Jure Sah wrote:
Is it possible to concentrate solely on perennial vegetation and still accomplish sufficient nutrients, protein intake, etc? I've looked into vegan and vegetarian diets and found that for people who are physically active or who strength train it can be difficult to get sufficient nutrients through diet alone - especially due to monetary constraint and simply the lack of proteins in most vegetables and fruits.

Having said that, I've decided to be an omnivore unless shown otherwise. Also, there are a great deal of people that are either omnivorous or 'mainly' carnivorous I'd like to bring up the question of livestock. When I have a moment I'll look for an example, but I've seen architectural designs where livestock are raised indoors within a 1 acre footprint on several floors of a tall-ish building.

It reminded me of an indoor version of Michael Pollan's speech, "The omnivore's next dilemma" viewable here:

Anyway, these animals offer a good potential for the plant nutrients, and unused portions of the crop could be used for the lifestock's needs as well. Michael Pollan also shows methods for land-based growth that, in my never-to-be-humbe opinion, should be incorporated instead of current meat mass-production methods.

Ahmad Deedat Ibrahim wrote:

From a health and digestive perspective, foods made from refined grains like wheat can actually be quite unhealthy. It's a type of carb that encourages energy storage (fat), and has been demonstrated to be a major contributor to obesity in wester regions (along with refined sweeteners and oil/fat content).
While i'm not an active part of the planning process I urge those who are in position of decision-making to consider the human biology and optimal nutrition/diet when developing the system.

On the question of livestock, one may run into difficulties when trying to build efficient facalities such as shown here:

www.independent.ie/farming/plans-for-377...ponents-2549991.html

> the so-called 'super dairy' met with strident opposition from locals and animal welfare groups.

> decision to abandon the plan was made after the Environmental Agency objected to the lack of
> information about the risks of building the dairy farm and spreading of anaerobic digestate on
> the site, which contains an underground aquifer.

www.enn.com/pollution/article/40644

> Cow manure is one of the largest contributors to greenhouse gasses and the runoff from
> manure pollutes water.

These difficulties should also be taken into account when looking into animal solutions.


> has been demonstrated to be a major contributor to obesity in wester regions

When food is available cheaply, there does seem to be a tendancy for people to get obese on the whole and perhaps rationing might be the only way to really address the issue, though ideally careful design of food choices may well help, as mentioned here for example:

www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/8950...te_Obesity_and_Worse

Nanos wrote:
Note, it was not abandoned because the environmental agency decided there was enough information, but lack thereof.

Note that our current methods of raising cattle are outdoors, the cows don't eat their natural diet, and are pumped full of steroids and medicines. The methods I am encouraging EOS to consider do not have to treat cattle this way, and it is very possible to use cow manure to grow mycelium and mushrooms.

I'm not a biologist or a kinesiologist or health practitioner, but my reference was specifically to refined grains because Wheat was suggested as a primary crop. Most breads are high in carbs and calories, but very little nutrients - the whiter the bread the fewer nutrients. The body has trouble digesting them. You don't see many obese people with a diet of rice and beans. Most people who eat a lot of meat but very few complex carbs are not overweight, even if they are eating fatty meat. (in fact low-carb diet adjustments helped quite a few people I personally know lose a lot of fat weight).

This would also be temporary as science has developed ways to create muscle in a petri dish (currently for transplants/etc), which means it will eventually be possible to make meat protein, whey protein, and casein protein in giant vats if deemed more beneficial than our current methods of meat raising.

I also want to mention that cows were just an example. Chicken is good and their feces is great for fertilizer (I know from experience). I believe rabbits, geese and goats also share this benefit to gardening, though I don't know from exprience.

Actually, grain plant is suggested more because of it's easy to be harvested and grown, compared to other plants (just like grass, but at least grain is much more useful). It is just a sample to test out automation and and self-sufficiency of agriculture.

Once the system developed, we can adapt it to other types of plants. The idea is to reduce the number of variables we have to consider in the research. So, don't worry too much about it. If you have any simpler plants as sample to test the system out, feel free to suggest.

P/S: I am busy this week, so i can't discuss much... Just dropping by. Hopefully, next week i can continue this discussion.

Has anyone considered fish for the nutrients?
have the fish in a tank. The fish defecates in the water. The system Pumps the water to the plants, the plants absorb the nutrients and filter the water. The clean water then is falls back into the fish tank.

you would have to feed the fish though...

Travis wrote:
I think you refer to Aquaponics? (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aquaponics) I like this option as it offers a source of protein and adds another loop of resources into the process

Travis wrote:


yes, something I want to look into, perhaps next year.

ui

I just recalled a thread on RBEF with a business plan for an aquaponics op: rbefoundation.com/grouptopic.php?p=22084