"Can we rely on it that a ‘turning around' will be accomplished by enough people quickly enough to save the modern world? This question is often asked, but whatever answer is given to it will mislead. The answer "yes" would lead to complacency; the answer "no" to despair. It is desirable to leave these perplexities behind us and get down to work." E.F. Schumacher, Small is Beautiful

I would rather have titled this essay "Where the Hoe Meets the Soil" but that phrase is not part of our cultural lexicon, which is itself a symptom of the problem I am working to address. Setting aside any prolonged discussion of whether or what about the modern world should be saved, this essay is primarily about what it means to "get down to work" as Schumacher puts it. But very quickly, to me saving the modern world means setting a goal for the human economy to be properly scaled relative to the global ecology, and maintaining a sufficiency of social stability necessary to manage a transition.

Before getting to work, I want to make sure the work I do is useful. This is where a clear understanding of the big picture helps.

Ecological Economics

The question of proper economic scale is examined by the field of ecological economics. In the ecological economics model, the human economy is a subset of the Earth system, and therefore the scale of the human economy is ultimately limited. The human economy depends upon the throughput or flow of materials from and back into the Earth system. Limits to the size of the human economy are imposed by the interactions among three related natural processes:

(1) The capacity of the Earth system to supply inputs to the human economy (Sources),

(2) The capacity of the Earth system to tolerate and process wastes from the human economy (Sinks), and

(3) The negative impacts on the human economy and the resources it relies on from various feedbacks caused by too much pollution.

Fig. 1. The ecological economics model of the relationship between the human economy and the Earth system highlighting the importance of sources, sinks, feedbacks and scale.[i]

For an expanded look at the relationship between our economy and the planet see the engaging on-line film "The Story of Stuff."[ii]

One measure of whether the human economy is too large is the ecological footprint (EF), which calculates on a nation-by-nation basis the consumption of resources and the build-up of wastes relative to resource regeneration rates and the waste-absorbing capacity of the environment. According to two independent EF analyses (which I will call EF 1 and EF 2) the human economy (population plus consumption and waste generation) is in a state of overshoot, meaning it is too large relative to the long-term capacity of the planet to cope.[iii] The Earth can provide for us beyond its means for a long time before the consequences become severe, just like a millionaire can, for a time, live high on the principal in a savings account instead of the interest. The degree to which we are drawing down principal as opposed to living on interest is called our "ecological debt."

Figure 2. Change in ecological footprint over time according to EF 1 with our cumulative ecological debt in blue.[iv]

Getting More Specific: Fossil-fuel Depletion and Climate Change

Indicators like the ecological footprint are important for understanding we have a problem and giving us a sense of the scale, but they aren't very specific. In order to do something about reducing our footprint, it would help to know what is causing the ecological footprint to be so large. A significant portion of the ecological footprint represents consumption of fossil fuels and the resulting waste, mainly greenhouse gases. The "carbon" footprint component is about 52% for EF 1 and the similar "energy land" is 88% for EF 2.[v] According to EF 2, "energy land" is 93% of the North American footprint. A priority on reducing fossil fuel consumption appears justified. The human ecological footprint can be lowered below "1 Earth" only by eliminating the pollution from fossil fuel combustion.

EF analysis uses the capacity of the environment to absorb greenhouse gas emissions, which, as seen in the model shown in Fig. 1, means EF measures "sink" capacity. The real picture is more complex and more disturbing for a couple of reasons. Firstly, fossil fuel extraction is reaching limits sooner than expected. Since we have not been weaning our economy off fossil fuels steadily for the past few decades, rapid energy price inflation will likely make it difficult to maintain the kind of economic vitality and stability needed for a smooth transition to renewable energy alternatives. Secondly, recent evidence suggests that climate change is happening faster than expected. Ice sheet destabilization is one major indicator that the Earth system is more sensitive to greenhouse emissions than most scientists and policy-makers have presumed. Recent articles by Kurt Cobb[vi] and Richard Heinberg[vii] review all these points, and the "Climate Code Red" report[viii] goes into truly excruciating detail so I won't elaborate further here.

The bottom line is that every measure must be taken to rapidly eliminate fossil fuel consumption and dependency in every component of our lives. The key word is "rapidly." Don't passively assume inexpensive alternative energy substitutes will arrive to replace fossil fuels-we may have waited too long to respond to have a smooth transition. Therefore, focus most attention on reducing energy demand rather than substituting a new energy supply. And finally, in the context of ecological economics, fossil fuel depletion and climate change, ask whether what you do in your life, vocation, hobbies, and habits, contributes to the long-term function (or dysfunction) of society.

The U.S. Food System and Fossil Fuels

It would be hard to argue against a claim that a secure and healthy food supply is indispensable to society. A widely known and troubling fact is that the current food system in the U.S. (and most highly industrialized nations) is very dependent upon fossil fuels.

As far as I am aware, the most comprehensive study on the topic of energy use in the U.S. food system is by Heller and Keoleian of the University of Michigan's Center for Sustainable Systems.[ix] The report is from 2000 and makes use of data from the mid-1990s. Although the data are about 10 years old, I don't believe the basic structure and function of the U.S. food system has changed dramatically over the past 10 years. In fact, current trends of increased industrial meat consumption[x] and biofuels[xi], which both rely on grains, make the following case even stronger.

We learn from the study that over 10% of the energy consumption in the U.S. can be attributed to the food system, and that about 20% of this occurs in the agricultural production sector. Home energy consumption (e.g., refrigeration and cooking) consume the largest share at about 30%. Between the farm and the home are everything else (transportation, processing, packaging and retail). Much of this middle portion is a function of the geographic disconnection between production and consumption. Eating food out of season either requires long-distance transportation or energy demanding processing. Both transportation and processing require investments in storage.

Sorting out the proper scale of operations for farms, processing and transportation systems is very difficult, however, because optimization for one factor (e.g., transportation), may be sub-optimal for another (e.g., heat intensive food processing). Within a category, such as transportation, the technologies analyzed may be limited too. A study comparing rail cars, large semi-trucks and small produce trucks may conclude that bigger is better, but what about hyper-local transportation systems using bikes, small electric vehicles and bipedal locomotion? Another complicating issue is that studies may assume the U.S. food system should be more or less similar in its mix of products while lowering energy consumption. For example, tomatoes can be processed using canning or drying. Canning lends itself to centralized operations and so does drying if fossil fuels are used as heat sources. But a naturally decentralized and fossil-fuel free technique such as passive solar dehydration may not even be considered. Large energy savings can be found everywhere in the food system, but especially so if assumptions about scale and consumer-level demand are allowed to change.

Fig. 3. The energy inputs to the U.S. food system are several times larger than the energy content of the food. A life-cycle analysis identifies how energy consumption is partitioned among economic sectors.[xii]

Another graphic from the Heller and Keoleian report clearly identifies a huge savings potential. Over 50% of U.S. grains are fed to domestic animals, and most export grains go to animal feed as well. Overall, only 26% of U.S. grain production in 1995 went to domestic human consumption.

Although poultry need grains, red meat and milk products dominate the feed market and grains are not a natural part of their diets. If red meat and dairy production were reduced to only what harvested hay and pasture could provide, perhaps half of annual U.S. grain production could be eliminated. The acreage out of food production could be used for green manure crops to build soil and fix nitrogen. A 2004 Congressional Research Service report showed that fertilizers are the largest part of farm energy use, and that natural gas to produce nitrogen comprised 75-90% of the fertilizer input (Fig. 5).[xiii] Fixing nitrogen naturally, therefore, saves significant energy. Some of the vast cropland area no longer producing grains could then be used for appropriately scaled biofuels to power farm equipment instead of fossil fuels.

Fig. 4. A reprint of Fig. 3 from the Heller and Keoleian report. See graph label above.

Fig. 5. A reprint of Fig. 2 from a 2004 Congressional Research Service report. See graph label above.

An older and less comprehensive on-line review paper[xiv] titled "Energy Use in the U.S. Food System: a summary of existing research and analysis" by John Hendrickson of the Center for Integrated Agricultural Systems, UW-Madison concluded that:

"It appears that some of the greatest saving can be realized by:

• reduced use of petroleum-based fertilizers and fuel on farms,
• a decline in the consumption of highly processed foods, meat, and sugar,
• a reduction in excessive and energy intensive packaging,
• more efficient practices by consumers in shopping and cooking at home,
• and a shift toward the production of some foods (such as fruits and vegetables) closer to their point of consumption."

Hendrickson's paper is helpful in republishing and comparing tables from many previous studies, including "Table 5" reprinted here on the energy consumption of home grown versus market-purchased fruit and vegetables.

Taking Responsibility: Brookside Farm Examples

With this extensive background I introduce the project I have been working on for about two years now, Brookside Farm. This is a 1-acre mini-farm in Willits, CA. It operates as a program of the non-profit corporation North Coast Opportunities, functions as a working farm with a community supported agricultural program serving 15 "shares" per year, exists at an elementary school and is therefore open to classes and tours, and conducts research and demonstrates aspects of a local food system with the collaboration and support of Post Carbon Institute.[xv]

Brookside Farm thinks about food from a "farm to fork" and back again perspective. Farmers create artificial ecosystems, and we therefore look to ecology to guide our practices. Highly productive and stable ecological systems are noted for a diversity of species both in kinds and functional forms. When these diverse species interact effectively, they maximize the rates of productivity and nutrient retention in the system using ambient energy sources. We view ourselves as human members of the farm ecosystem with our labor and wastes as parts of the whole.

To get by on ambient energy as much as possible, we have sought alternatives to fossil fuels in every aspect of the food system we participate in. Table 1 considers each type of work done on the farm, to the fork, and back again and contrasts how fossil fuels are commonly used with the technologies we have applied.

Table 1. Feeding people requires many kinds of work and all work entails energy. In most farm operations the main energy sources are fossil fuels. By contrast, Brookside Farm uses and develops renewable energy based alternatives.

Our use of food scraps to replace exported fertility also reduces energy by diverting mass from the municipal waste stream. Solid Waste of Willits has a transfer station in town but no local disposal site. Our garbage is trucked to Sonoma County about 100 miles to the south. From there it may be sent to a rail yard and taken several hundred miles away to an out of state land fill.

We are also planning to irrigate using an on-site well and a photovoltaic system instead of treated municipal water or diesel-driven pumps.

How much energy does Brookside Farm save?

The complexity of the food system makes it difficult to calculate how much energy Brookside Farm is saving. A research program at UC Davis now devoted to just this sort of question is recently underway, but with few results to share thus far.[xvi]

From previous studies we can find clues about the high energy inputs to fruit and vegetable cultivation. From Fig. 4. above, we can see that fruits and vegetables account for (102,370/921,590) 11% of crop production by weight. Table 3 (given below) of the Congressional Research Service report shows that energy invested in fruit and vegetable production is proportionally higher, accounting for (3759/18364) 20% of the energy for crops at the farm level.

Much of the savings at Brookside Farm occurs off the farm by replacing what would normally be imported, through passive solar preservation and storage techniques, and by shifting consumer habits towards seasonally fresh cuisine proportionally high in vegetables.

Does Brookside Farm Scale? Lawns to Food

Before it was Brookside Farm, it was a field of mostly grass at an elementary school. The school district watered and mowed it (Fig. 6).

Fig. 6. Brookside Farm in early spring, 2007. The image shows the farm site adjacent to the forest and bordered by grassy fields, school buildings and a residential neighborhood. Arrows from a home contrast distance and direction of food coming from the local Safeway supermarket and Brookside Farm. The 1 acre Brookside Farm occupies about a quarter of the available play field at Brookside Elementary School.

Using satellite imagery, the area of lawn in the United States has recently been estimated:

"Even conservatively," Milesi says, "I estimate there are three times more acres of lawns in the U.S. than irrigated corn." This means lawns-including residential and commercial lawns, golf courses, etc-could be considered the single largest irrigated crop in America in terms of surface area, covering about 128,000 square kilometers in all.[xvii]

The same study identifies where and how much water these lawns require:

That means about 200 gallons of fresh, usually drinking-quality water per person per day would be required to keep up our nation's lawn surface area.

Let me put the area of lawn from this study into a food perspective. The 128,000 square kilometers of lawns is the same as 32 million acres. A generous portion of fruits and vegetables for a person per year is 700 lbs, or about half the total weight of food consumed in a year.[xviii] Modest yields in small farms and gardens would be in the range of about 20,000 lbs per acre.[xix] Even with half the area set aside to grow compost crops each year, simple math reveals that the entire U.S. population could be fed plenty of vegetables and fruits using two thirds of the area currently in lawns.

Labor Compared to Hours of T.V.

For its members Brookside Farm's role is to provide a substantial proportion of their yearly vegetable and fruit needs. Using our farming techniques, we estimate that one person working full time could grow enough produce for ten to twenty people. By contrast, an individual could grow their personal vegetable and fruit needs on a very part-time basis, probably half an hour per day, on average, working an area the size of a small home (700 sq ft in veggies and fruits plus 700 sq ft in cover crops).

American's complain that they feel cramped for time and overworked. But is this really true or just a function of addiction to a fast-paced media culture? According to Nielsen Media Research:[xx]

The total average time a household watched television during the 2005-2006 television year was 8 hours and 14 minutes per day, a 3-minute increase from the 2004-2005 season and a record high. The average amount of television watched by an individual viewer increased 3 minutes per day to 4 hours and 35 minutes, also a record. (See Table 1.)

So if we imagine families having the discipline to cut out a single sitcom viewing per day, or one baseball or football game per weekend during the growing season, that would free-up sufficient time to become self-reliant in fruits and vegetables and likely improve overall health.[xxi]

(A note of caution though, an article from The Onion warns "that viewing fewer than four hours of television a day severely inhibits a person's ability to ridicule popular culture.")[xxii]

Conclusions

For those wanting to contribute to a lower-energy food system, starting with fresh produce makes sense for several reasons:

(1) Significant production is possible in a small area, often what people already have,

(2) Tools and equipment are simple, inexpensive and readily available,

(3) Fruits and vegetables are heavy due to high water content, and therefore energy-intensive to transport and process either by canning or dehydrating,

(4) Growing vegetables and fruits is generally more energy intensive than other crops because of high fertilizer and irrigation inputs,

(5) Quality declines rapidly after harvest, so home or locally available food has higher nutritional value and usually tastes better,

(6) Labor, packaging and storage demands of fruits and vegetables are high in mechanized production systems, making the investment in home-grown produce financially competitive, and

(7) Gardening and small-scale fruit and vegetable farming lend themselves to physical and social activities across generation and income gaps that improve health and enhance a shared sense of purpose and fun.

[i] This graphic was developed based on the principles discussed in Chapter 2 of Daly and Farley "Ecological Economics: Principles and Applications" (2004, Island Press)

[ii] http://www.storyofstuff.com/

[iii] http://www.footprintnetwork.org and http://www.rprogress.org/ecological_footprint/about_ecological_footprint.htm; the original ecological footprint analysis (EF1) is at the first reference, and the second type (EF2) at the second. The major difference between the two is that the second attempts to incorporate aquatic systems (e.g., oceans), total terrestrial productivity, and biodiversity reserves.

[iv] Graphic from: http://www.footprintstandards.org/

[v] For the 50% figure see: http://www.footprintnetwork.org/gfn_sub.php?content=global_footprint; for the greater than 90% and discussion of differences between methods see: http://www.rprogress.org/publications/2006/Footprint%20of%20Nations%202005.pdf

[vi] http://scitizen.com/screens/blogPage/viewBlog/sw_viewBlog.php?idTheme=14&idContribution=1397

[vii] http://globalpublicmedia.com/richard_heinbergs_museletter_big_melt_meets_big_empty

[viii] http://www.climatecodered.net/

[ix] http://css.snre.umich.edu/main.php?control=detail_proj&pr_project_id=29

[x] See especially Table 2. in: http://www.fao.org/docrep/005/AC911E/ac911e05.htm

[xi] http://www.theoildrum.com/node/2431

[xii] Graphic from: http://css.snre.umich.edu/css_doc/CSS01-06.pdf

[xiii] http://www.ncseonline.org/NLE/CRSreports/04nov/RL32677.pdf

[xiv] Although no date appears on this paper, it is clearly related to a 1994 conference and workshop: http://www.cias.wisc.edu/pdf/energyuse.pdf; http://www.cias.wisc.edu/archives/1994/01/01/energy_use_in_the_us_food_system_a_summary_of_existing_research_and_analysis/index.php

[xv] http://www.energyfarms.net/

[xvi] http://asi.ucdavis.edu/conferences/farmtofork/; http://californiaagriculture.ucop.edu/0704OND/editover.html; http://asi.ucdavis.edu/Research/ASI_Program_Proposal_Brief_-_Energy_Life_Cycle_Assessment_in_Food_Systems_9-13.pdf

[xvii] http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Study/Lawn/

[xviii] http://www.ers.usda.gov/Data/FoodConsumption/FoodGuideIndex.htm

[xix] An acre is ca. 43,000 sq ft. Our experience at Brookside Farm suggests about 1 lb of produce per square foot of cultivated space is to be expected, with infrastructure and paths requiring significant area. Fruit orchards in Mendocino County yield about 20,000 lbs per acre: http://www.co.mendocino.ca.us/agriculture/pdf/2006%20Crop%20Report.pdf

[xx]http://www.nielsenmedia.com/nc/portal/site/Public/menuitem.55dc65b4a7d5adff3f65936147a062a0/?vgnextoid=4156527aacccd010VgnVCM100000ac0a260aRCRD

[xxi] http://www.csun.edu/science/health/docs/tv&health.html

[xxii] http://www.theonion.com/content/node/30863

During July we have been working to produce aerobic compost at the Willits Energy Farm. The compost project of July and August is important because we are seeking to demonstrate a model of sustainable farming practices that focus on soil fertility and includes an on-site composting center. The challenge for this project is to produce 10 piles of aerobic compost by sometime in August.

Currently, there are three piles that have reached high temperatures of up to 150°F and are now entering their “cool down” phase where they will sit until the fall. These piles have turned from a mixture of green and yellow to a dark brown/black color. Three other piles are beginning to decompose and will need to be turned a couple of more times before being allowed to cure. We are going to let the piles sit for a couple of months so that they can mature and allow the compost to develop a diverse set of micro organisms including bacteria, fungi, protozoa, nematodes, and macro arthropods.

Quality compost is the substance and inoculum in which a farmer can add organic matter to the soil and promote nutrient cycling. This is a natural way in which a farmer can promote healthy plants, resist soil born diseases, and ensure the fertility of the land for years to come. By producing quality compost it is possible to eliminate the need for non-organic fertilizers and pesticides because the soil will be very healthy and feed the plants in a way that will help make them less susceptible to pests. It is useful to think of pests as a way that nature “selects against” diseased and unhealthy plants. When a plant is unhealthy it puts out a signal that insects tune-in to. Soon the bugs come to eliminate the sick plant from the area, effectively selecting against the weakest plant

Three Piles Under 50% Shade Cloth to Prevent Drying-Out

Compost Section Evolving to Accommodate More Piles

I checked material from one of the compost piles under my microscope today to see which types of micro organisms were present. Since the pile was previously hot and newly developed I noticed a good deal of bacteria, some dormant protozoa, and some fungal spores. I knew that I would see bacteria, but I wanted to set a "before" image in my mind about what was occurring inside the pile. In a month I am curious to see whether or not there are more diverse microbes or if biology in the pile slows and becomes dormant.

This method, termed "direct count," is an alternative way of examining soil and compost that and differs from the standard chemical analysis that most people are accustomed to. The soil, roots, organic matter, and soil-based microbes are all interconnected and work together to produce healthy plants and living soil. The direct count method is useful because it provides a picture of the life within the soil. We can use this "picture" to make predictions about the nature and the health of the soil based upon the presence or absence of certain organisms.

Below is a link to the article: Soil food web - opening the lid of the black box. This was written by Bart Anderson and appeared on Energy Bulletin in late 2006. It is a great article that provides a synopsis about a truly sustainable way to maintain soil fertility and also describes the importance of Dr. Ingham's work related to uncovering the interconnected world of the "Soil Food Web".

During the early part of July we have been working to produce aerobic compost at the Willits Energy Farm. The compost project of July and August is important because we are seeking to demonstrate a model of sustainable farming practices that focus on soil fertility and includes an on-site composting center. The challenge for this project is to produce 10 piles of aerobic compost by sometime in August.

Currently, there are two piles that have reached high temperatures of up to 150°F and are now entering their “cool down” phase where they will sit until the fall. The two piles have turned from a mixture of green and yellow to a dark brown/black color. Two other piles are beginning to decompose and will need to be turned a couple of more times before being allowed to cure. We are going to let the piles sit for a couple of months so that they can mature and allow the compost develop a diverse set of micro organisms including bacteria, fungi, protozoa, nematodes, and macro arthropods.

Now that many of the crops in our garden are established we are able to start interplanting beneficial flowers among the rows.

There are many benefits to interplanting flowers and herbs among the rows of energy crops or vegetables

1. Attract Pollinators
2. Attract Beneficial Insects
3. Repel Garden Pest Insects
4. Increase Biodiversity in the Garden
5. Increase Production
   

* Miscanthus w/ Strawflower * Soybeans w/ Marigolds * Sunflowers w/ Cosmos

This is the final part of a 3 blog set that discusses the importance of healthy soil, the need for compost at the Willits Energy Farm, and which factors lead to good compost. This blog will summarize our findings and report on the next step to addressing the needs of the site.

After examining the compost under the microscope, David, Jason, and I discussed the possibility of bringing some to the site. All of us agreed that we should probably not bring the compost made of grape pomace to the farm as it most likely contains alcohols and the presence of ciliates were a clear indicator of anaerobic conditions. Also the introduction of symphylums and springtails to the site was unthinkable. Balance is important when making compost, and a gigantic supply of one material (in this case grape pomace) does not make for a healthy end product. The gentleman who wanted to sell the compost made it clear that this was not his best batch and recommended that it might be better as mulch.

We also decided against the animal manure compost for one main reason-we were unsure of the temperatures of that the compost reached, and therefore, could not be sure that the weed seeds had been destroyed. The land at Brookside Elementary is gifted with a small weed bank. There is perennial grass that has been growing on the site, but otherwise we do not have any significant weeds in our beds. If we were to introduce this compost then we could run the risk of seeding the site with a problem that could eventually become a nightmare and more work.

After all this analysis we are back to the same problem of how to feed the soil and still intensively grow crops. Since compost is indeed a priority, I think that we must begin to treat it so. David and I fixed a broken stand pipe and we should now be able to water the compost piles that are located in the northwest corner of the site. We have amassed an abundance of biomass from clearing away the sod. Also, the warm spring weather has led to a burst of grass and clover growth along the perimeter of the fence. I can harvest the grass and clover with a push mower or a kama and use it as the nitrogen source for the compost piles. If we can keep on top of the compost situation we will end up with a bit of material to feed back into the soil after the spring vegetables.

I hope these blogs made it clear that it is important to consider the soil first as you begin or continue to grow food and energy crops. We must not simply mine the soil and we cannot extract its vitality without a cost. If we are going to grow crops intensively than we must be equally intensive about our compost processes and crop rotations. Compost is not a mere catch phrase as much as it is a means of emergency preparedness in relation to local food security. When Cuba faced an immediate scarcity of supplies resulting from the collapse of the Soviet Union, they lacked sufficient compost to grow crops on land that had been depleted through decades of practicing the conventional agricultural model that utilizes inorganic fertilizers, herbicides, and pesticides. A ready supply of compost will be a great resource for any community looking to turn to local agriculture as a response to an immediate and long-term need for food. It can help boost depleted lands and sustain the vitality of rich soil. I believe that we can do a lot for our communities and the environment if we can pursue agricultural practices that make the effort to grow and sustain healthy topsoil.

Welcome to Part 2 of the blog related to the importance of maintaining healthy soil at the Willits Energy Farm. If you followed the first blog, you will know that we will eventually need to do something about compost at the site. The soil is healthy and can sustain the crops that are being grown in it; however, to grow so intensively without the addition of compost is unsustainable. I felt that the addition compost would take the pressure off the land while we continued to work to establish the crops and the desired composting system. I consulted with David Drell and Jason Bradford and we thought that it might be a good idea, in this first year, to possibly import some compost if the source is not too far away. The plan to import soil is defiantly not how we want the site to operate in the long-term, yet, the health of the soil is a first priority and this is a consideration that we cannot afford to overlook, even if it means importing some compost.

There are multiple people offering “compost for sale”, however, one needs to be careful about the quality of compost that you are buying. Some stuff that is touted as “compost” is no better than mulch, and the processes in which the organic material was created may not have been aerobic or hot enough to kill weed seeds (150°F). If the organic material was composted anaerobically, it will contain natural alcohols that can turn a plant to slime by dissolving portions of the cell walls. Finally, anaerobic compost will lack fungi and the compost will thus lack the diversity need for a healthy soil food web. If the material has the potential of causing harm instead of helping the situation we will not bring it to the site.

David and I decided to visit a farm site that as been know for creating quality compost and take samples to view under the microscope. By talking with the person who makes the compost and by looking at the types of microbes inside it we can make a fairly good assessment of whether or not we want it on the site. When we arrived to the farm there were two different compost piles to choose from. One of the compost piles had been created using grape pomace from a nearby vineyard that had been mixed with straw bedding and spoiled hay. There were earthworms in that compost and also a great deal of little white bugs. Some of the bugs were spring tails and others were symphylums. These symphylums are particularly nasty if they do not have a good deal of fungal biomass to eat. If there is no fungi the symphylums will eat plant roots!

The other pile of compost was made in windrows that had not been turned for 8-9 months. It was composed of 70% horse manure, 25% made of goat droppings, and 5% chicken manure. It looked very nice and had an earthy smell, no visible bugs.

After getting the samples home I examined them under the microscope.

Grape Pomace Compost:

The grape pomace had a diversity of organisms. Lots of bacteria and large dark strands of fungal hyphae were present (large dark fungal strands are a good thing). Unfortunately, there seemed to be a large number of ciliates, which are protozoa that thrive in anaerobic conditions. I also noticed bacterial feeding nematodes (small round worms) that feed high on the soil food web. While the fungal strands looked promising, the presence of symphylums and springtails coupled with the knowledge that some of the material might have been fermented into natural alcohols made this compost into something that we did not want to bring to the site at Brookside Elementary.

Animal Manure Compost:

The animal manure compost was bacterially dominated and had beneficial protozoa in it. Beneficial protozoa include testate amoeba and flagellates. These protozoa are important because they eat the bacteria and help cycle the nitrogen contained in the bacteria into plant available forms. I noticed some large, dark fungal strands; however this compost did not have the fungal biomass that the grape pomace compost. I did not notice any nematodes. Out of the two compost samples, I felt that this one was the best.

Grape Pomace Compost

Grape Pomace Compost (Notice it is purple)

Manure-Based Compost

Example of a Bacterial Feeding Neamatode (The Spots Toward the Tail Are Bacteria)

Example of a Fungal Strand with a Red Spore

Example of Two Cilliates (Protazoa). They Are Feeding On Bacteria

When working the land to grow food and energy crops our first priority and greatest resource is the soil. It has been said if humans take care of the soil then the sun and water will care for the plants. At the Willits Energy Farm we are developing a mini-farm template that factors in crop rotation systems, bed preparation, and a multi-faceted compost center designed to preserve and grow soil. As is evident by the abundance of earthworms that fill almost every scoop of soil, the site at Brookside Elementary has a nutrient rich soil high in organic matter. A soil analysis from December 2005 indicates that the percentage organic matter is 6% and there exists large reserves of exchangeable nutrients.

The same report shows that the soil is rich in microbial life including fungi, protozoa, and especially bacteria. Micro organisms are important aspect of the soil because they participate in the process of nutrient cycling and nutrient retention. Nutrient cycling is the conversion of organic matter and the exchangeable nutrients within the soil into plant available “foods”. Cycling occurs when bacteria and fungi decompose and metabolize organic matter in the soil. These microbes store the nutrients in their bodies (retention) and are themselves eaten in the processes and interactions within the natural food web of the soil. When a diverse set of microbes are interacting in the soil the nutrients are less susceptible to leeching out and the fungal threads and bacterial glues help form soil aggregates that resist compaction. As you might expect, healthy compost is a primary inoculum soil based micro organisms.

Given what has been said about the value of healthy soil, we have begun to plant out and seed spring annuals. These vegetables are transplanted in closely spaced sets and seeded densely in order to grow the greatest amount of food in the smallest space possible. On marginal soil this sort of approach may not produce desired yields as the plants struggle to find the nutrients in land that has been depleted or lacks the nutrient cycling provided by diverse microbial life. Although we have excellent soil to begin this project with we need to be careful not to deplete the reserves that have been stored up through the years. The Grow Biointensive method that we are pattering some of our crop spacing after admits that in order to produce large crops yields in a small space you will need to replenish the land and soil to make up for the nutrients used in the processes of growth. It is clear that we will need to amend the soil with compost after each section of annuals is finished.

Example of Intensive Planting of Onions and Lettuce

Intensive Planting of Peas, Beets, Cabbage, and Swiss Chard

Each day this week, we worked to prepare approximately 2880 Sq Ft for spring grains and legumes. This process involved clearing away and removing rooted sod with the Thatch Rake, loosening the soil with the Glaser Wheel Hoe, and then sowing the grains and legumes with an Earthway Seeder. Since we currently lack the processing equipment for grains and legumes, we will use them as supplementary feed for the egg-laying chickens that are planned for the site. These cover crops will also provide the farm with an abundant supply of dry biomass to use as a compost feedstock. At present, we will provide initial watering for germination and allow these crops to grow dryland.

The varieties of grains and legumes that were sown include:

• Hard Red Spring Wheat (1204 Sq Ft)
• Green Brown Lentils (387 Sq Ft)
• Jet Barley (129 Sq Ft)
• AC Baton Oats (215 Sq Ft)
• Chickpeas (129 Sq Ft)
• Pacific Blue Stem Wheat (430 Sq Ft)
• French Green Lentil (258 Sq Ft)

The polyculture system at Brookside is an advantage because:

1) The diversity of crops avoids the susceptibility of monocultures to disease

2) The greater variety of crops provides habitat for more species, increasing local biodiversity

3) We get an idea of which grains may be best suited for the site

4) We can add a variety of materials to the compost and the different plants participate in a diversity of interactions with the soil

When you add the newly planted spring grains to the cover crop that was sown in November on the "compacted infield” there is over 7650 Sq Ft dedicated to the growth of biomass. The aim of these sections is to add some organic matter to our soil (already at 6% OM) and to convert the plant matter into compost. Since we have chosen an intensive method of mini-farming, it will be crucial to keep a portion of land in rotation that is dedicated to growing biomass crops for composting. Intensive mini-farming has the potential for high yields; nevertheless, without seasonal additions of compost it is possible to deplete the land of the micronutrients and vitality. Intentional compost feedstock is one methodology to try and confront a paradigm where compost inputs are "mined" from one piece of land and exported to another. At the Willits Energy Farm we aim to cycle nutrients in the form of compost and through maintaining a healthy soil food web. Although it may not always be possible to achieve 100% self-sufficiency, the intention is to keep the land as self-sufficient as possible in a majority of the micronutrients necessary to grow healthy food.

Using Thatch Rake to Clear Sod

Using Three-Wide Earthway Seeder to Drill Seeds

Approx. 2880 Sq Ft of Spring Grains and Legumes

November Sown Cover Crop on Infield (Approx. 4770 Sq Ft)

In the last blog I outlined the methodology for preparing the annual beds. I will use this blog to describe each tool involved in that process.

Thatch Rake

The Thatch Rake has sharp knife-like tines on both sides of the head. The tops of the tines are curved, so if you set the rake down on its head it can rock like a cradle. The opposite side of the tines is almost straight across, but does have a slight curve to it. The straight tines are designed for typical raking and the flared sided can be used for removing debris and for scratching up the soil for reseeding.

The rake head is attached to the handle by one wing nut on each side of the head. The bolts on the head fit into a slot on the attaching piece. This allows us to easily adjust the head to an angle that is comfortable and powerful. We like to have the rake fully angled down in order grab and pull up large tufts of re-establishing grass. Once the head is adjusted properly you pull it through the lawn scraping up dead debris and dislodging lots the clumps of stubborn perennial grass. When you push back on the rake the self cleaning head deposits the pile of thatch in a row that we collect and transport off the seedbed to be composted.

Glaser Wheel Hoe

This tool is a Swiss design. An older model of the wheel hoe has been used at the Vancouver Energy Farm, but this design seems a bit sturdier as it powers through tough ground when we put our weight into it. This wheel hoe is strong, lightweight, and highly maneuverable. It performs the work of a hand hoe in a fraction of the time and can be fitted with other attachments including a three pronged cultivator and even a shallow furrower. The hoe is fitted with ash handles cut on a modified Planet Jr. pattern for a better handgrip and improved comfort. The basic unit includes a forged tool frame fitted with handles and a pneumatic, rubber-tired wheel-all fully adjustable for height, angle of handles, and attachments.

We have found that this tool can clear large swaths of turf and weeds; however, it looks like it will not be appropriate for weeding between intensively planted vegetables. Furthermore, it is important to keep the hoe sharp to achieve optimum performance. I gave the "blade" a good honing with a file so that I only need to touch it up with the file before using it. I have noticed that steel hoe attachment shows signs of wear after sharpening and use, and I think that it will eventually wear out. The design of the hoe attachment is simple and can be replaced with a strap of steel when it wears out.

Broad Fork

We use the Broad Fork to loosen the soil and deeply aerate it without damaging the soil structure or mixing the layers. The Broad Fork replaces the typical garden fork in this application because it can cover more ground in less time. This tool performs a similar (yet not identical) act of tilling/fluffing beds, yet it requires little effort. With this tool we can use our body weight instead of the back and arms. For instance, when the soil is compacted we stand on the base and rock the fork back and forth. Once the tines sink in you lean back on the handles and the soil loosens. This fork does not however perform the task of double digging.

The Broad Fork has five 10.5 inch tines and the farthest distance between tines is 20 inches. The steel base is 24" inches wide, and is attached to 48 inch ash handles. It is important to keep the tines sharp, but they do not dull very fast. The handles seem like the most fragile part of this tool and are probably the component that might someday have to be replaced.

Example of Heavy Sod That Needs to be Raked

Head of Thatch Rake

Using the Thatch Rake

Using the Glaser Wheel Hoe

Close-up of Glaser Wheel Hoe in Action 

Broad Fork Sinking into the Soil

Using Weight on Broad Fork to Pry Soil