submitted 3 months ago by JillOfAllTrades@hexbear.net to c/agriculture@hexbear.net

3 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Pretty interesting lecture series here. Trees are less fragile than grain-yielding grasses, not vulnerable to weeds. Nuts are a high-calorie food, so why not get bulk calories from nut-orchards instead of fields of broadacre crops?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] JillOfAllTrades@hexbear.net 5 points 3 months ago

Nuts are significantly more land intensive per calorie than grains

I don't really agree.

Grains

Call oats 4 t/ha, 389 kcal/100g
Call rice 3.9 t/ha, 129 kcal/100g
Call wheat 3.5 t/ha, 389 kcal/100g

Nuts

Chestnuts get 8 t/ha – https://www.fao.org/4/Y4351E/y4351e0c.htm – and have about 196 kcal/100g
Almonds get 4 t/ha – https://www.permaculturenews.org/2012/02/25/perennial-staple-crops-of-the-world/ – and have a mighty 578 kcal/100g
Hazelnuts get 2.27 t/ha (2000lb/acre is conservative) and have 628 kcal/100g

Ranking in kcal/m²/year

Almond 2312
Chestnut 1568
Oats 1556
Hazelnut 1426
Wheat 1152
Rice 503

this post was submitted on 06 Oct 2024

16 points (100.0% liked)

agriculture

259 readers

1 users here now

Agriculture

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

Vampire@hexbear.net