"Billy" wrote in message
news:wildbilly-0C1D70.23375308042008@c-61-68-245- all tall buildings have
rooves?

there are balconies?

Very harsh environments for growing, with much effort you could get some
boutique crops but not enough to really matter. It would be very
inefficient.
Are you not listening? This is how Cubans get fed. If you don't want to
eat, continue on with your ignorance.

Please spare me the attitude. I will take it that you feel strongly about
this and so get a bit carried away sometimes but I would rather hear from you
in a civil way about your passion.

Are you seriously suggesting that the roofs and balconies of large urban
buildings are a suitable place to grow food? Have you ever tried to grow
anything in that situation? The wind and heat (and added heat island effects)
make your water consumption huge and anything tender gets burned.

I see in your quote that the author claims this happened in the Cuban
situation. I don't have the book. I don't know what the city buildings of
Cuba are like or how they managed this, I will take your word that it happened
at least on some scale.

I doubt that roof/balcony gardens in the big cities of my acquaintance
(Sydney, Melbourne) are ever going to produce more than a supplement to the
diets of the inhabitants and that would be at a great cost of materials.
These cities are looking at permanent water restrictions and great increases
in the cost of water. Squandering tap water in this way is pointless. Roof
water is insignificant in high rise due to the high ratio of people to roof
area.



most cities have large parklands?


Yes but the people need them. Sure strolling through a nice vege garden
is
relaxing but what of those who want to play sport etc?
They won't feel like playing sports if they are hungry.

You seem to be assuming there will be a great catastrophe and that drastic
measures will be required to survive. My original question was about whether
permaculture was a suitable replacement for broadacre farming, I am more
interested trying to find ways of not having a catastrophe.



melbourne is noted for it's culturaly diversified gardens shared by
occupants who live in medium to high rise tennaments.


Melbourne is quite low density compared to the mega cities. The Aussie
1/4
acre block is very uncommon in many places. We have no experience of what
really high density housing is like.

and back in the 40's and 50's over here what produce the market
farmers had left they took into the general market situated in the
city proper where all could access it by various public transport, now
the markets are so situated it is a hectic drive to even attempt to
get there.


And those market gardens have been swallowed up by housing developments
that
can hardly be torn down now. The population is 3 times what it was then.
The
institutions and organisation of 60 years ago will not serve for the next
60.

Same in California, good agricultural land used for housing tracts. Just
totally mindless.
and people lived in suburbs and business was in the city.

and in your scenerio or the current scenerio food is going to become
very very expensive to buy i the cities, and much can happen to stop
the harvest or the harvest being distributed, you may be affluent
enough right now? but very many aren't and everyone could be in their
shoes at any time.

in the US of A some of the so called fresh food can be in transit for
up to 2 weeks from what i have read at various times?

i never said it was going to be easy, but when do we start? when it is
way too late maybe?

outside the square and the comfort zone.
With peace and brightest of blessings,


I support your philosophy that major change in how we deal with the world
is
essential. And backyard and inner city growing plots would certainly be a
step in the right direction. But this will never be more than a minor
part of
the calories required to feed a big city.

You are just blowing this out you burro. Read about the Cuban solution
before you make such stupid comments.

I did read it. Convince me that it translates to other situations.

How would it be applicable to a medium sized low density city like Melbourne?

How would it be applicable to a huge high density city like Tokyo?

Look at the people who are doing this on a small scale (ie one or a few
families). They need acres to do it. Evan if yields could be increased
many
times (doubtful, especially in Oz)
Oz has the oldest and most depleted soils on the planet but it still
seems with crop rotation and green manure, the situation could be turned
around.

You make it sound so easy. I would like to see numbers.

those acres just aren't available in or
near big cities, nor are the numbers of skilled people prepared to
lovingly
tend them.
Some American you are. The American answer is supposed to be, why not?

I am no sort of American. The references to Melbourne and the Aussie 1/4 acre
block and the poverty of Australian soils was not there to confuse. But let's
leave nationality out of it.


Local can be 100 miles, an hour and a half to two hour drive. If you can
eat a plant within hours of its' harvest, you're not doing too bad.


It's in that ring area about 1 1/2 hours from the city centre that so much
good land is getting turned into housing estates. I agree with you and Len
that there is a problem there. I don't see how to fix it though, do you?


It is this very problem of the efficiency of scale that made me ask the
question in the first place.
I guess the question is what do you consider EFFICIENT? You won't mind
if the rest of us eat while you explain.


This is the third shot you have taken, what's it for?

How did we go from agrarian economies to the present? By huge increases in
specialisation and efficiency. Sadly broadacre farming has serious unwanted
side effects and demands inputs that are going to be much more expensive or
not available in future. I mention efficiency because it must be a factor in
any system of sustainable growing that replaces the broadacre farming. In a
future of very limited resources where the per capita consumption of resources
will have to be reduced in countries like yours and mine how can we
countenance inefficiency?

David