Agreed. I've reused black landscape fabric for multiple years, but black plastic mulch isn't reusable.

Weeding is going to be a big deal - and it is going to be a big deal no matter what for most people, because as weeds become herbicide resistant, and the cost of pesticides and pesticide resistant varieties rises out of the reach of many - including many American farmers, we're going to have to deal with the weeds. There are ways to cut back on them, but not a lot of ways to avoid them entirely. Which means that we're going to have to reallocate some of the money we now pay for nearly pointless things to paying for people to use hoes. Giant plastic baggies as mulch, tractors, tillers, etc... all of these were cheaper than people. But in a massive financial dislocation in a world with almost 7 billion people, but not nearly as much energy as we'd like, that's going to start to shift. The unemployed will need work - and useful work is better than pointless work.

That's one of the reasons I think that the majority of our coming farmer will be small scale home farmers on land they own, in families where agriculture is not a primary income source - because the cost of labor means that growing your own is actually more feasible that buying in many cases in a world without a lot of cheap energy.

Nor do I anticipate an instant transition - the giant plastic baggies will be around for a while, and there are worse things than black plastic mulch or old carpet - more expensive ones, too.

Sharon

I guess I'm not in the same category with you farmers - I'm a gardener, and my mulch sheeting lasts a long, long time. The fabric type is permeable, so it doesn't hold moisture, but it's a lot easier to roll back up than film. Still, for my lil' half-acre, reuse isn't a problem for either type.

We're going to have more than enough oil to make mulch film and fabric for generations, especially when the car market crashes! Seriously, plastic is a minor player in our profligate petrorgy.

OK, I see your point. And actually, here at home I DO reuse my plastic. I'm cheap, and this is a smaller scale than the farm I work at, so I carefully fold up my sheets and stack them in the shed. They get thrown out only after they start deteriorating.

The stuff I refer to above is the filmy stuff that comes off the back of the tractor. It's impossible not to damage upon removal, and there's really no way to store it. I still cringe every time I go to the dump with it, though.

"We're going to have more than enough oil to make mulch film and fabric for generations"

Oh, that's OK, then. At least the next n generations will be fine.

What mechanization does do is reduce the amount of human labor required. However, in a world with 6.6 billion humans and growing, human labor is a widely available resource.

and

Which means that we're going to have to reallocate some of the money we now pay for nearly pointless things to paying for people to use hoes.

I wonder how many of the people cavilierly tossing out such statements have actually spent a summer with a hoe in a ten acre cornfield, or cutting down thistles in a fifty acre pasture? I have, as a child on a farm in the 'fifties, and believe me, the city folk I now know will prefer to die after the second day. Literally.

Even now, I would never do that job for wages, not even for the wages I now make as an IT professional. I did it as a kid because I wanted to contribute to the family. But having a supervisor punch-clocking you in and out for breaks and lunch, criticising every time you accidentally cut off a good plant? For minimum wage? What you're advocating is a return to a slavery system, pure and simple. What criteria would be used to select for the most efficient crew supervisors? Obviously, intelligence not required so likely meanness and insensitivity.

You guys had better go back and take another crack at this problem.

There are a lot of jobs that people do that I don't particularly want to do - I've done a bunch of them. I've stood in one place doing retail sales, unable to move more than step, unable to stretch a muscle and felt my back seize up. I've lifted elderly people onto toilets and back to bed all day long, often lifting people much heavier than I was, because there was no one free to help me and their needs had to be met. I've unloaded shipping crates and lifted their contents onto shelves above my head for 6 straight hours. A lot of people do physical labor in the US, and worse jobs than farming. I've done several of them, and I find the time I spend cutting thistles pleasant compared to my memories of nursing home work.

It isn't always fun - especially when you get paid badly and work in terrible conditions, but those are your additions to the narrative, not mine, and they aren't inevitable. We're going to be using what resources we do have for something - yes, we'll have less money to go around, but we'll be spending what we do have on some things. I suppose it is possible to imagine that we'll give up food and go on buying other stuff, but me, I'd bet we'll be looking for food. That is, agriculture is the wildly underpaid sector it is in part because of fossil fuels. Take them out, and food (and its production) become more valuable.

The problem, of course, is making such a shift sooner, rather than later - Cuba's agricultural shift, for example, happened after everyone was already hungry and lost 20lbs - Russia's happened in crisis. In that case, you have several options. One is to subsidize and enable small farms - large gardens and small farms using existing housing on large lots (often very good farmland) and larger plots. That makes it possible for people to do this work for the same reasons you were willing - to contribute to the well-being of their family. Another possibility would be to artificially subsidize agricultural wages, turning agriculture into a decent job. You might not take it, but millions of people doing McJobs and heavy physical work with repetetive strain injuries might not find decently managed agricultural work intolerable. There are other options - it is hard to condense nearly 400 pages into 5 or so ;-). But I don't think one of the choices we're recommending is slavery.

Sharon

"There are a lot of jobs that people do that I don't particularly want to do " and you've made a good list of them. But for me farm worker definitely ranks among them and it didn't take me very long doing that to conclude (1) it's not a way I want to live and (2) it doesn't seem to sensible to live off of other people living that way. So, small farms - yes, small down to the size of gardens, I say. But we need to bring up the issue of social security. Without some form of centralized social security it's every family for itself and the larger the family, the better the chance of making it in old age. I've read of and figured out many versions of Utopia but without addressing the population question they all crash. To those who claim that unfair distribution is the real problem, the reply is (1) fairer distribution is not about to happen and (2) if it did it would be a temporary solution.

My daughter lives on a commune/farm in W Va. They have goats, various fowl, a few cows, horses, and a large garden with plenty of room to expand. Recently they've taken up canning. The live very comfortably, but use a teeny fraction of the resources the same number of people in suburbia would use. Although, they are not self-sufficient, they are positioned to get a lot closer to it.

When I think of farm labor, I think of the way they live on this commune. One doesn't have to be simply a low-wage farm hand. I think it's far better, far more fun to a member of some kind of collective where farming is but one of your labors, and where you participate in deciding how to make it work.

As far hard work, I was a truck driver for 11 years, til I was 36, long, long ago. Hard, hard work loading and unloading box cars, loading my truck, running around three states delivering office furniture, carrying desks up flights of stairs, duking it out with other drivers who jumped the line at the packing houses on the waterfront in NYC, and so forth. Some of the best years of working life. Hard physical work is not to be afraid of, especially if you have some control of it and if you can lighten it up as you get older.

None of this matters, however. There's not going to be any choice about it. It's the future. It doesn't matter how much anyone hates it. The adjustment is going to have to be made. The era when everyone could sell real estate, process claims, design web pages or just walk around a warehouse guarding against "terrorists" is rapidly coming to a close. And its not a matter of re-industrializing either. That too cannot happen on a major scale. One way or another it's back to the land and small industry connected with it. People don't like biking or walking too much either. SO SORRY!

BTW, I'm a total city-slicker (although I walk everywhere, except to get out of the city to go hiking). But I know this ain't future. I used to hate visiting my grandfather's farm as a kid, getting up in the middle of the nite, like 5 or whatever, listening to some idiot fowl howling. But my daughter's commune/farm plus the recognition of necessity has changed my mind. Trouble is, I'm at the age now where all I'll be able to contribute is fertilizer, one way or another.

Ah yes, upthread there was talk of night-soil. What about buckets? Carry it out to the fields. That's what they used to do in China, probably still do.

Sorry for not being clearer. I was talking about earning money along side the farm workers that harvest so much of the food we all eat. Has your daughter tried to earn a living in that way? If you or she tried it, I think neither you would be so rhapsodical about it.

Doom and Gloom, you don't get it. As soon as you say "tried to earn a living" I know you don't get it. You're living in the unreal world where everything you do and everything you consume has a price. What is the price of being off the economy? Priceless!

Two of us have lived for a decade on about $12,000 to $14,000 a year. The IRS keeps hounding us, because they don't understand how people can live that way. How do we do it? For starters, we don't buy plastic crap from China, we don't pay rent -- to a landlord or a bank (if you have a mortgage, you're just a renter), we produce 2/3rds of our own energy, and close to half our food.

If your goal is to live a good life with as little money as possible, it's amazing how easy it is. You just have to kick your addiction to money.

One doesn't have to be simply a low-wage farm hand.

Well, of course that was the main point of my post above. Before you guys go getting all utopia dreaming of everyone outstanding in their fields, you'd better address the present tendency for concentrated wealth to capture every activity with any potential to increase it, and agriculture tops the list. My point was that there will be some social engineering required before I'll get back to anywhere near participating in anything like a majority of working society employed full time in manual labour agriculture.

I don't understand why it needs to be an all or nothing proposition. My philosophy as an organic vegetable producer is to use fossil fuels/mechanization only when there is a compelling advantage in doing so. For example, I use my tractor/loader primarily to turn compost piles. In this case, five minutes with the tractor offsets a couple of days of backbreaking manual labor. I use a walk behind tractor for most of my mechanized tilling, but my primary tillage tool is a manual wheel hoe. Does it go as quickly as my mechanical tiller? No, it takes three times longer, but it is much more precise, so I do less pulling by hand when I use this tool. In this case, I don't feel that the motorized tiller provides enough of an advantage to justify its use under most circumstances. The bottom line is that I used about ten gallons of diesel this season, but got a huge bang for the buck of each gallon consumed.

There is no doubt that organic farming is very labor intensive, but I don't find it to be the drudgery that you describe lengould (although I might feel differently if I had to manually hoe ten acres of corn as a kid). Equally daunting is how "knowledge intensive" organic growing is. As a former conventional grower who converted to organic, I understand this first hand. However, the more I learn, and the better I apply this knowledge, the less physical labor I have to do. I cannot emphasize enough how important this knowledge/labor tradeoff is in organic farming.

With respect to the intelligence required for good food growing practices, it is interesting to note that Adam Smith, who wrote in a time when all farming was organic, was extremely impressed with the intelligence and skill of farmers and farm laborers:

After what are called the fine arts, and the liberal professions, however, there is perhaps no trade which requires so great a variety of knowledge and experience. The innumerable volumes which have been written upon it in all languages, may satisfy us, that among the wisest and most learned nations, it has never been regarded as a matter very easily understood. And from all those volumes we shall in vain attempt to collect that knowledge of its various and complicated operations, which is commonly possessed even by the common farmer;

Not only the art of the farmer, the general direction of the operations of husbandry, but many inferior branches of country labour, require much more skill and experience than the greater part of mechanic trades.

The common ploughman, though generally regarded as the pattern of stupidity and ignorance, is seldom defective in this judgment and discretion. He is less accustomed, indeed, to social intercourse than the mechanic who lives in a town. His voice and language are more uncouth and more difficult to be understood by those who are not used to them. His understanding, however, being accustomed to consider a greater variety of objects, is generally much superior to that of the other, whose whole attention from morning till night is commonly occupied in performing one or two very simple operations. How much the lower ranks of people in the country are really superior to those of the town, is well known to every man whom either business or curiosity has led to converse much with both.

Which is why food production is best left to the experts. Also I see no reason why diesel powered machinery couldn't be used by organic farmers. On average only 1 acre in six needs to be devoted to soy beans for biodiesel which is half as much land that would be needed to support draft animals.

Unfortuntely we probably have an inadequate supply of the expertise needed for producing food in a post fossil fuel world. Farming is going to have to become a growth profession.

Soybeans are an inappropriate feedstock for biodiesel. The only reason they're being used for commercial biodiesel is because of huge subsidies for factory farming, and because the by-product is fed to cattle, which should not be eating such stuff anyway. Google for "Joe Salatin" or read Michael Pollen's latest book to learn more.

Canola has double the yield, and the seedcake makes an organic pesticide.

But we should not be making biodiesel at all -- at least not for warm-weather use. If engine manufacturers spent 1/100th the R&D on what I call "flex-fuel diesel" as they do on hybrids, we'd have engines that you could pour pure vegetable oil into, without modification. Rudolph Diesel did it in 1899; it isn't rocket science. But modern diesel engines have been optimized for petro-diesel, which is just infuriating.

"This leads to the further reflection, that no other human occupation opens so wide a field for the profitable and agreeable combination of labor with cultivated thought, as agriculture. I know of nothing so pleasant to the mind, as the discovery of anything which is at once new and valuable -- nothing which so lightens and sweetens toil, as the hopeful pursuit of such discovery. And how vast, and how varied a field is agriculture, for such discovery. The mind, already trained to thought, in the country school, or higher school, cannot fail to find there an exhaustless source of profitable enjoyment."
Abraham Lincoln, Address before the Wisconsin State Agricultural Society, September 30, 1859

I would never do that job for wages, not even for the wages I now make as an IT professional.

Yes, but would you do it for food when your IT job goes away?

Hungry people find they are capable of more and different kinds of work than they were when their belly was easily and cheaply filled.

It's hard to say when IT jobs will go away. The "doomers" say "any day now." John Michael Greer thinks it might take decades. That's a large range, and prudence might dictate developing some other skills.