Re: Mind's Eye Re: Green Issues (might make some 'green')

Some land in the dust bowl was better as grass land for grazing plus
water supply is still an issue. Also I think they learned to plow in
different patterns to reduce erosion- plus rotation, as you mention.
Another new factor is handling waste on industrial feed lots plus
disease. Your idea for tree groves/crops/barriers is an excellent
thought but I wonder if farmers resist the loss of fields. Use of
artisan wells spell trouble.//I am consumed with ice melt! :-) Have a
problem with my garage gutter which faces north and the shovelers are
going to have to shovel off the flat roof or something. Meant to run a
heat wire through but forgot and not sure that would have solved the
problem anyway.//Back to the subject- the central usa will probably
still be in drought as the snow pack is not absorbed by dry ground.
Plus the planning of our outdoors leaves something to be desired.

On Feb 27, 6:34 pm, James <ashkas...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ouch new height of self deprecating humor guys, hmm this year we are
> trying to save money and do the returns in-house. Not all farming leaves
> land desolate Allan, much land erosion I think is due to growing single
> crops and eliminating groundcover completely between water and wind it
> wreaks havoc. I think rigsy mentioned the dust bowl, that sure raised
> some awareness, not enough yet I guess.
>
> I like the idea of engineered forests encroaching into the windswept and
> desert areas, wood can be used as a great carbon-sink. With a major
> upstart it could become a bit self-sufficient with fuel extraction and
> burying the char to advance the growing line, lots of brush and
> non-productive biomatter would be put to good use in such an operation.
> The fields could be devised with narrow lanes of long gardening strips
> protected from powerful winds and hold soil better. Such an engineering
> process could implement municipal waste management and organized zones
> of patch-work communities with resource distribution designed a hundred
> of more years in advance. Some alternative economic and socially
> progressive projects would make it a powerful integration between
> industry and social spheres. Since the desert is usually in a strong
> solar region it could make for some neat energy projects as well.
>
> On 2/27/2013 5:59 PM, archytas wrote:
>
>
>
> > It's just not fair Al - I always wanted to cry all the way to the
> > bank!  Maybe we should petition the young jerk running Faceflop and
> > impress him with out credentials - turning silk purses into sows'
> > ears, the negative Kelvin temperature of our customer service and
> > other assets we bring to maximising tax loses whilst simultaneously
> > stacking piles of hard currency offshore?  Given the job we could hire
> > Gabby's friend to do the books on double time (she'd do the bird for
> > both of us later) ...
>
> > On Feb 27, 8:51 pm, Allan H <allanh1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Sorry Neil those tax breaks are for the super rich..  poor people like
> >> you and me have to pay our taxes..
>
> >> On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 9:16 PM, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> I never settle in long enough to be under-paid Gabs - I move on before
> >>> I could be barely competent to whoever is dumb enough to pay more for
> >>> my next period of incompetence.  Your friend has made the mistake of
> >>> learning how to competently do the job.  Does she not know the
> >>> relationship between productivity and wages is inverse - ergo one
> >>> should not be productive and spend one's time looking for the next
> >>> employer not to be productive with.  That the employers bring this on
> >>> themselves is apparent in your friend's sad tale.  Self-employed these
> >>> days, I no longer fear the sack should I spend enough time in one
> >>> place to be discovered inept (as I am a tolerant employer who realises
> >>> any deficiencies I have are down to a lack of training) and dare to
> >>> visit the same work place twice after reasonable gaps in which they
> >>> have forgotten I was there before.  Does your friend do freelance -
> >>> I'm looking for someone good and cheap!  I'd even pay time and a third
> >>> if she gets me Faceflop's tax concession ($450 million rebate).
> >>> On 27 Feb, 16:08, Allan H <allanh1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> I am sure Gabby your friend is highly accurate at her job or employment..
> >>>> I never realized the soil loss until I was driving truck across mid
> >>>> west in the US..   there you can see a 16 cm difference between the
> >>>> fence line and the crop surface,,  thus difference is from the crops
> >>>> removing soil matter from the land.  This loss needs to be replaced.
> >>>> and that can be very difficult to do..  if your friend is saying the
> >>>> soil does not need supplements  she can be right ass it can be quite
> >>>> rich..  believe me if you are farming you have soil loss due to plants
> >>>> using up the resources.  the long you wait the more difficult it
> >>>> becomes..  even in my flower garden I replace approximately 4 cm every
> >>>> year..
> >>>> On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 8:41 AM, gabbydott <gabbyd...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>> First, Allan, my friend is my friend, who happens to be earning her living
> >>>>> by doing her employer's book-keeping. Secondly, the books are never
> >>>>> officially out of balance, even when being checked by the finance office,
> >>>>> because she is doing the book-keeping and not her boss. And yes, her wage
> >>>>> amount has been forgotten to be dynamically integrated into that forever
> >>>>> cyclic process for more than 10 years. But this is not his fault, this is
> >>>>> hers. Is it not?
> >>>>> 2013/2/27 Allan H <allanh1...@gmail.com>
> >>>>>> Gabby your accountant friend deeds to examine his books  as is
> >>>>>> forgetting to add in some of his credits like the amount of soil the
> >>>>>> plant uses to grow and is not replaced when we harvest that crop.. in
> >>>>>> other words his books are out of balance.
> >>>>>> On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 10:57 PM, gabbydott <gabbyd...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>> Looking far and big is one option of going  beyond common sense
> >>>>>>> limitations.
> >>>>>>> My best friend does that on a much smaller scale for her employer and
> >>>>>>> his
> >>>>>>> different companies by doing his book-keeping. Their well-being is
> >>>>>>> firmly
> >>>>>>> rooted in  interdependency already, no further soil improvement is
> >>>>>>> needed to
> >>>>>>> mix the balance up.
> >>>>>>> 2013/2/26 archytas <nwte...@gmail.com>
> >>>>>>>> Stuff from the UK plants goes to farms - soil improvement.  I sense
> >>>>>>>> there is plenty of money that could go into such schemes. Despite $1.1
> >>>>>>>> billion in pre-tax profits from its US operations in 2012, Facebook
> >>>>>>>> didn t pay any federal or state income taxes in the US in fact it will
> >>>>>>>> collect net tax refunds totaling $429 million (owing to some stock
> >>>>>>>> option dodge).
> >>>>>>>> On 26 Feb, 14:59, gabbydott <gabbyd...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> Ah, I see that the English language definitely needs an update for us
> >>>>>>>>> to
> >>>>>>>>> be
> >>>>>>>>> able to communicate at - at least - nose level. What you call 'waste
> >>>>>>>>> trade'
> >>>>>>>>> and ' trade of recyclables' we call 'Wertstoffhandel', which
> >>>>>>>>> literally
> >>>>>>>>> translates, no not 'resource trade', but 'trading with substances of
> >>>>>>>>> value'.
> >>>>>>>>> 2013/2/26 Allan H <allanh1...@gmail.com>
> >>>>>>>>>> I know recycling has to become a major part of our world and life
> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 8:05 AM, gabbydott <gabbyd...@gmail.com>
> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> Not sure what exactly I'm replying to, because I do believe
> >>>>>>>>>>> seeking
> >>>>>>>>>> mutually
> >>>>>>>>>>> beneficial outcomes is a good thing. The way that 'mutually' is
> >>>>>>>>>> achieved or
> >>>>>>>>>>> generated is the problematic aspect in my view.
> >>>>>>>>>>> 2013/2/26 James <ashkas...@gmail.com>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> I've been wondering, what was scary about seeking mutually
> >>>>>>>>>>>> beneficial
> >>>>>>>>>>>> outcomes gabby? Seems I'm a master at the failed followup. :p
> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/25/2013 2:40 PM, gabbydott wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Oh, yes, that's of course a good point!
> >>>>>>>>>>>> 2013/2/25 archytas <nwte...@gmail.com>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> We have large scale versions in the UK - the muck is treated
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> and
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> pathogens removed.  It was once called night soil here.  Quite
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> what
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> precautions are taken in India is a bit scary.  My point
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> largely
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> concerns the possibility of a 40% fertiliser reduction and how
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> many
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> more examples could be drawn into an economic plan.  Fishing
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> gear
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> is
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> being changed to do less damage to the sea bed and reduce the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> ludicrous amount of stock dumped at sea because it doesn't
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> match
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> rules
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> on what can be landed - pilot projects have reduced 'throw
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> back'
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> from
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 37% to less than one.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 25 Feb, 11:12, gabbydott <gabbyd...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Interesting. I've had this issue categorized under "the fresh
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> water
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> waste
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> in toilets". There are some much greener solutions on the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> market.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2013/2/25 rigs <rigs...@gmail.com>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Isn't this called "night soil"- no pun intended. What about
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spreading of disease via human/animal waste?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Feb 24, 1:43 pm, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You produce some 500 litres of urine and 50 kilograms of
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> faecesa
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> year. Besides the water and organic carbon, your annual
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> output
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contains around 10 kilograms of nitrogen, phosphorus and
> >>>>>>>>>> potassium
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> compounds, the three main nutrients plants need to grow -
> >>>>>>>>>> helpfully
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> roughly the correct proportions. This is sufficient to
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fertilise
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> plants that would produce more than 200 kilograms of
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cereals,
> >>>>>>>>>> says
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Christine Werner of the German development agency GIZ.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scale that up and the world's population excretes 70
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> million
> >>>>>>>>>> tonnes
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nutrients annually. Applied to fields, this could replace
> >>>>>>>>>> almost 40
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> per cent of the 176 million tonnes of nutrients in
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chemical
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fertilisers used by the world's farmers in 2011 - from
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> New
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientist.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There are loads of ways to redeploy human waste - from
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> planting a
>
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

--

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to minds-eye+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.