"There is enough in the world for everyones needs, but not enough for everyones greed"
(Buckman)
Matt Ferrall wrote:It only becomes a crutch if a persons food system is dependent on it.Whether it is a tool or crutch depends on what is inside it and whether it is a means to an end or an end in itself.
There is nothing permanent in a culture dependent on such temporaries as civilization.
www.feralfarmagroforestry.com
There is nothing permanent in a culture dependent on such temporaries as civilization.
www.feralfarmagroforestry.com
Matt Ferrall wrote:I wasnt advocating for natives so much as plants that do well without outside inputs or artificial environments.
Darrell Frey wrote:Ah, i need to chime in here. What is wrong with a greenhouse? What is wrong with a people house? Maybe we should save resources and wear lots of clothes and find shelter amongst the trees to spend the winter. or why even wear the clothes? lets all move to the tropics again and wear mud to protect us from bugs and sun.
However, if we are to build buildings, and live in them, and want to eat local food... what is the objection to a greenhouse really??? Whos is against them and why? i mean for real?
"We're all just walking each other home." -Ram Dass
"Be a lamp, or a lifeboat, or a ladder."-Rumi
"There is enough in the world for everyones needs, but not enough for everyones greed"
(Buckman)
There is nothing permanent in a culture dependent on such temporaries as civilization.
www.feralfarmagroforestry.com
"There is enough in the world for everyones needs, but not enough for everyones greed"
(Buckman)
There is nothing permanent in a culture dependent on such temporaries as civilization.
www.feralfarmagroforestry.com
"There is enough in the world for everyones needs, but not enough for everyones greed"
(Buckman)
There is nothing permanent in a culture dependent on such temporaries as civilization.
www.feralfarmagroforestry.com
There is nothing permanent in a culture dependent on such temporaries as civilization.
www.feralfarmagroforestry.com
"We're all just walking each other home." -Ram Dass
"Be a lamp, or a lifeboat, or a ladder."-Rumi
There is nothing permanent in a culture dependent on such temporaries as civilization.
www.feralfarmagroforestry.com
"We're all just walking each other home." -Ram Dass
"Be a lamp, or a lifeboat, or a ladder."-Rumi
There is nothing permanent in a culture dependent on such temporaries as civilization.
www.feralfarmagroforestry.com
Matt Ferrall wrote:Like I posted earlier,I do not agree that an industrial greenhouse operation is inherently less sustainable than lots of small greenhouses because the larger greenhouses have an economy of scale.They are just easier targets because the outside inputs are easier to see and quantify.Heating an industrial greenhouse would use far less energy per square foot than heating the same floor space spread over many smaller greenhouses.Economy of scale is what makes industrial technologies efficient.If lots of small greenhouses used less energy,than companies would opt for them instead(since they have to pay for the outside inputs).I think it is a fallicy that small scale industrial production is somehow more ecological.It just looks cuter.
There is nothing permanent in a culture dependent on such temporaries as civilization.
www.feralfarmagroforestry.com
"There is enough in the world for everyones needs, but not enough for everyones greed"
(Buckman)
Matt Ferrall wrote:Like I posted earlier,I do not agree that an industrial greenhouse operation is inherently less sustainable than lots of small greenhouses because the larger greenhouses have an economy of scale.They are just easier targets because the outside inputs are easier to see and quantify.Heating an industrial greenhouse would use far less energy per square foot than heating the same floor space spread over many smaller greenhouses.Economy of scale is what makes industrial technologies efficient.If lots of small greenhouses used less energy,than companies would opt for them instead(since they have to pay for the outside inputs).I think it is a fallicy that small scale industrial production is somehow more ecological.It just looks cuter.
There is nothing permanent in a culture dependent on such temporaries as civilization.
www.feralfarmagroforestry.com
Matt Ferrall wrote:Yes,I agree that the term 'greenhouse'is somewhat relative.There is ,of course,a varied spectrum of applications and appropriate uses.That ,however, makes for boring reading so hopfully you will pardon my sometimes dogmatic antagonism in the attempt to spurn conversation.The thread provides a context for points that,on their own,would have little effect.
Whether or not the use of a greenhouse is a crutch or tool is dependent on how it is used.Whether or not it has an ecological cost that outweighs its benefits is largely dependent on how its constructed.These factors are hard to judge here but I think the narrative, thus far ,provides the reader with some ideas as to how the lines are deliniated.
The human mind however loves to rationalize so perhaps a more clearly articulated deliniation of what 'appropriate use' looks like is in order.
Matt Ferrall wrote:So if an individual were to purchase a backyard greenhouse and not use salvaged materials than they would be supporting the same industrial structure and production but WITHOUT any economy of scale.They would already be operating at far less effeciency than their large scale peers.
There is nothing permanent in a culture dependent on such temporaries as civilization.
www.feralfarmagroforestry.com
Matt Ferrall wrote:Cris:before we leap safely into the subjective and relativistic realm of 'appropriate use',I think in general,that(based on points already expounded apon)avoiding/moving away from greenhouses is the best direction concerning this topic.When in doubt,dont.We have discussed their many downsides and the danger is real in allowing yourself to snuggle up to a lifestyle based on industrial products.
Matt:yes,everyone here agrees that some sort of 'appropriate use'may exist out there but unfortunatly even the crasses examples can be found hiding beneath such slogans.In fact the worst examples are the most likely to cling to ambiguous concepts.
Matt Ferrall wrote: The human mind however loves to rationalize so perhaps a more clearly articulated deliniation of what 'appropriate use' looks like is in order.
Matt Ferrall wrote: I think in general,that(based on points already expounded apon)avoiding/moving away from greenhouses is the best direction concerning this topic.
There is nothing permanent in a culture dependent on such temporaries as civilization.
www.feralfarmagroforestry.com
"There is enough in the world for everyones needs, but not enough for everyones greed"
(Buckman)
There is nothing permanent in a culture dependent on such temporaries as civilization.
www.feralfarmagroforestry.com
"There is enough in the world for everyones needs, but not enough for everyones greed"
(Buckman)
Matt Ferrall wrote:Well it seems you would like me to be idiologically consistant regardless of converstional context and quite frankly,Im really not uptight enough to pull that off.I do,however,appreciate that you care enough to track down any percieved inconsistancies in my posts.I stand by them in the context they were spoken.
The permaculture playing cards make great stocking stuffers: http://richsoil.com/cards |