[frankthetank]

From a local news article...A person does eat a lot of "oil" in a year!
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'H')e estimates it takes between four and eight gallons of fuel to harvest just one acre of land for the entire planting and harvest seasons, costing anywhere from $9 to $18 per acre to grow crops. Using last year's average diesel price at this time, it would have cost between $6 and $14.
And farmers cannot pass the increased costs along, Doyle noted, because they must sell crops at market price.

[RdSnt]

Actually, that's a gross under-estimation of the energy required to harvest a crop. What about the energy expended to get mine, process and deliver fertilizer? How about the energy required to maintain the farm machinery?
What about the energy used to deliver the food to market? etc.....

[frankthetank]

You never do get the full picture...

[MicroHydro]

Do not underestimate what can be done without oil. The French island of Guadeloupe (in the Caribbean) exported 24,400 metric tons of sugar in 1762. This was done with organic farming and human labor. The sugar was exported in wooden sailing ships. No fossil fuels were involved.

The catch was that 80% of the population of 50,000 were slaves.

Be that as it may, most of the sugar was used to create ethanol. As we know, ethanol is a good fuel for automobiles and airplanes.

One of the problems of the world now is too many people. Easy to imagine what the people will be expected to do when the oil is gone.

For people who object to being enslaved (see the bankruptcy bill) there is always the thermal depolymerization plant. Soylent biodiesel is people.

[frankthetank]

good thoughts...i agree...slavery is set to come back..

[DriveElectric]

I would rather be the plantation owner in the new economy.

[gg3]

Re. wannabe-plantation-owners: He who walks in expecting to be the next pope, walks out still a cardinal. Be careful what you wish for. Aside from the obvious moral issues, you will be surprised at how fast you get it, and how much of it you get.

Slavery is a lazy man's way out of having to think of more efficient modes of production.

Or, if you're saying that free enterprise with free citizens is doomed to failure, then I suppose communism is on the table too. I've seen many a dot-commer go from social darwinist in boom times, to socialist in bust times, and all you have to do is multiply that by the multitudes and you will see Red flags flying from sea to shining sea.

[Novus]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('RdSnt', 'A')ctually, that's a gross under-estimation of the energy required to harvest a crop. What about the energy expended to get mine, process and deliver fertilizer? How about the energy required to maintain the farm machinery?
What about the energy used to deliver the food to market? etc.....

[pedalling_faster]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('frankthetank', 'g')ood thoughts...i agree...slavery is set to come back..

[Revi]

I have a friend who has a solar powered tractor. It could plant and harvest an acre on the sunlight that hits it's canopy. Eliot Coleman once told me that yields from one acre of intensively managed organic farming can beat the yields of agribusiness. Of course it requires a lot more labor. We're going to have lots of unemployed people around soon, so it could work. Maybe a form of share cropping would be a kinder gentler alternative than a return to slavery.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R26RdfqGvUE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zFYpNrby ... re=related

[furrybill]

Let's face it, 100 years ago 95% of us were farmers and we're heading right back in that direction. How large a population we can sustain will be based on things like solar tractors and intensive organic farming that Revi mentioned. And of course, EVERYTHING is going to get more labor intensive since cheap energy will be gone. I think the best way out is for people to get very very organized at a community level, perhaps much like the Israeli kibbutzim, with luck using smart technology to live lives better than in the 19th century.

[sparky]

.
Slavery only make sense in the context of cash crop production ,
It started with Virginia tobacco and West Indies sugar then Southern cotton
to feed the hungry clothing mills of the industrial revolution
The development of the sugar beet under Napoleon was specifically designed to break the British
quasi monopoly of the trade .
it was also cheaper making slavery a financial anachronism

As soon as there was no money in it Britain discovered its morality and was the strongest agent to ban the trade ,
much to the indignation of the U.S. congressmen which were still making a bundle out of it .

the severe disruption in the " King cotton" supply ,during the early years of the Civil War ,
started a scramble for growing cotton in Egypt and India , colonial labor was cheaper than slavery

The Cuban sugar growers freed their slaves in late 19th century
it was more economical to pay poor farm laborers for the one month of the harvest
and let them starve the rest of the year than to take care of them all year round
Slavery never was an attractive proposition for industry or mining ,
productivity is very low , running costs are high
It was profitable only in the new world where labor was scarce

In a normal economy , slavery is the exception rather than the rule ,
the favored mode of production is a large population on the edge of starvation
They would fight each others to work until they drop .

[Expatriot]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('frankthetank', '
')And farmers cannot pass the increased costs along, Doyle noted, because they must sell crops at market price.

[Loki]

Funny to see old threads like this resurrected from the dead. Good to "see" gg3 again, wish he still hung out here. Don't think Frankthetank is around any more either.

Based on the OP, fuel inputs are <$20/acre. Doesn't say what crop, but that's a negligible cost for even the least valuable crops. You could quadruple that and it wouldn't make much difference, at least on the farm I work on. I drove a tractor most of the day yesterday to put in roughly an acre of alliums and brassicas, no idea how much diesel it used, 2 to 5 gallons would be my guess. We used a fairly large tractor to till the field, and we'll use a small tractor to cultivate it. Harvest is by hand, but we'll use trucks to haul the crop and ourselves. But whatever fuel we use in production will be a tiny fraction of the value of the crop.

Fuel used to distribute the crop is another story, though.

[Sixstrings]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MicroHydro', 'D')o not underestimate what can be done without oil. The French island of Guadeloupe (in the Caribbean) exported 24,400 metric tons of sugar in 1762. This was done with organic farming and human labor. The sugar was exported in wooden sailing ships. No fossil fuels were involved.

The catch was that 80% of the population of 50,000 were slaves.

[Sixstrings]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('gg3', 'S')lavery is a lazy man's way out of having to think of more efficient modes of production.

[sparky]

.
Yes six string , cheap labor beat slavery any day
there is only a fraction of the population fit for labor ,
infants ,small children , the sick and lame , a fair few women and the elderly
some infrastructure has to be maintained and there is the overseer factor
a slave with whip marks would be cheaper , it showed some defect
either laziness or some attitude
slaves are notorious slackers since Roman times ,it's not in their interest to work too hard
freeing worn old slave was no favor, they were thrown out like a broken machine
those from Corsica even had a discount on their price they were reckoned the laziest bad asses around


that's why I pointed out in my post above that slavery is not the cheaper form of labor
very poor fit men are the best ,
if they have some family to feed in far off places even better
if they have a doggy status and can't complain all the better

As I said they would fight each others to get the work

[Serial_Worrier]

Innovation and renewables will save us!

[PhebaAndThePilgrim]

Good day all: A few years ago a neighbor told us he spent twenty thousand dollars for synthetic nitrogen fertilizer to prepare his corn field of 100 acres for planting corn. He did not go overboard and put down excess fertilizer. He put down the average for average yield. I do not know what average is now. It used to be 140 bushels per acre. I have heard there are farms in Iowa getting up to 200 bushels per acre.
The bushels per acre increase is related to nitrogen fertilizer applied, the hybrid corn used, etc.
The fertilizer must be applied more than one time, called a top dressing. Synthetic nitrogen fertilizer is an energy intensive production method.

Also, you know the nice neat rows on corn and other crops. Now, farmers don't even need to steer the tractor. With GPS satellite imaging, the tractor does all of the work. That is how those cool farm mazes are made, with GPS.
Imagine a day with no computers, when farmers actually have to have the knowledge and experience to farm without the mega tractors and GPS.
Pheba.

[Cloud9]

According to the guys using the mother earth news woodgas system, sixteen pounds of would equals about a gallon of gasoline. My farmal has a ten horse motor in it. Sixteen pounds of wood chips ought to give a couple of hours machine time. Soccer moms would deforest us running to the shopping malls, but keeping small scale farming operations running appears to be doable.

I’ll let you know how it pans out. I am in the planning stages for a woodgas generator for my shop. Once I get that going, I’ll look into building one to run a truck.