[NAFEX] realism when looking at inputs

abb7 at Lehigh.EDU abb7 at Lehigh.EDU
Tue Jun 16 22:59:41 EDT 2009

> Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2009 14:10:42 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Kevin Moore <aleguy33 at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: [NAFEX] realism when looking at inputs

> Sorry, fluffy, I can't let this one slide. Mass transit is better  
> for the >environment when done right. Meaning electric trains and  
> buses fueled by >renewable energy.

That would be an excellent system...does it exist anywhere?  Certainly  
the huge majority, if not all, mass transit systems have not been  
"done right" by your criteria.  I hope Fluffy corrects me if I'm  
wrong, but I think you're illustrating his point...the theoretical  
ideal model does not really match reality.  Certainly he was  
criticizing existing mass transport systems.

> Try permaculture. A method of farming/gardening that is more  
> productive and >uses >few to no outside inputs. a method that is  
> nearly always more wholesome >than >what organic has become under  
> the auspices of the USDA. Its early emphasis >was >on tree crops but  
> now encompasses also grain and aquaculture. (Not to >mention >city  
> design, banking, etc.) The same principles apply to all these, and  
> >yes it >is truly sustainable.

Although there is a lot of overlap, I find the permaculture approach  
much more sensible than the "organic" approach.


This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.

More information about the nafex mailing list