Could a country grow it's own food? Can it be done?

[Johnny Galt]

I'm looking for feedback, suggestions, or, play devils advocate.

Could a country grow it's own food? Could they grow an abundance of it, region to region? I see that this would generate work all across the country, food would be cheaper, and we'd lower c02 emissions (because we'd have less food shipped to us from all around the world) 

Could this be done? How could it look? What are the roadblocks? Or, why wouldn't this work? 

Thoughts? 

[Carl-Richard]

Try growing food in Norway ?

[Yarco]

Of course. It's how it's been done for most of history. 

A town or city can be self-sufficient. A state/province/region can be self-sufficient. A country can be self-sufficient.

Of course big cities are an exception. Any city over around 100k can't be self-sustaining within its borders.  You could never grow all of the food for Tokyo within Tokyo, but there is definitely enough empty space in the countryside of Japan to do it.

You also couldn't do it in artificially-developed places like Arizona or Nevada where people are literally living in deserts where cities shouldn't be possible.

Estimates for a family of 4 to be completely self-sufficient range from 2 to 15 acres. Depending if you want larger livestock or entirely plant-based and how efficiently you use your space. That's not even taking economies of scale into account, it would actually take much less space if it was a few large centralized operations.

1 hour ago, Johnny Galt said:

How could it look?

Go driving on any highway and see how much empty space there truly is in most places. Or monoculture fields just growing wheat or corn that could be way more efficiently managed.

Silvopasture where you let pigs, cows, etc graze in forests. Create a closed permaculture system where the plants in the area feed the animals, the animals provide fresh manure for the plants to thrive, etc. You wouldn't have to provide feed for your animals in many cases except in the winter months. In areas with fire risk like california, letting some pigs and cows loose would clear up a lot of the dead underbrush.

Think of pretty much every property in a suburb in America. The house takes up about 1/3 of the land area, with 2/3rds left available for growing food. But instead all we grow is grass that actually creates more unnecessary work mowing it for purely aesthetic reasons.

Think if every house basically had a 1/4 acre of farmland attached to it. The property owners don't have to do it themselves, they can lease the land to someone who wants to farm it. Or let someone farm it for a share of the total crops harvested. Your land can produce most of your vegetables for the year without having to do any of the work yourself, and the person doing the work gets to sell the surplus. It's win-win.

1 hour ago, Johnny Galt said:

What are the roadblocks?

Government laws. Agriculture industry lobbying to create or maintain laws that keep food ultra-centralized and in monocultures. City bylaws that prevent you from having front yard gardens, chickens or livestock in your backyard, etc. Laws about producing and selling food.

People would need to learn to eat in season. No more eating strawberries in January in the North. No more bananas ever. People would need to learn how to can and preserve foods (or eat foods that other people have preserved.) Although many cool-weather crops can be grown in greenhouses etc even in places that are below-freezing in winter.

21 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

Try growing food in Norway ?

Somehow Vikings managed to not just survive, but thrive in such a climate.

The key is focusing on what you're good at. If you live somewhere with a very short growing season, obviously you're not going to be eating greens and tomatoes all year round. People who live in cold climates will have to live on diets that much more heavily favor meats and fish. In extreme cases like the Inuit, 100% of their diet.

Norway already produces 80 - 90% of its own beef and sheep meat. 60% of its own grain and potatoes. Of course only 25% of their vegetables/fruits.

And that's with only 3% of Norway's total land area currently being farmed land!

If people insist on keeping their tropical acai quinoa bowl it will be tough. But if everyone at UK latitude and above went back to eating primarily meat and potatoes it'd be very easy.

"But grains and potatoes aren't healthy" - Maybe not to people who haven't had ancestors living in those places for thousands of years already that have adjusted to it. I'd be curious what % of people in Norway have a gluten intolerance vs. people who come from the tropics. Look at pics of your grandparents or great grandparents, no matter where they lived or what they ate. They are almost never obese or unhealthy looking. I'd argue a bigger part of that is lifestyle vs what they ate.

Edited February 25, 2022 by Yarco

[Johnny Galt]

@Yarco Great response. I've just skimmed it, but I'll reread through it all and I'll give it some thought before I say more

 

@Carl-Richard Open your mind bro

 

I'd take a look at these links

https://truegarden.com

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCGxYsES89b3we65M2oCcnaw

https://troyalbright.towergarden.ca/tg

 

 

Saudi Arabia turns desert into farms

 

 

Greening the deserts: https://vimeo.com/8239427 (i'm quite sure it's this video, they were growing mushrooms and grasslands where there was once just dormant soil)

 

They Built a Rainforest Ecosystem inside a Geodesic Dome: 

 

 

 

 

[Johnny Galt]

@Carl-Richard And from the sounds of your comment, I'm getting the impression that growing an abundance of food in Norway would be a challenge. I'd love to hear more of why that is. I envision for some countries what I am suggesting would be very difficult and yet that leads me to the question, how could countries like Norway, work alongside with others, in a locally oriented fashion, to making of this happen? 

[Yarco]

I've been to The Eden Project, it's very cool, the video doesn't do it justice. I don't think geodesic domes are an efficient way to grow food though. You could build many poly tunnels for the equivalent cost.

Similarly, rooftop gardens are more of a gimmick than a real solution to me. Lugging all the supplies up to the roof in an elevator and bringing produce back down. It's just not very efficient, and it's not much space to work with. Cool proof of concept but not much else.

I don't think we don't necessarily need futuristic or technological solutions. Just dig up a patch of grass wherever you're allowed and start growing. You don't even need fertilizer, compost, etc to start with. Just pick really hardy crops that will do well in heavy clay or sandy soil, or whatever you've got. Growing beans will naturally add nitrogen to the soil. Growing root vegetables will naturally break up the soil and improve it for future years.

You can probably think of some abandoned lot in your city where nothing has happened for years. You can probably get the city to lease it to you for free for a few years to test setting up a community garden. Even if it's a concrete slab that used to be a parking lot or demolished building, you can set up raised beds on it and start growing immediately.

If you live in an apartment with a spare bedroom, you can get a few racks of shelves and start growing more microgreens and oyster mushrooms indoors than you can eat.

Best to get permission where possible, but if not, you can resort to guerilla gardening. Go a few feet off a walking path and toss some seeds in the ground, and let nature do its thing for a few months. You might be surprised what will grow without any human input.

Better yet, start foraging. There is already a ton of edible foods all around us, even in cities. Just most people don't know how to identify or use it. Learn to eat weeds like dandelion. Pick wild berries and nuts. Even if you live in an apartment there's probably a tree within a block of you dropping chestnuts or acorns in the fall. If you don't take them they're just going to rot or be eaten by squirrels anyway.

[Carl-Richard]

10 hours ago, Yarco said:

Look at pics of your grandparents or great grandparents, no matter where they lived or what they ate. They are almost never obese or unhealthy looking. I'd argue a bigger part of that is lifestyle vs what they ate.

People's diets were shit back in the day. This only became a problem in the 1970s as diseases of poverty fell during the previous decades, causing a subsequent rise in life expectancy and a shift towards diseases of lifestyle. It's absolutely possible to be normal weight on a sub-optimal diet.

[Carl-Richard]

3 hours ago, Yarco said:

Norway already produces 80 - 90% of its own beef and sheep meat. 60% of its own grain and potatoes. Of course only 25% of their vegetables/fruits.

And that's with only 3% of Norway's total land area currently being farmed land!

70% of Norway's terrain is mountainous, half of the country is too far north to grow anything.

[Loba]

I loved all the responses in this thread and learned a lot; you guys are really smart - we have right now a good group of people on actualized.

This is a good forum to learn from if you are trying to play catch up in understanding more about the world..

3 hours ago, Yarco said:

Similarly, rooftop gardens are more of a gimmick than a real solution to me. Lugging all the supplies up to the roof in an elevator and bringing produce back down. It's just not very efficient, and it's not much space to work with. Cool proof of concept but not much else.

I thought that, too, I think it's better to make little parks on rooftops instead.

[Roy]

18 minutes ago, Knowledge Hoarder said:

But yes, technically speaking you could survive in many conditions - you just gotta open your mind enough.

Yep we are pretty adaptable. An amazing fact I found out recently is more than 2 billion people on Earth actually live in deserts! That goes against a lot of intuition but it's true nonetheless. Our adaptability is our greatest strength and something we'll have to come to grips with more often too, since climate change is essentially unstoppable.

[puporing]

https://www.youtube.com/c/UrbanFarmerCurtisStone

I followed this guy pretty closely back in the days. He's in a slightly warmer part of Canada but still going and has been pretty successful. 

[Yog]

You probably could, but the menu would be tighter.

You would have more meat heavy diets in the north and more diverse in the south.
 

[Johnny Galt]

@Yog Yes, the menu would change and there may be less variaty of foods. With this said, I'm sure if countries who are in close proximation, they could still collaborate and grow enough variation that we'd get all we need and some. 

 

@puporing Looks like a great channel. I'll be subscribing and taking a closer look

 

@Roy

On 2022-02-25 at 2:44 PM, Roy said:

Yep we are pretty adaptable. An amazing fact I found out recently is more than 2 billion people on Earth actually live in deserts! That goes against a lot of intuition but it's true nonetheless. 

I never knew that/thought of that. You might find this video interesting. They grew mushrooms in the impossible environment. 

 

@Yarco

On 2022-02-25 at 10:54 AM, Yarco said:

Similarly, rooftop gardens are more of a gimmick than a real solution to me. Lugging all the supplies up to the roof in an elevator and bringing produce back down. It's just not very efficient, and it's not much space to work with. Cool proof of concept but not much else.

I hadn't thought that part through haha, but now that I have, ya, it seems like an inefficient way to grow food; food for thought

Quote

"If you live in an apartment with a spare bedroom, you can get a few racks of shelves and start growing more microgreens and oyster mushrooms indoors than you can eat."

I'm going to look into oyster mushrooms now! 

Overall, I think you're on the right track in that we can keep it simple and still produce an abundance while at the same time food is all around and it's just a matter of identifying this. 

 

My question now, to you all, is why aren't our governments pursuing all of this? 

Our governments (Canadians/Americans) send billions to other countries all the while our infrastructure is becoming more and more destabilized. We are so dependant on nations from around the world and yet both of our countries, we have a profound amount of resources. Also, both our countries are moving towards attempting zero emissions and yet all the while we continue to work within an infrastructure which has us receiving food from all around the world; this is quite the contradiction. 

Feel free to tell me why this is and yet the questions I'm curios about, is how can we pressure governments to address this? while at the same time, how could you create a national movement (or continental/planetary)  which can get the attention of the masses? I imagine if we put our minds together, collectively online, we could construct and build through collaborative dialogue and conscious use of the internet, new paradigm (s) which could assist us in making this happen. It's just a matter of will and belief and I see that it could be done. Again, take a look at the video above and of what was accomplished; that which was once perceived as impossible.

I see that we only know what we know, and so sometimes it's hard for us to think beyond this, and yet, I believe we have barely scratched the surface of what humanity is capable of.  

Thoughts? 

Edited February 28, 2022 by Johnny Galt

[Yarco]

13 minutes ago, Johnny Galt said:

My question now, to you all, is why aren't our governments pursuing all of this? 

$$$

Why are our governments taking private jets to go discuss climate change

13 minutes ago, Johnny Galt said:

how can we pressure governments to address this? while at the same time, how could you create a national movement (or continental/planetary)  

You don't have to. Stop turning to your government for permission or guidance and just do what you know is right.

Don't look to bureaucracy. We don't need any more laws.

You can't start something sustainable on a national or international scale.

Just like you can't cut a full-grown tomato plant and hack it off at the ground and just transplant it somewhere else.

To start you just have to PLANT A SEED (in the minds of people around you)

You have to start at your roots... GRASSROOTS. (okay these analogies are getting cringe)

Start a community garden. Volunteer to help people create a small backyard herb garden or replace their plants with native annuals. Create a charity where you farm local food using volunteers and then donate it all to a homeless shelter. Support local farmers that grow food sustainably. Get people to start composting. I don't know, probably dozens of things if you brainstorm about it for a while.

Edited February 28, 2022 by Yarco

[Yarco]

Sometimes you have to break the law to do it. Illegally cutting curbs, breaking bylaws. Don't worry, the law will catch up and illegal actions you're taking today might be things that your city makes mandatory in the future when they see how beneficial they are. That's what happened with the actions this guy took in Tucson, Arizona.

Documentary: Anarcho Permaculturist Transforms the Tucson Desert with Water Harvesting:

https://odysee.com/@jackspirko:a/Dryland-harvesting-home-gathers-sun%2C-rain%2C-food%2C---more:c

Edited February 28, 2022 by Yarco

[Johnny Galt]

@Yarco No, your analogies, they are not cringe. Your words and attitude is appreciated!

Edited February 28, 2022 by Johnny Galt

[Johnny Galt]

@Yarco The reason I speak about creating a national/global movement, is because of how easily the masses are fooled and directed towards objectives which sound good yet when in reality they are not.

An example would be the UN's Agenda 2030 and their intent to achieve 0 emissions; It's similar to covid. Their objective may sound nice and yet how they intend to get there, I don't actually think it will work and nor do I think they offer good ideas for getting this done, and yet many will be easily persuaded to move in that direction, and in turn the group will be pressured to, "be in this together".

I'd suggest you take a look at all the articles on line which are suggesting we use digital passports/ID (built upon the vax pass) as a tool to manage peoples activities so that we lower c02 emissions. There's many articles exploring this idea. Here's an interesting website https://www.carbonpassport.eu 

We'll attempt something which is ridiculous (0 emissions) while at the same time, the way we go about it, will be just as ridiculous. This leads back to one of my intents with this focus on food which is to find a way to unite people which involves us coming together to build a new infrastructure across a nation and world wide. There are some who intend to do just this,  build a new world, and yet considering their ideas and associations, I would rather go off into the bush and live a simple life; problem is, I like people  and so I'd rather stick around and see what we the people could do. 

Edited February 28, 2022 by Johnny Galt

[Neuroknot]

I don't think it would be doable unless is a global effort and we all are in the same page. Many third world countries rely their economy into selling raw materials (that is crops, fruits, vegetables, etc). Imagine what would happen if suddenly some first world countries started to take that matter into their hand, how devastated it would be to third world countries. Commodities like cellphones, vaccines, cars, would only just be dreams for the less fortunate.

Sadly, I don't really have an answer on how to avoid this problem, unless those countries do something to change their economy.

[Johnny Galt]

@Neuroknot This is good input. I've considered this and my thoughts are that, if hypothetical I was PM of Canada, I would work towards being more sovereign and yet at the same time I would look at how the other countries would be effected and in turn I would work towards helping them transition towards being more sovereign themselves; and so yes, this would require an international effort. 

Many world leaders keep talking about the concerns for global warming and yet if we do not become more sovereign then any sort of cataclysms which affect one country, in turn they will drastically impact many others due to our inter-dependance on goods and resources.

A good example is of how many countries are dependant on Russia for natural gas. What happens if shit gets really crazy, this could cause troubles for us all

And so to turn this back to food, if one country has a great cataclysm and yet other countries are dependant on it for food, then it creates a problem for many. However, if more countries are abundant, if one has issues, then the others can easily help out due to their abundance. 

 

Edited February 28, 2022 by Johnny Galt

[Neuroknot]

@Johnny Galt  I like the perspective of more advance countries helping out the others, but for it to work those countries would have to be under the same frame of thinking, otherwise it could end up in "give someone an inch and they take a mile" kind of situation. 

If we think that matter from a spiral dynamics perspective is easier to understand what would happen if a green like government tries to unite forces with an orange like government, is not so hard to think who would take the advantage, or rather who would see this whole act as something to get an advantage from.

Pardon me if I'm thinking about the obstacles rather than the solutions but I guess is equally important to know the inconveniences haha.