Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú

Garden inspirationÌý permalink

Eco-villages; are they a gardening farce?

• Message 1.Ìý

  Posted by Papa Nopsis (U14479902) on Saturday, 29th October 2011

  
  (Eco towns) 150m wikipages can't all be bad)
  
  Have they got the wrong end of the stick about sustainability, or is there the world of difference between sustainability and self sufficiency?

  Link to this forum: Eco-villages; are they a gardening farce?

  Report message1

• Message 2

  , in reply to message 1.

  Posted by lilleybee (U14586199) on Monday, 31st October 2011

  Hmm... self sufficiency as in grow you own.....or foraging...preserving....bee keeping?
  
  Cost effective self sufficiency...when you only have a back garden?
  
  A sustainable housing estate? Whose land will be compulsorily purchased?
  
  Weren't they once called ecovillages...?

  Link to this forum: Eco-villages; are they a gardening farce?

  Report message2

• Message 3

  , in reply to message 2.

  Posted by Papa Nopsis (U14479902) on Tuesday, 1st November 2011

  The idea of eco-towns was created in about 2006 as response to global warming and "desperate housing shortage" in the UK.
  
  There is no such shortage when you consider the 300,000 people who have second homes which they scarcely ever use.
  
  My point is rather less about eco-logy and more about the human need that many feel to till the soil, and do their own thing, in their own space and their own time. To be as self sufficient as possible. Eco towns are merely concerned with being able to get to work on a bicycle, solar power and things like that.
  
  None of the old villages of these islands are eco-villages because they are all owned by people from London or the nearest city,for investment purposes, and rarely visited.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  

  Link to this forum: Eco-villages; are they a gardening farce?

  Report message3

• Message 4

  , in reply to message 3.

  Posted by Joe_the_Gardener (U3478064) on Tuesday, 1st November 2011

  ...........'There is no such shortage when you consider the 300,000 people who have second homes which they scarcely ever use.'...............
  
  There is, of course, a shortage; ask anyone on a waiting list, or who needs a mortgage of seven or eight times their salary to buy one. Or are you suggesting relieving people of their legally acquired property?
  

  Link to this forum: Eco-villages; are they a gardening farce?

  Report message4

• Message 5

  , in reply to message 4.

  Posted by Papa Nopsis (U14479902) on Wednesday, 2nd November 2011

  I am pointing out the inequalities; in that sense, the latter.
  
  To relieve them of the value by lawful means, certainly.
  It is only the value they are interested in, and not the way of life at all, or the "use" thereof.
  
  When there are 4m or more unemployed who would be thrilled to bits to be able to dig their gardens to useful purpose, it seem unwise to promote non-use by second home owners.
  
  Taxation is one way of dealing with it, as has been suggested in the last few days with the removal of discounts of Council tax for such people.
  I would say charge them a substantial premium for non use.
  

  Link to this forum: Eco-villages; are they a gardening farce?

  Report message5

• Message 6

  , in reply to message 5.

  Posted by Don Kidick (U13987773) on Wednesday, 2nd November 2011

  Papa.
  
  What’s the weather like in your world?
  
  

  Link to this forum: Eco-villages; are they a gardening farce?

  Report message6

• Message 7

  , in reply to message 6.

  Posted by Papa Nopsis (U14479902) on Wednesday, 2nd November 2011

  What kind of question is that?
  
  Eco-villages. A government initiative in 2008-2009 wanted to plan and develop
  nine completely new eco-villages/towns, based on modern technology, saving on fossil fuels and the like. they set aside several hundred million for the purpose, but now due to the recession, and a new government, the project has been more or less shelved.
  
  How many people are more or less self sufficient in their food supplies, and can use all the modern saving technology, solar panels, non use of cars and so forth?
  
  How many could be, even with a small acreage?

  Link to this forum: Eco-villages; are they a gardening farce?

  Report message7

• Message 8

  , in reply to message 7.

  Posted by garyhobson (U11055016) on Thursday, 3rd November 2011

  Anyone contributing to this message board does not produce more than an infinitesimal amount of the materials they use to run their lives...
  
  ...unless they have been digging holes in their garden, to mine rare metals, and have been refining and smelting them in their garden shed, and then designing and building their own laptop, from scratch... and are powering it using a hand-generator, which they have also designed and built from scratch.
  
  We all contribute to a complex web of specialisation and trade. We all know virtually nothing about self-suficiency in a modern world. And there is no valid reason why we should.
  
  And this applies to producing food too.
  
  How many gardeners who use the phrase 'self-sufficiency' actually keep their own cows? One gardener in 100,000? So where do most of the gardeners who talk about self-sufficiency get their milk? They get on a bike (imported from China!) and cycle down to the Supermarket.
  
  But don't feel guilty about.
  
  There is nothing morally evil about buying a carton of milk from a Supermarket, riding a bike, or buying a bag of carrots. Although some confused souls would like us to think that this is the road to damnation.
  
  I used to be a bit self-sufficiency inclined myself. But I've recently completely changed my perspective.
  
  Gardening, in my view, is a hobby, and nothing more. Some people like watching football; some people like tinkering with car engines; and some people enjoy growing flowers and vegetables.
  

  Link to this forum: Eco-villages; are they a gardening farce?

  Report message8

• Message 9

  , in reply to message 8.

  Posted by Papa Nopsis (U14479902) on Thursday, 3rd November 2011

  Anyone contributing to this message board does not produce more than an infinitesimal amount of the materials they use to run their lives...
  
  ...unless they have been digging holes in their garden, to mine rare metals, and have been refining and smelting them in their garden shed, and then designing and building their own laptop, from scratch... and are powering it using a hand-generator, which they have also designed and built from scratch.
  
  We all contribute to a complex web of specialisation and trade. We all know virtually nothing about self-suficiency in a modern world. And there is no valid reason why we should.
  
  And this applies to producing food too.
  
  How many gardeners who use the phrase 'self-sufficiency' actually keep their own cows? One gardener in 100,000? So where do most of the gardeners who talk about self-sufficiency get their milk? They get on a bike (imported from China!) and cycle down to the Supermarket.
  
  But don't feel guilty about.
  
  There is nothing morally evil about buying a carton of milk from a Supermarket, riding a bike, or buying a bag of carrots. Although some confused souls would like us to think that this is the road to damnation.
  
  I used to be a bit self-sufficiency inclined myself. But I've recently completely changed my perspective.
  
  Gardening, in my view, is a hobby, and nothing more. Some people like watching football; some people like tinkering with car engines; and some people enjoy growing flowers and vegetables.
  Ìý Anyone contributing to this message board does not produce more than an infinitesimal amount of the materials they use to run their lives..Ìý
  
  Gary's reply is an interesting one and probably not uninformed, but was it not "two acres and a cow" which was the determinant of self sufficiency?
  
  The colonizers of Canada in the early 20thC settled migrants with possibly ten acres of that particular soil for the purpose of self sufficiency, but the weather gap for planting crops turned out to be so narrow, that most people got it wrong.
  
  Livestock, other than hens or doves (viz the very successful dovecotes of previous centuries, take up a great deal of fertile soil to little nutritive effect. It takes 2-300 acres to keep 100 cattle but that acreage would feed people vegetarian wise far better than the cattle useage. this is presumably why a certain proportion of the Asian population is vegetarian, relying on
  vegetable protein for their protein, which is sufficient.
  
  I'm not suggesting vegetarianism for the sake of it, I do enjoy some meat, but if I could use my space/acre more efficiently would it not be a "responsible" thing to do, not to eat meat?
  the gleaning done by doves/hens/pheasants is extremely effective however gardens or no gardens.

  Link to this forum: Eco-villages; are they a gardening farce?

  Report message9

• Message 10

  , in reply to message 9.

  Posted by Papa Nopsis (U14479902) on Thursday, 3rd November 2011

  Anyone contributing to this message board does not produce more than an infinitesimal amount of the materials they use to run their lives...Ìý
  
  Apologies I did not intend to reproduce the whole of Gary's post.
  
  Gary's reply is an interesting one and probably not uninformed, but was it not "two acres and a cow" which was the determinant of self sufficiency?
  
  The colonizers of Canada in the early 20thC settled migrants with possibly ten acres of that particular soil for the purpose of self sufficiency, but the weather gap for planting crops turned out to be so narrow, that most people got it wrong.
  
  Livestock, other than hens or doves (viz the very successful dovecotes of previous centuries, take up a great deal of fertile soil to little nutritive effect. It takes 2-300 acres to keep 100 cattle but that acreage would feed people vegetarian wise far better than the cattle useage. this is presumably why a certain proportion of the Asian population is vegetarian, relying on
  vegetable protein for their protein, which is sufficient.
  
  I'm not suggesting vegetarianism for the sake of it, I do enjoy some meat, but if I could use my space/acre more efficiently would it not be a "responsible" thing to do, not to eat meat?
  the gleaning done by doves/hens/pheasants is extremely effective however gardens or no gardens.

  Link to this forum: Eco-villages; are they a gardening farce?

  Report message10

• Message 11

  , in reply to message 10.

  Posted by Papa Nopsis (U14479902) on Sunday, 6th November 2011

  garyhobson,
  
  The "hide" or "hyde" was the basic unit considered to be sufficient to support a household; between 60-120 acres or in France 25 hectares after the 1820 revolution.
  
  Today it would be much,much less, due to greater understanding of plant ethology.... by everybody.
  
  I should say 30 -60 acres; 12ha. and erring towards 30acres
  
  Imperial square measure was carefully considered, by the "crown civil service" at the time of the colonies, Pennsylvania, and much later Australia.
  
  But what now?
  
  

  Link to this forum: Eco-villages; are they a gardening farce?

  Report message11

• Message 12

  , in reply to message 11.

  Posted by Papa Nopsis (U14479902) on Sunday, 6th November 2011

  
  
  that's all folks!

  Link to this forum: Eco-villages; are they a gardening farce?

  Report message12

• Message 13

  , in reply to message 11.

  Posted by Joe_the_Gardener (U3478064) on Sunday, 6th November 2011

  Papa N,
  
  I think that if you take the area of UK (about 240,000 sq. km), deduct large chunks of all four countries that are uncultivable, knock off about 12% (I think) for urban areas, and then divide it by, say, 25 million households, you'll find that we're b*g**red already. And that's before you start going to war with the landowners to take over their land. Now who tried this recently? Oh yes, Mugabe; result? sickness and starvation.
  
  And if you think that arthritic old ladies are going to set to with a hoe instead of watching Flog-it, I beg to differ, so we would end up with a market, which is where we are now.
  
  Joe

  Link to this forum: Eco-villages; are they a gardening farce?

  Report message13

• Message 14

  , in reply to message 13.

  Posted by Papa Nopsis (U14479902) on Sunday, 6th November 2011

  
  
  Can heath and heather be cultivated, any more than as heath and heather? It is usually a few inches of soil resting on chalk and gravel.
  
  Lower land forest is frequently swampy but could be irrigated, drained.
  
  25m into 240,000 does not leave many sq kms each(call it 250,000 for estimating purposes) Divided up like that each household would have 1/100sq km.
  
  One hundredth of a sq km each. What is the length by the breadth of a sq km? 10,000sq m=1sq km(?)
  
  We might just have enough! Great!
  

  Link to this forum: Eco-villages; are they a gardening farce?

  Report message14

Back to top