[P2P-F] how-1-million-pounds-of-organic-food-can-be-produced-on-3-acres

[Steve Bosserman]

Thanks, Michel.

Destroke is when you take something designed in its capacity and
functionality to fit one application or market then, remove some its
features and reduce its capacity so it fits another application that
requires less capacity or a market that demands a lower price.  The same
basic design and overall operation are retained and reused.  The idea is
that one gets to spread an investment already made much further, thereby
generating even more profit because of less engineering and retooling
expense.

The term relates, in part, to the U.S. auto industry during the 1950s, 60s,
and 70s when manufacturers would take a basic engine block designed for high
horsepower ratings and shorten the stroke (or travel) of the pistons by
modifying the crankshaft throws and lengths of the connecting rods combined
with changing the bore of cylinders to produce less horsepower.  Therefore,
they could amortize the original investment in the fundamental design of the
engine block across much larger product volumes.  Hence, the term
"destroke."

Growing up during these times, we used to start with a cheaper destroked
engine, mix and match components scavenged from the junk cars and an
occasional new part, and bore out the cylinders to create a considerably
more powerful engine for much less than the price of a one new.  Of course,
all that's past history now.  In the states, "shade tree" mechanical skills,
local machine shop know-how, and a blacksmith "can fix anything" attitude
are long gone.  When we talk about relocalization, we often mean a
restoration of this kind of self-sufficiency or self-reliance--not as
nostalgia about times past--but as a hedge against rampant, unchecked, and
ultimately destructive globalization.  But I digress...

Take care,

Steve B.

On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 10:23 AM, Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com>wrote:

> thanks steve, a great comment which I'll feature on the 22nd,
>
> what does destroke mean?
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 9:13 PM, Steve Bosserman <
> steve.bosserman at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Michel,
>>
>> These articles have some truth, but they don't tell the whole story.  For
>> instance, here's a similar operation to what the Wake-Up World post
>> highlights in the Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA area:
>> http://www.growingpower.org/.  They have a spin-off facility that
>> specializes in aquaculture: http://sweetwater-organic.com/.  They offer
>> training programs to help people in communities across the U.S. setup their
>> own food / composting / aquaculture systems.  The founder of Growing Power,
>> Will Allen, even won a MacArthur Foundation "genius award" to promote his
>> program
>> http://www.macfound.org/site/c.lkLXJ8MQKrH/b.4537249/k.29CA/Will_Allen.htm.
>>  And he was selected as one of Time Magazine's Top 100 influential people in
>> the world for 2010
>> http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1984685_1984949_1985243,00.html
>> .
>>
>> The problem is, as even Will Allen will say, that these food production
>> systems require constant subsidy through gifts of time, materials, and
>> money, grant funding, or high-end markets where clientele can afford to pay
>> a premium for local food.  In other words, they are not sustainable.
>>  Furthermore, they only provide a small percentage of the calorie
>> requirements for the local populations they serve.
>>
>> The answer rests in the community adopting a production-to-consumption
>> local agriculture system rather than attempting to establish a sustainable
>> food supply through production only.  That means the entire value chain gets
>> taken into consideration when designing the local system.  And it means
>> starting at the point of consumption, i.e., total number of affordable,
>> accessible, and healthy calories required to sustain local community
>> members, designing the system backwards to the points of production, and
>> allocating the revenue from sales of calories to community members such that
>> all participants in the value chain, i.e., preparation, processing,
>> production, and distribution, can, at a minimum, cover their costs.  Such a
>> system is very different than a "destroked" global system which is what one
>> has when only localizing production.
>>
>> My opinion for what it's worth...
>>
>> Steve B.
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 8:47 AM, Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> http://wakeup-world.com/2011/07/14/how-1-million-pounds-of-organic-food-can-be-produced-on-3-acres/
>>>
>>> it would be great if someone more versed in agrifood production could
>>> look into this,
>>>
>>> Michel
>>>
>>> --
>>> P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net  -
>>> http://blog.p2pfoundation.net
>>>
>>> Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss:
>>> http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation
>>>
>>> Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens;
>>> http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> --
> P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net  - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net
>
> Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss:
> http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation
>
> Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens;
> http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens
>
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.ourproject.org/pipermail/p2p-foundation/attachments/20110715/fa3a881f/attachment.htm