squander them.
        
       | zeroCalories wrote:
       | I've always been wary of the permaculture community. Firstly, a
       | lot of the things advanced by them are simply not scalable to the
       | entire human race. They will say stuff like "it's practically
       | free to have all this free food I grew on my lawn", while
       | ignoring the massive amount of labor they put in, the waste
       | product that they managed to scavenge, and the infrastructure
       | they pay little to no taxes for. It's not even clear to me that
       | "Big Age" is even a bad thing, seeing that their massive
       | economies of scale allow them to produce more for less(money,
       | environmental impact) than smaller farmers. Failure to realize
       | this lead to the dumb memes about how global supply chains are
       | supposedly bad, without realizing that having many small
       | factories around the world would actually be more environmentally
       | harmful than shipping products to where they can best be
       | processed. I'm sympathetic to fears about long term
       | sustainability and skepticism about globalism, but I generally
       | don't like the type of stuff they advocate for. I generally agree
       | with calls for increased regulation and a reduction in waste
       | though.
        
         | throw8383833jj wrote:
         | there are many things that absolutely are scalable to the
         | entire human race, at least outside of the city. Permaculture
         | asks nothing of you but your effort. The "massive amount of
         | labor put in is what's needed to produce that amount of food.
         | It's only in rich countries where people can produce food for
         | much less labor (by working a high paying job and buying the
         | food at the market). there are many countries where people are
         | much better off growing their own food, rather than working at
         | a minimum wage job and buying the same food.
         | 
         | You should watch John Jai on Youtube. He's in thailand a
         | country where the GDP per capita is a fraction of the US and
         | yet he has more land, 3 small paid off huts and enough food to
         | raise 4 kids all with plenty of time left over to read books.
         | "Life is easy" he says, not bragging about his riches but
         | rather to let people know about an alternative way of living.
        
           | zeroCalories wrote:
           | I agree that permaculture might be an option for some people,
           | but the difference isn't gdp, it's that there are no
           | productive things to do in many of these low income
           | countries. If their economy advances enough they'll find that
           | working a job provides more for them.
        
         | CapstanRoller wrote:
         | >It's not even clear to me that "Big Age" is even a bad thing,
         | seeing that their massive economies of scale allow them to
         | produce more for less(money, environmental impact)
         | 
         | Big Ag is extremely destructive to the environment, because it
         | doesn't respect existing environments & ecosystems, instead
         | seeing them as a blank canvas for terraforming and imposing
         | industrial processes.
         | 
         | Where are you getting the idea that Big Ag has less
         | environmental impact than a backyard garden???
         | 
         | >They will say stuff like "it's practically free to have all
         | this free food I grew on my lawn", while ignoring the massive
         | amount of labor they put in,
         | 
         | It doesn't require much labor. That's one of the main points --
         | permaculture is about working with nature rather than against
         | it. Instead of tilling and pumping soil full of mined
         | fertilizer, you use the natural processes appropriate for your
         | local environment to support your crops. When properly applied,
         | permaculture is about _minimal effort_.
         | 
         | >the waste product that they managed to scavenge,
         | 
         | Yes, that's also the point of permaculture: diverting waste
         | streams and closing loops. For example, composting is a great
         | way to make high-quality soil while diverting food waste from
         | the landfill where it would anaerobically rot and generate
         | methane. Permaculture can (and should) be low effort.
         | 
         | >and the infrastructure they pay little to no taxes for.
         | 
         | Huh? Where are you getting the idea that permaculture
         | encourages resource theft and tax avoidance?
        
           | zeroCalories wrote:
           | >Where are you getting the idea that Big Ag has less
           | environmental impact than a backyard garden???
           | 
           | Most studies I've seen suggest that the larger the farming
           | operation, the more efficiently it's able to use resources.
           | Most of those were small/organic farms instead of a backyard
           | garden, but I don't see many reasons to think it would be
           | better.
           | 
           | >When properly applied, permaculture is about minimal effort.
           | 
           | You still put in more effort than most people. Someone
           | working a median wage job will be able to buy more food in
           | the time it takes you to maintain your garden. The only
           | exception are the very poor.
           | 
           | >Yes, that's also the point of permaculture: diverting waste
           | streams and closing loops.
           | 
           | Diverting waste is good, but when scaled up it won't be
           | sufficient. You won't be able to get free fertilizer from
           | people that prune trees because everyone will want it, and
           | that's assuming a lot of this waste would still even be
           | produced in an environmentally conscious world. You will most
           | likely need to produce all of it on your own.
           | 
           | >Huh? Where are you getting the idea that permaculture
           | encourages resource theft and tax avoidance?
           | 
           | To be fair, this is just from the permaculture people that I
           | know. Many of them work very little and pay nothing in taxes,
           | use medicare, and are still well off because a lot of their
           | labor is untaxable. They live in suburbs and the country
           | where stuff like roads and water are provided to them at a
           | loss to society.
        
           | kamray23 wrote:
           | Firstly, I absolutely agree with both people here. Industrial
           | agriculture is large-scale enough to be able to use
           | everything with extreme efficiency. Secondly, modern
           | industrial agricultural practices result in the
           | transformation of nature into an unsustainable hell-scape
           | which will collapse in on itself within a few centuries at
           | the latest.
           | 
           | But I don't think you should consider humans as separate from
           | nature, there is evil to being artificial and there is no
           | evil to sometimes going against nature. Humans are, by their
           | nature, a species who take natural fruits and labour upon
           | them to transform them, to give them a new use-value. That is
           | a, if not even the, universal constant which has held through
           | every age of human (pre)history. Humans, just as bees or
           | termites or elephants or trees, transform nature by our
           | nature. Everything natural is artificial and everything
           | artificial is natural. To transform nature, to bend it and to
           | change it is our species being, it is part of our role in
           | nature to transform it as do countless other species.
           | However, unlike those guided by pure instinct, we have both
           | the ability to imagine and project through labour that ideal
           | into reality. Importantly, that's not really any more
           | artificial than a beehive is, artificial is not a very well
           | defined concept or in any way scientifically useful. Once
           | again, it is part of our natural role, our nature, to
           | transform nature around us. When we do transform nature in
           | major ways, we speak for the trees, as much as destroy them.
           | However, our societal development has led us into a
           | transformation of nature which is wasteful and unsustainable.
           | These are very scientifically useful concepts and things like
           | sustainability can be experimented upon and proven. Imagining
           | alternative transformations is the first step to projecting
           | them into reality, to transforming nature once again in a way
           | which has a long-term benefit for us all. There do however
           | exist major economic barriers which can never be broken which
           | prohibit permaculture on any real scale, though that's only
           | true as long as the economy is as it is now. Beside the point
           | for now. My point is that it is not useful to consider ideal
           | and badly defined concepts like artificial and natural and a
           | struggle between the two. It is much more useful to think in
           | terms of our nature, how our nature and labour is governed by
           | our society, how by our nature of transforming nature that
           | leads to the current unsustainable mode of life, and then
           | think about what needs to be done within that more
           | explanative framework to imagine not only unreachable ideals
           | but to project them into reachable ideals in the real,
           | material world.
        
         | KaiserPro wrote:
         | I mean yes and no.
         | 
         | Permaculture has a much higher yeild, per unit of land compared
         | to traditional western arible. The reasons are not really well
         | understood. Possibly attention to pest levels, mixed crops, and
         | much healthier soils (with a fucktonne of mushroom webs)
         | 
         | but permaculture isn't much different to subsistence farming.
         | 
         | But, the flip side is that industrial movement of food has
         | stopped, limited or reduced the effect of localised famines.
         | 
         | There is a much mire equitable medium
        
           | zeroCalories wrote:
           | Land usage isn't a good metric, especially because land in
           | the countryside is plentiful. This is another thing that
           | pisses me off about permaculture people, they encourage
           | inefficient use of land in urban environments, leading to a
           | whole bunch of other problems, including higher land value,
           | more need for cars, and MORE environmentally and economically
           | draining suburbs. I don't want a community garden in my most
           | important economic areas, I want housing and workplaces.
        
         | vintermann wrote:
         | > ignoring the massive amount of labor they put in
         | 
         | I thought the whole point of permaculture was exploring
         | tradeoffs between labour and space (i.e, that "yield per acre"
         | of a small intensively managed gardening plot is surprisingly
         | good, and conversely you can trade effort for yield with
         | "forest garden" type stuff that requires less maintenance).
        
           | zeroCalories wrote:
           | I don't believe them, but I'll start my own farm if it can
           | earn me anywhere near 50$/hr in profit.
        
       | baremetal wrote:
       | I am currently building a permaculture farm. Continuing to dig
       | out a pond here in about 30 minutes.
        
       | markus23 wrote:
       | Great to see that Permaculture is on-topic on Hacker News! We are
       | developing an app to make Permaculture easier
       | https://permaplant.net/
        
         | pantalaimon wrote:
         | Interesting, there is also
         | https://wiki.ecohackerfarm.org/powerplant:start
        
         | LikeAnElephant wrote:
         | FYI I get a security error when going to the https of your
         | site. I get an Apache message when going to http. Can't wait to
         | check it out though once it's up!
        
       | kubb wrote:
       | Getting into permaculture is great, you just need a piece of
       | land. You won't be able to feed yourself just from your balcony.
       | 
       | And contrary to what some people believe, it matters what kind of
       | soil you have how much water, and what climate you're in.
       | 
       | I'd honestly just quit my job and do that, a shame that my
       | partner couldn't be further from that desire for a different
       | life.
        
         | eikenberry wrote:
         | If you didn't work, how would you pay your property taxes?
        
           | justrealist wrote:
           | If you're really just trying to cover property tax, set aside
           | half your acreage and let a nearby farmer harvest hay. On
           | reasonably productive land, splitting the cash will cover
           | taxes.
        
           | throwawaaarrgh wrote:
           | Sell books on permaculture...
        
           | kubb wrote:
           | 3 acres of land in the US cost $15K on average. A property
           | tax with a 1% rate is $150 per year. You could earn that by
           | selling 20kg of tomatoes. You should be able to grow a tonne
           | in the right soil with the right climate.
           | 
           | Of course in the permaculture you'd try to plant various
           | species, but you should be able to earn $150 by selling them.
        
             | eikenberry wrote:
             | I guess I'm to used to city life with 10K+ property taxes
             | to consider that it could be so low. So yeah.. that
             | wouldn't be much of an issue.
        
         | Gordonjcp wrote:
         | > And contrary to what some people believe, it matters what
         | kind of soil you have how much water, and what climate you're
         | in.
         | 
         | This is what the "but we don't need to farm animals, it's a
         | waste, we can just eat the plants instead" crowd don't get.
         | 
         | You can't eat the kind of plants you can grow, where people
         | grow plants to raise animals.
        
           | AlotOfReading wrote:
           | This is a half-truth at best. The places where you can _only_
           | grow inedible crops are extremely marginal environments and
           | they usually can 't support economical densities. These are
           | pretty unique environments like the northern plains and
           | northern central Asia where only a small percentage of the
           | livestock population lives. Even here, livestock are usually
           | fed to the extent that the land can support and then
           | additional feed is provided with crops grown in less marginal
           | environments. For finishing, that's almost entirely human
           | edible crops like corn, sorghum and oats (even if the
           | specific varietals aren't considered edible).
        
             | Gordonjcp wrote:
             | Or, you know, most of the UK, and in particular Scotland,
             | where most of the farmland is hill grazing.
        
               | AlotOfReading wrote:
               | Are you kidding? Most of the UK is _phenomenal_ for
               | crops, practically a garden of Eden. Do you think
               | megafarms in Kent or even Herefordshire are on
               | particularly marginal land?
               | 
               | Yes, the Scottish Highlands are a marginal environment,
               | but that's reflected in how many cattle they have. There
               | are some 20m cattle in the UK. 1.7m are in Scotland. I
               | couldn't find specific numbers for the highland counties,
               | but only ~15k of those are highland breeds. That's also
               | what I saw in Scotland. Lots of farms and ranches down
               | south, very small villages with huge ranges/low densities
               | up north.
        
               | Gordonjcp wrote:
               | Yes, and the thing you'll notice is that anything that's
               | remotely viable for arable farming is used for just that.
               | 
               | Even large-scale industrial farms still rotate pasture,
               | though, because otherwise the soil gets spectacularly
               | fucked up within about four years.
               | 
               | Without cows, everyone would starve.
        
           | phreeza wrote:
           | In principle it is right that it makes sense to use animals
           | to get the optimal amount of calories out of marginal land
           | that can't be used to directly grow edible plants. The
           | current state of agriculture is very far removed from that
           | optimum though.
        
       | roboben wrote:
       | Most fun thing about permaculture is the fact that no one is
       | making money from actually applying it but rather just selling
       | courses, books and other media. It's funny since the first thing
       | you learn about it, is that you don't need to spend a lot of
       | money doing it.
       | 
       | Beside that, permaculture is nothing more than a framework for
       | systems design. Can be applied to much more than your garden.
        
         | debacle wrote:
         | A few people are making money from it, but they're content to
         | make money. The majority of people doing homesteading are:
         | 
         | 1. At-home farmers who are eating healthier, but paying for the
         | privilege.
         | 
         | 2. People who are quiet because they're actually making very
         | good money doing what they're doing.
         | 
         | 3. People who haven't quite grasped that permaculture and/or
         | homesteading are still farming, and farming is still hard work
         | despite how blog-friendly you make it.
         | 
         | 4. People trying to sell their "next best thing" marketing to
         | hopeful mommmy bloggers.
         | 
         | I am currently a #1 hoping to become a #2 eventually. Online, I
         | predominantly follow #2s and they never try and sell me
         | classes, PDFs, etc, because they're busy making money farming.
        
           | hksh wrote:
           | Could you link to some of the #2s you follow?
        
             | debacle wrote:
             | People making a living:
             | 
             | https://www.youtube.com/@gregjudyregenerativerancher
             | 
             | https://www.youtube.com/@savvydirtfarmer
             | 
             | https://www.youtube.com/@JustaFewAcresFarm
             | 
             | https://www.youtube.com/@PeteKanarisGreenDreamsFL
             | 
             | https://www.youtube.com/@MikesBackyardNursery
             | 
             | https://www.youtube.com/@FraserValleyRoseFarm
             | 
             | https://www.youtube.com/@edibleacres
             | 
             | https://www.youtube.com/@regenerativeagriculture
             | 
             | Hobbyists, but doing it right:
             | 
             | https://www.youtube.com/@Selfsufficientme
             | 
             | https://www.youtube.com/@simplifygardening
             | 
             | https://www.youtube.com/@GardenerScott
             | 
             | https://www.youtube.com/@RedToolHouse
             | 
             | https://www.youtube.com/@MySelfReliance
             | 
             | Some of these folks do sponsored content, usually widgets
             | or toys or something, but they're pretty up front about it.
             | A few of them I follow religiously, others I choose which
             | videos I'd prefer to watch.
        
               | beembeem wrote:
               | Oh this is what you meant - making a living through
               | permaculture. Can confirm that SelfSufficientMe strikes
               | me as a great dude with engaging content.
        
               | ry4nolson wrote:
               | The Gardening Channel With James Prigioni is another
               | great channel.
               | 
               | https://www.youtube.com/c/jamesprigioni
        
               | blisterpeanuts wrote:
               | Also, Justin Rhodes and Joel Salatin youtube channels.
               | Joel focuses on poultry, and Justin also raises pigs and
               | cows. Both are heavily into permaculture.
               | 
               | I only have a few backyard chickens, but I'm trying to
               | apply their principles where I can. It's scalable,
               | luckily.
        
           | CapstanRoller wrote:
           | Why is money the main goal? If you see everything through
           | that lens, then of course permaculture seems incoherent.
           | 
           | If money is a primary concern, why grow food at all? Just
           | strip-mine your land instead, or simply engage in real-estate
           | speculation and landlordism.
        
             | vintermann wrote:
             | If you buy actually valuable expensive input from the
             | outside world for making food, you should sell actually
             | valuable output to make it worth it. Otherwise it isn't
             | sustainable.
             | 
             | Sure, making money on things that aren't actually valuable
             | is all too easy, but that would defeat the point.
             | "Economy", formal and informal, seems to be a big and
             | acknowledged part of permaculture culture.
        
               | gafferongames wrote:
               | The whole point of permaculture is to not require
               | expensive inputs.
        
         | suoduandao2 wrote:
         | Applied to much more than your garden is very true. I related
         | all the principles of permaculture to my jiujitsu class. Hard
         | to say if they helped, since I already had been practicing them
         | in a different 'bundle', but definitely speaks to how universal
         | they are in systems with complexity and feedback.
        
         | alisson wrote:
         | I know a few people that make very good money applying
         | permaculture principles. Not because they are applying the
         | principles, but because they are very good at selling their
         | produce and services. They know how to get to their target
         | audience, specially people with more money to spend. I think
         | this is true for any kind of agriculture or business.
        
         | 11235813213455 wrote:
         | > no one is making money
         | 
         | your comment makes me think of
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35847327
         | 
         | Permaculture is mostly about growing food for yourself and
         | local friends
        
           | wing-_-nuts wrote:
           | People joke about the fact that you're not really saving any
           | money doing this vs buying the produce at the store, and they
           | might be right, but it's not about the price of food, it's
           | about learning the knowledge needed to grow your own. It kind
           | of freaks me out that 98% of the US population would starve
           | if our ag system seriously broke down. We could seriously use
           | some resiliency there.
        
             | hahamrfunnyguy wrote:
             | Oh you save a ton of money on produce and it's higher
             | quality _. I save seeds and don 't have to buy new seed
             | every year. I use woodchips, leaf compost, manure compost
             | and whatever else free I can get close by. My neighbor has
             | a huge pile of woodchips that he's offered so I've been
             | using those instead.
             | 
             | This week I harvested morels which the local grocery store
             | sells fresh for like $40/lb.
             | 
             | _There is a catch, and that catch is you eat whatever is in
             | season. It does require getting creative with recipes. I
             | live in zone 6B and have fresh greens from April -
             | December. Winter squash will store well into the spring.
             | Nuts in the shell will last years. I have black walnuts
             | that I harvested in 2019 that still taste great.
        
             | throw8383833jj wrote:
             | whether or not you save money and how much you save depends
             | on how much your regular job pays. Sure, a google software
             | engineer will be better off just buying all their food. but
             | someone working a minimum wage job, will be much better off
             | growing their own fruit trees. Here are some quick
             | calculations/back of the napkin. with an average harvest
             | labor of 3 apples per minute, that would produce 180
             | organic apples per hour or 40 lbs/hour or about 80$ worth
             | of fruit per hour, not including time spend watering,
             | pruning, irrigation and mulching (if done). Organic Berries
             | on the other hand are 4-10 times more expensive, thus even
             | giving some engineers a run for their money!
        
               | hahamrfunnyguy wrote:
               | Pretty good assessment. I have the potential to be
               | earning a high hourly rate but I don't count my time
               | gardening as a loss because I enjoy it most of the time.
               | I also can grow different things than I can find in the
               | store and that's hard to put a price on.
        
               | throw8383833jj wrote:
               | plus you know it's organic, whereas the grocery store's
               | "organic" label sometimes has some give to it. Some
               | wheats for example, aren't entirely organic.
        
             | saalweachter wrote:
             | I mean, resiliency, yes, I am all for resiliency, besides
             | "produce enough food for everyone", "be able to continue
             | producing enough food for everyone despite 5- or 6-sigma
             | disasters" is the most important thing for an agricultural
             | system to do.
             | 
             | But, like, why would the agricultural system break down? If
             | that's a possibility in your society, maybe ask why that is
             | and try to fix it, rather than trying to have everyone go
             | back to subsistence farming.
        
               | CapstanRoller wrote:
               | The agricultural system doesn't need to break down in
               | order for us to realize it's deeply damaging and
               | unsustainable. Ideally we'd realize this and change our
               | ways _before_ breaks down -- that 's why permaculture
               | exists.
               | 
               | You're confusing permaculture with prepping.
        
               | lmm wrote:
               | > The agricultural system doesn't need to break down in
               | order for us to realize it's deeply damaging and
               | unsustainable. Ideally we'd realize this and change our
               | ways before breaks down -- that's why permaculture
               | exists.
               | 
               | I'm pretty sure the systemic fix isn't going to be
               | everyone having their own backyard plot.
               | 
               | > You're confusing permaculture with prepping.
               | 
               | Well, if you're talking about "98% of the US population
               | would starve" that's absolutely prepper talk.
        
             | badpun wrote:
             | Many permaculturists would probably starve too. It's pretty
             | hard for a person with a backyard to consistently produce
             | the 2500+ kcal needed per day, and also process and store
             | it so that it's available outside of harvest season as
             | well.
        
               | vintermann wrote:
               | Doing genealogy, my ancestors were surprisingly good at
               | that sort of thing. Then they learned to read and studied
               | farming practices and stuff and got _much_ better at it.
               | 
               | Of course it depends on the size of your backyard, and
               | how long, and critically on trade networks/community.
        
               | CapstanRoller wrote:
               | The goal isn't to have one person produce all that for
               | themselves, or about back-breaking labor.
               | 
               | Permaculture encourages community, not hyper-
               | individualism. It's about working with nature rather than
               | against it, and directing the benefits of it to everyone.
        
               | blisterpeanuts wrote:
               | I think some of these folks who are on several acres, and
               | who have poultry, cattle, pigs, and extensive gardens,
               | will likely not starve.
               | 
               | But life will be hard, once the fuel and electricity run
               | out, even the ones who are totally off grid with solar
               | and storage batteries. Just basic stuff like screws,
               | pumps, pipes, tools, not to mention medical care,
               | pharmaceuticals etc.
        
               | oh_sigh wrote:
               | Not starve if left to their own devices. But if they're
               | anywhere even close to a city or town, or a group of
               | other people who don't have those things, they better be
               | prepared to defend it.
        
               | VBprogrammer wrote:
               | In fairness, some permaculture people talk about this,
               | for example, food forests which can produce an impressive
               | amount of food which a city dweller would not recognise
               | or know how to cook even if they did. If you have a large
               | enough food forest then you could be providing some kind
               | of subsistence living long after someone came for your
               | cows, sheep and pigs.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | VBprogrammer wrote:
         | I find it fascinating. It's somewhere between a brilliant
         | insight into the human species relationship with the other
         | inhabitants of our planet and utter snake oil sold to new-agey
         | people to be applied in utterly unsuitable conditions.
        
           | CapstanRoller wrote:
           | What part of permaculture is "snake oil"? Please be specific.
        
         | rakoo wrote:
         | > Beside that, permaculture is nothing more than a framework
         | for systems design. Can be applied to much more than your
         | garden.
         | 
         | And people do: http://permacomputing.net/
        
       | 1827163 wrote:
       | I just discovered composting using Oyster mushrooms (Pleurotus
       | Ostreatus). It can handle food waste and also human/animal waste
       | too. It colonizes the waste really fast when it's warm. No need
       | for a septic tank.
       | 
       | Yes I have a small hut in the woods, with electricity and
       | Internet via fiber optic cable from a house nearby. There's a
       | waterproof WiFi access point mounted outside the hut on a pole,
       | with a surprisingly long range.
       | 
       | Recovering burnout victim here too, by the way.
        
         | woile wrote:
         | Interesting, I grow Oyster mushrooms from used coffee beans. I
         | really like giving an extra purpose to so many beans consumed.
        
           | 1827163 wrote:
           | I have a whole 70 litre dust bin that contains spawn and
           | waste organic matter, and it's all turned white and fluffy as
           | the mycelium has colonized everything. And once it's full I
           | can then use the mycelium to start even more colonies on
           | collected tree leaves and branches. It kind of grows
           | exponentially in size. I just keep producing more and more of
           | it....
           | 
           | When you grow large quantities of mycelium this way, it
           | generates its own internal heat, I've found it to be warm
           | inside. So that makes it grow faster than it would if it were
           | at ambient temperature.
           | 
           | Also the large amount of spawn easily overruns any other
           | fungi that might contaminate the bin, such as green mold,
           | before it has time to spread. The oyster mushroom fungus is a
           | very aggressive colonizer which will eventually outrun green
           | mold with time, but this can take a while.
        
             | tstrimple wrote:
             | All of my mushroom experiments have ended in mold. I wonder
             | if I just need a more aggressive fungi.
        
               | 1827163 wrote:
               | Increase the ratio of spawn to substrate, and ensure that
               | it's mixed very evenly, as that will increase the surface
               | area for growth. So it will colonize faster.
               | 
               | If you're growing it in a jar, ensure that you make a
               | couple of tiny airholes in the lid. The fungus needs
               | oxygen to grow. But if the holes are too big then fungus
               | gnats can get in, and you will find maggots in the
               | mycelium, which you don't wont.
               | 
               | Also if you have a moldy jar, leave it for a couple of
               | months. You might find the mushroom fungus has overrun
               | the mold eventually.
               | 
               | And finally, Oyster mushrooms can't grow on pine
               | woodchips, by the way.
        
         | cjohnson318 wrote:
         | What's your climate like?
        
           | 1827163 wrote:
           | I live in the United Kingdom, summers are quite warm with
           | most days above 20C, winters ~10C or so, rarely you get
           | frost.
        
         | goda90 wrote:
         | I've been dreaming of a way to compost my dog's waste. It's
         | against city ordinance, and widely discouraged for standard
         | compost bins. Mushrooms could be an interesting approach. But
         | the city ordinance stands. And handling it in the deep Midwest
         | USA winters would be difficult.
        
           | peteradio wrote:
           | Honestly, why bother? Its hard to imagine it would amount to
           | a good product.
        
             | goda90 wrote:
             | I have two larger dogs who produce a fair amount. It just
             | feels wrong to be putting several pounds of biodegradable
             | matter into a plastic bag to be sent to the landfill each
             | week. I've also thought of installing an outdoor sewage
             | drain to let me dump it into the city sewers instead, since
             | the sewage treatment plant will process it in a better way
             | than the landfill.
        
               | peteradio wrote:
               | I compost my dogs waste but basically have no intention
               | to do anything with it ... ever. Just dig a hole and drop
               | in the turds. Trying to do anything with it seems like
               | finding a piece of uranium in the woods and thinking you
               | got a good power source.
        
               | 1827163 wrote:
               | Yes, I changed my mind and agree with you now. And
               | consider it nuclear waste.
        
             | 1827163 wrote:
             | The mushrooms are not suitable for human consumption, but
             | in the process of breaking down the waste, the fungus
             | destroys most pathogens present. Then you can use the spent
             | mycelium as high grade garden compost, to be spread on the
             | soil to enrich it.
        
               | peteradio wrote:
               | What kind of guarantees are you making here? Can I half
               | ass this half assed described process and expect to avoid
               | all pathogens?
        
               | 1827163 wrote:
               | As usual, it's bad wording there on my part. I'll update
               | it to replace "any pathogens" with "most pathogens".
               | 
               | Wait, I can make some more changes, but I'm so tired,
               | having been in front of a computer almost continuously
               | for more than 16 hours today.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-05-09 23:01 UTC)