Beyond permaculture: How do we achieve zero-waste agriculture?
Have you ever tried to ask permaculture enthusiasts about the role of technology in permaculture systems? It’s a rather controversial topic. I asked the question on a few permaculture groups in the past week, and was met with quite a few anti-technology comments. What these people love about permaculture is the time spent observing and replicating natural patterns the old-fashioned way — I understand that. But if we see permaculture as a tool to solve the world’s food, resources and waste challenges, couldn’t technology give it a beneficial boost?
Should permaculture really be tech-free?
This week, I spoke with Christopher Bush, the founder of a small, Canada-based NGO called Catalyst Agri-Innovations Society. What he and his small team do is very much in line with permaculture principles. Their mission is zero-waste agriculture, and their motto is ‘Power the World — Feed the People — Heal the Planet’. They operate according to what they call ‘the one-reason rule’: nothing should ever be done for one reason only, and every aspect of a solution should serve several purposes. “Our model is technology meets permaculture,” he says.
Bush and his team have developed a system whereby cow and chicken manure is fed to an anaerobic digester, which extracts methane for energy and produces natural fertiliser. The fertiliser is then used to grow duckweed, which absorbs CO2 from the air, and from which sugar and protein can be extracted. The resulting compounds are used to make animal feed. And thus the cycle continues. Now, Catalyst is in the process of launching an applied research facility, where it will run innovation competitions in the quest for zero-waste agriculture.
Permazone: Tell us about your experience in trying to disrupt the way food is produced in Canada.
Christopher Bush: We have to address how we feed 9 or 10 billion people with the resources we have, and we know the old ways are wasteful. But when you are advancing disruptive technologies, you have to manage your message, find real problems the industry is facing today that you can fix, as your way forward. We strive to meet the world where they are and then lead them to a better reality. Now, I mostly don’t talk about my 2050 vision when I’m in the agricultural sector, because they don’t want to think about it. I focus on what’s inescapable: no one can deny we have to do a better job with the environmental impact of agriculture.
P: What has been the reaction from local farmers to the solution you propose?
CB: When I built the first biogas plant, British Columbia’s government was supposed to put in new regulations for manure management. I started I 2008, the rules were supposed to change in 2009, I commissioned in 2010 and the rules only changed in 2019. It was economically catastrophic for me, and the market saw me as a threat, because we were solving a problem they said couldn’t be solved, forcing them to change. Now in February, the new code of practice came in and all farmers have to follow it.
It’s tricky because the farm lobby has a very strong voice. What drove the change of the rules here is that Abbotsford sits on top of an unconfined aquifer which flows into America. The farms voluntarily participated in an environmental study on aquifers, but as soon as the study came out they were all slapped with lawsuits which they lost, and had to settle for millions of dollars. That got everybody’s attention.
P: Do these types of environmental changes always have to come from regulators?
CB: I hope not, because if it comes from the law, it’s usually reactionary. We are trying to work on a new model, away from idea-driven innovation, toward outcome-driven innovation. The target is zero-waste agriculture. We test and prove solutions, identify the best answers, install those and start running them, and continuously run new competitions. We publish the data and if anybody comes in with a better solution, that becomes the new champion. We have room for absolutely everything except egos and greed. In fact, we’re always hoping that we don’t have all of the answers. But you know, I have been in this business for 14 years and suddenly, everything is exploding.
P: How do you react to comments that permaculture should be tech-free?
CB: Permaculture is a wonderful word that may mean different things to different people, and a lot of it has to do with a circular economy. But even permaculture principles have some base assumptions that may or may not in the long term prove true. We don’t want to take any base assumption and let it stand untested. A lot of permaculture is about looping the cycle and putting the nutrients back in the soil, but maybe we take the soil out of the equation, maybe we take the animals out of the equation, maybe we even take the plants out of the equation. Maybe technology takes us to where it’s all microbial conversion. Our only target is zero-waste agriculture: how do we power the world, feed the people, heal the planet.
Part of the challenge is that different people have different opinions about what that means. We are talking about simulating natural systems, but maybe taking them completely out of nature. We want to be really careful not to get stuck in any box. Have your target and make sure you don’t limit how you get there, as long as you respect natural systems.
In fact, we’re doing everything open-source — no patent. We never want to get married to a technology, and we want to invite challengers to the table every day. We are not fighting over a finite pie, it’s not like there’s a limit to the need for what we’re doing. As JFK said: “The rising tide lifts all boats.” We want to use whatever mechanism we can find to this reach our goal.
Find out more about the work of Christopher Bush on the Catalyst Agri-Innovation Society website. Make sure to give us your feedback on this article in the comments, and join our permaculture community on www.permazone.com.
