permaculture

[Niels <mudguard@gmail.com>]

Perhaps we should consider a no energy solution.
Since there will be little or no servicing or parts available, if the 
conditions ever necessitate the use of biofuels.
And what of embodied energy for vehicles and sundry powered equipment?

Though that said, has anyone seen the "Coconut Revolution"?
Remember, human labour really is the most economic form of labour in any 
absolute terms.
The Bougainvillians did all their oil processing by hand.
All vehicles were _very _communally owned!
But They were at war and in a truly self-sufficient paradigm!!

What conditions are there in our future paradigm that will necessitate 
the use of vehicles?
There certainly is no need to bring produce to market.

If there are surplus ag. wastes is distillation the most efficient form 
of processing?
The processing produces a loss of efficiency. Perhaps by a factor of two.
That said, in a systems approach one always views energy transactions in 
context.
If a "waste" or bi-product is processed, beyond a certain degree, could 
it not be viewed more as a commodity?
And start to become a (systems) design concession. Rather than a feedback?
Is production for output for transportation an efficiency loss worth 
integrating?
If the distances are short a biological solution, eg draft animal, will 
yield efficiency losses, at the least, one order of magnitude less.

To be included into a systemic energy policy one factors in development 
lead time.
Ethanol technologies are well understood but not widely practiced.
Distillation skills rank alongside basic motor mechanics, plumbing or 
wine-making but how many of us can profess their competence in areas 
like these?
It and other practical skills are certainly not widely practiced to a 
level necessary for instant take up.
So there will, in most cases, be a lag-time that must be factored into 
cropping cycles. That is not including any experimentation with the 
crops themselves.
However the same could be said for animal handling. This knowledge has 
been lost, in the wider community at least.
So perhaps this factor is equal?

If we are to extrapolate the transport issue further one sees that ALL 
components (elements) of mechanized transport are _inputs._ Even down to 
the knowledge of how to drive them! Once again, there are comparisons 
with horses/animals and handling. But I know of which novice driver I'd 
rather meet coming round a bend out-of-control! And the convenience of 
being able to fuel my car with plants from the side of the road is a 
plus when compared to trekking back to base on foot for more alcho-pop. 
That is saying we remembered to make enough, or it didn't all evaporate 
coz someone left the lid off!
Or any of the number related handling and storage issues.

I have been told, since I am yet to do a course, that a key component of 
a permasystem should have be served by three or more elements.
One could say that there are many more sources than just three, but I 
feel they are not 'elements'.
Since one may just as well say the vehicle is the destination and the 
still is the output to it. So if there is one fuel that is just one element.
One may have twenty different crops all possibly re-channeled to 
distillation but you still have only one still, no pun intended.
I do believe they are unlikely to malfunction, at least catastrophically 
but still one still.

So should one have redundancy?
In strict terms the answer is emphatically yes!
But again we come back to a need to assess/quantify the fuel/transport 
requirements.
What is the purpose of these journies? Where are they to? How often 
_must _they be made? And why must they be in fuel motor-transport?
I feel a scoring system for this assessment process would be very useful.
Education, or schooling, medical care are all extremely important 
factors in evaluating transport policies.
It is important to view education and medical care as an input.
More than any low-tech solution any problems, systemic or other wise, is 
the need to develop a 'lore'.
Based around such key topics as botany.
It is this knowledge that will provide with the tools for self-care, 
self-love and autonomy. And with it survival.
Much more than clever uses of intermediate technology, however robust 
and well-understood.
Bougainville is one of the only clear experiments to demonstrate the 
potential for true autonomy and self-sufficiency in all areas: fuel, 
food, medicine etc even fighting and winning a guerrilla war against a 
state backed by a major power, namely Australia.
Like Bougainville, no indigenous society has had the realistic 
opportunity or the will to look outside their (eco)system for resources.

If permanence is what we seek input-free closed systems are the most 
likely route to success.
The bottom-line is that fuel production for transport must be 
subservient to many other in-system design concessions.
Return crop wastes to the soil is much less involved than the production 
and use of fuels, and far more efficient.
Why turn your mulch into mush then into ethanol then CO2 just to get to 
the shops?

End of rant.
http://del.icio.us/entrailer