It is again that time of the year when, whenever the weather allows it, I have to cut and prune all the trees in my garden. Above all, the coppice. If I wait a bit longer, the trees start to pump sap into the wood, and it will be more difficult to cut, as well as the cuts would be more dangerous to the trees. I am not doing a full harvest this year, but I did cut most of the maples and some of the thicker poplar and willow poles. Together with the pile of raspberry and Symphoricarpos twigs, it looks impressive when piled up.

© Charly, all rights reserved. Click for full size.

You have already seen the front pile. The middle pile is the poplars and willows, and the rear pile is the maples. It looks big in the picture, but it is not much wood. As I said, the first pile is not worth much as firewood and thus will be mostly shredded and used as mulch. Today, I started de-branching the other two piles, and the work is progressing slowly.

© Charly, all rights reserved. Click for full size.

Some of the thicker and straighter poles will go towards growing beans over the summer, and thus they will be processed into firewood in the fall. The rest will be cut into ca 50 cm pieces that fit whole into my oven. The thinner twigs will also be cut into 50 cm pieces or shredded into chips, depending on what is easier. These are dense enough to be worth burning (together with the thicker Symphoricarpos twigs), but I might use them as mulch too. It depends on the amount.

And a little cross-over with the self-sustainability posts:

© Charly, all rights reserved. Click for full size.

Each time a poplar or willow is cut, they sprout an overabundance of thin twigs in the spring. Most of them die off in the same year due to overcrowding and overshadowing. I am currently thinning these dead twigs because they make other works, like mowing grass or even walking through the coppice, difficult. But if I had rabbits, guinea pigs, sheep, or goats, these could be pruned in early summer when still green and fresh and fed to them. They could also be dried up as “tree hay” and fed to them in winter. This is, in my opinion, the main reason why an omnivorous diet would beat a vegan diet in the self-sufficiency game, because only herbivorous animals are capable of converting inedible plant material into edible protein, thus utilizing slightly less land overall.

I am currently using my coppice as a vegan would. It is a conscious choice on my part – I am not attempting full self-sustainability (I do not have enough land for three people anyway), and the additional workload connected with having to care for the animals is not worth it to me personally. So I am buying all my animal products, and I concentrate on maximizing the plant-based outputs of my garden.

I wrote last year about my sewage cleaning facility  –click-. I actually designed that system myself, and I think it is a good design for a self-sustainable land plot. For just one person, it would not even need to be as big as mine is, although it is about twice the size on the hypothetical map. Here is what I think would be ideal to do with that space.

1. A 5 m³ underground, anaerobic, 3-chamber septic tank. This is the first stage of cleaning, and it separates all the liquid and water-soluble stuff from insoluble sludge. The sludge needs to be pumped out once a year with three people; with one person, it would last much, much longer. And since this structure is underground, it is not accounted for in the map – only the third fourth stage is.
2. An underground sand filter or biofilter. Which one to use depends on the local geography. Sand filters need a bigger slope, and biofilters deal better with being constantly submerged.
3. A 70 m² gravel field sown with reed canary grass, Phalaris arundinacea. Why this particular species and not the common reed Phragmites australis that I use in my own cleaning facility? Because unlike common reed,  reed canary grass can be mown two to three times a year for hay to feed the rabbits, whilst being just as effective at cleaning the water with its roots throughout the year. With a gravel field this big, I think the water would be even cleaner at the end than mine is, which is pretty clean.
4. An 8 to 10 m³ underground cistern, into which goes not only the clean water from the sewage cleaning facility, but also all the rainwater from all the buildings.
5. A small pond between two rows in the coppice, into which would go the overflow from the cistern. If there were a well somewhere on the property, it would need to be at a distance that a hydrologist determines as safe (in my case, 30 m was seen as ample).

That way, the sewage would serve a secondary purpose as a reservoir of utility water (mostly for watering the garden) in a drought.

Removal of insoluble sludge is the one thing that cannot be dealt with legally in a self-sustainable way where I live, but that does not mean it cannot be done safely, just that the laws are a bit overcautious (for good reasons). In the part of the coppice that is furthest from the well (and neighbour’s well), it could be safely disposed of on the ground once a year, ideally in the spring, in a pile of old, dead leaves or wood chips or both. It would be smelly for a bit, but nature is really good at dealing with shit, and one person does not produce so much of it to cause any trouble. After a few months, that pile of leaves would decompose and transform into compost safe enough to recycle nutrients to the fields. Which are the most interesting parts of all this, IMO, so that is the part about which I will write next time.

Edit: corrected numbering typo.

Let’s talk about some nice, long, hard wood. Sorry, hardwood.

The coppice is divided into five parts for a reason, and for the same reason, it would actually take five years for it to reach its full potential.

In medieval times, this is exactly how they grew firewood. They did not have chainsaws, and cutting a trunk as thick as your forearm is way easier than one as thick as, ehm, trunk. It also dries quicker and is easier to handle allround. So trees were either pollarded or coppiced, with firewood being cut and bound into faggots for transport, then dried, and subsequently used for heating and cooking.

The difference between a pollard and a coppice is mostly the height at which the trees are cut. A coppice is cut almost at the ground level, and a pollard is cut at shoulder height or higher. In both cases, the goal is to get a tree to branch out and create several upright trunks. When these trunks are then cut, the remaining stump creates new ones again. Some trees deal better with being coppiced (hazel), some deal better with being pollarded (basswood), many just do not care that much, and many others are not suitable for this at all.

Almost all softwoods are unsuitable because they will not survive the technique. The sole exception is yew, which was sometimes coppiced for bowstaves, but not very much because it grows extremely slowly, and it was usually cheaper and easier to plunder the wild forests (end of a tangent).

In our self-sustainability attempt, it would be best to plant most of the coppice with fast-growing poplar hybrids. I get ca 1 kg/m² on average with difficulties and suboptimal maintenance, and Google tells me that 0,7 kg/m² yearly on average is essentially the minimum. Therefore, I conclude that 2000 m² coppice should easily produce over 1,5 tonne of firewood yearly on average, and that should be enough to keep one human in a small, well-insulated domicile alive all winters and comfortable most, at least where I live. In colder climates, a bigger coppice would be needed, and vice versa, of course.

On the very north end of the coppice, I think it would be good to plant one-two wallnut/hickory trees, and a few hazels for nuts. And throughout the coppice, any native hardwoods that sprout there should be encouraged in addition to the planted poplars. Eminently suitable are ash (Fraxinus), maple (Acer), birch (Betula), hornbeam (Carpinus), and wild hazel.

How would one go about setting up such a coppice? In the first year, the whole area would need to be planted with circa 30 cm long twig cuts from poplar trees, buried at 50 cm intervals in north-south rows 1,5 m apart. In the second year, before sprouting, they all would need to be cut down at the desired height (I am cutting mine at about waist height, because that is the easier height to use the tools). In the third year, four fifths would need to be cut, and one would be left intact. In the fourth year, three-fifths would be cut, and two would be left. In the fifth year, two fifths would be cut, and three would be left. And in the sixth year, finally,  only one fifth would be cut, and that would be the way to go forward – always cutting the longest growing fifth of the plot. This would maximize the harvest of firewood about the thickness of a human forearm.

But that is not all, the coppice could also serve as a source of food all that time. It would be full of insects, and thus it would be eminently suitable as a pasture for chickens and rabbits. There would not be much grass growing under the trees, but there would be some that could be either grazed or made into hay. And lastly, the trees would sprout an overabundance of twigs each spring, from which only some survive and become firewood. Many of those twigs can be harvested throughout the summer and used as fodder for rabbits, either directly or dry. I estimate that together with other supplements to be discussed later, it should be possible to feed five egg-laying hens, a rooster, and one male and two-three female rabbits to provide their offspring yearly for sacrifice on the kitchen altar. If that makes you uncomfortable, I understand, but that is the best way to make the most out of the coppice.

I will write about the sewage cleaning facility next.

The weather is still cold, but the frost is no longer so severe that seeding potatoes cannot be shipped. Thus, they were shipped and arrived today.

Funny thing about potatoes – I have grown potatoes for over thirty years, and only this year I learned that they are divided not only by vegetation length from early to late, but also into determinate and indeterminate types. Determinate types start growing, set the tubers in one layer once, and then bloom and die irrespective of whether they are hilled up or not. They are mostly the very early and early varieties. Indeterminate potatoes keep growing and setting bulbs along the stem in multiple layers if they are being hilled up. They are mostly the late varieties.

© Charly, all rights reserved. Click for full size.

This year, I bought four varieties:

• Dali – an early to intermediate potato variety, with yellow-skinned tubers. You might remember that I grew it before, and I bought 10 kg of seed potatoes this year because it is tried and tested for my region, and they can be dehydrated without discoloring. The other three varieties are new (for my garden). I will probably plant these in soil and hill them up. I would like to maximize my harvest, and I could not find out if they are determinate or not.
• Camel – early variety, red-skinned tubers. Again, I could not find whether they are determinate or not, probably yes. They will be planted on top of the grass. I bought 5 kg to test it out.
• Agria – medium to late, yellow-skinned variety. From what I could find, it should be indeterminate, so it will definitely go into the soil, and I will hill it up as much as possible. It is also allegedly more starchy than the varieties I grew so far, and it should therefore be more suitable for French fries and chips (I tried to make chips last year, it was a disaster). I bought 10 kg because I got hyped up by the description on the webshop – allegedly, it has high yields and big tubers. We shall see if it beats Dali, who holds in my garden a record of growing 100 kg from 10 kg of seed, with tubers up to 900 g.
• Bellarosa – very early, determinate variety, red-skinned. It should also be drought-resistant, and thus supremely suited to planting on top of the soil with the Ruth-Stout method. I bought 5 kg to test it out.

So those are my potato planting plans for 2026. I hope to grow at least 300 kg of potatoes, if the weather is favorable.

I had fun today drawing this little map. As per convention, north is on top.

© Charly, all rights reserved. Click for full size.

I chose a 50×60 m rectangle because it allowed me to get exactly 3000 m², unlike a 54×54 m square (and drawing meters to a decimal point is pure nonsense). And whereas a square would, theoretically, need the least amount of fencing, the difference is just 4 m overall.

There is a logic behind all these placements and orientations, and I will talk about them in subsequent posts. In this one, I will talk a bit just about the utility buildings.

The buildings are positioned around a small front yard and close to each other, so a person can easily move between them when needed, and the walkways are short enough to clear snow with ease.

A one-story house with a cellar solves one requirement from the “storage” post, and the attic can work as an additional storage space for junk, as is usually the case. I store electric gardening tools in mine when not in use. 10×8 m would be plenty of space for one person, which is what this whole mental exercise is about.

The toolshed, workshop, and garage form one big unit. And the storage barn is as close to the house as it is to the toolshed and the workshop. The garage is 6×6 m, which should be big enough not only for a car, but also for, as previously mentioned, a small tractor, a lawnmower, a verticutter, and assorted accessories.

So, we have our not-so-small plot of land, we have the house and all the storage buildings, and now let’s look briefly at all the tools that one person would need to be self-sufficient in firewood and food. If I were to write it all, it would be  quite a long list, so I will try to be brief

• Full set of hand tools for gardening, orcharding, and landscaping, including such old-school tools as a scythe and sickle. No matter what, there will be a lot of earth moving, so a lot of work with a spade, a pickaxe, and a shovel will be involved.
• Woodworking and woodcutting hand tools – saws, a hatchet, an axe, and a machete.
• Some power tools, like at least a small chainsaw, and a small electric hoe.
• Some medium-sized gardening machinery – a verticutter, a lawnmower, and a small tractor with a plough, a rotary tiller, a harrow, and maybe even a small cart.
• A deer and hog-proof wire fence.

Let’s not forget that we are trying to do all the necessary work to feed and keep warm one person on 3000 m². Ideally, it would be a square of land 55×55 m2. It might not look that big on a map, but walking it back and forth the whole day, dragging dead trees behind you, or carrying sacks of potatoes, is not easy (I am talking from experience). And if we are trying to do without a mule or an ox, machinery is necessary.

I must say, I do have fun with this mental exercise. We will look at how to partition the land next.

Most food production is highly seasonal or dependent on other seasonally produced products, so storage is essential. And whilst one person can live comfortably on about just 100 m², they would need significant space to store all the food, feed, firewood, and everything else that is necessary for self-sustainability. And since both food and firewood production can also wildly vary from season to season, I think storage of at least 2 years’ worth of supply is necessary to get through a few years of bad harvests, or even one with complete failure.

• A barn for firewood and hay – at least 50 m².
• A tool shed of at least 12 m², with a workshop just as big nearby.
• Rainwater storage of at least 30m³, either as a big pond or (better) as a covered tank.
• A small garage for a small tractor, lawnmower, hoe, and similar small machinery, and their fuel(s).
• A rodent-proof, dark, cold cellar, circa 12 m²
• Large-capacity freezer.
• If electric self-sufficiency is intended (I won’t concentrate on that), then sufficient battery storage is needed.

So now we know how much land one would need, and what fixtures would need to be on said land for long-term survival. And it appears to be a lot – and it is.

Finally, we are getting to something really interesting – how much land would a person need to be self-sufficient with food and firewood? It does, of course, depend on a lot of the previous factors, but let us talk about a moderate climate and moderately fertile soil, like I talked about at the end of the previous post.

I was not actually thinking about this whole issue that much until a few years ago, when one commenter on Affinity brought up the concept of vertical growing of vegetables at home. In their opinion, vertical farming was supposed to be an agricultural revolution, including this small-scale home version. I have immediately expressed deep skepticism about this idea, and in the years that followed, I feel fully vindicated. Vertical farming boomed off big way, and then busted, as I expected. Not to mention that most of the startups that I saw were growing salads and herbs, neither of which are foods; they are condiments.

And thus, there is one thing that I feel confident in saying right off the bat – the land use needed to feed one person is probably a lot more than an average city dweller’s idea. And one of the reasons for this is that most people actually have no real first-hand experience growing anything except perhaps that bonsai/orchid they got for a birthday from a clueless relative, which then hung on for dear life for a few months before it inevitably died.

Talking about my own experience in my garden, I estimate I’d need at least 500-600 m² of arable land for food, and ten times that for wood. However, I am currently heating the house for three people, not just one. With a domicile for one person only, it could probably be reduced to 2000 m², arriving at 2600 m² total. This counts only the production areas; there would need to be more for the house, the storage spaces, animal sheds, paths, etc. Let’s not count too much and round it up to 3000 m² overall, for just one, very thrifty person.

We shall see how I personally would use said land in order to meet my food and firewood needs.

All numbers are, and will be, estimates. After all, I am writing blog posts, not a PhD dissertation.

Needless to say, not every environment is suitable for an attempt at self-sustainability. Neither desert nor tundra is a good choice. Funnily enough, in neither of those live very many people, for some reason.

As a rule of thumb, anywhere where people can live, an attempt can be made. But let’s spell out what criteria the local climate and environment must meet in order for a person to be able to grow their own food/firewood in sufficient quantities.

• The latitude dictates day length and seasons, which, to some extent, dictate what crops can and cannot be grown, regardless of any other factor. There is a bunch of edible plants originating from, for example, high altitudes in South America (Perú) that cannot be grown in temperate Europe or North America at lower altitudes, despite the climate being in all other regards suitable. And day length is the sole reason for this – the plants start bulking/flowering at a certain day length, which in Perú is achieved relatively early in the growing season, whereas in Europe that specific daytime length comes too late. This is one of two main reasons why my planned soybean experiment has a huge question mark over it. But other than that, it does not impede self-sustainability; there are plenty of crops to choose from for most latitudes except the farthest north/south extremes. At the extremes, heavily carnivorous sustenance through hunting becomes necessary because agriculture simply is not possible.
• Altitude, together with latitude, determines temperature. The interval between the first and last frost of the season plays a huge role in the growth-season length for many crops, and climate change throws a wrench in the works here in a big way, pushing some environments higher up (or farther from the equator).
• Sufficient rainfall is absolutely essential. Everything being soaking wet all the time is bad, but not as bad as everything being bone dry.

However, apart from these three main factors, multiple other factors also need to be taken into account.

• Local geology. The bedrock often determines the soil chemistry. Not all soils are suitable for all crops. There are even soils that are more suitable for pastures than fields, and an attempt at self-sustenance would, by their very nature, have to be weighted more towards the meat-eater diet, with all its drawbacks.
• Local light conditions. Living in the shadow of a huge mountain or on a north-facing slope (in Europe) can have a significant impact.
• Local hydrology. Distance from a big body of water or a water stream affects temperature and air humidity. As well as how deep the underground water table is.
• Local air currents. Frost hollows can be a real pain in the nethers. Huge winds are not pleasant either.

So, taking all this into account, what environment would be best suited for self-sustenance? Probably a tropical one, with thick topsoil rich in organic content, and reliable rain. I have only limited and purely theoretical knowledge about such environments. Of all the possibilities, I can only talk with some minuscule authority about hardiness zones 6b to 7b, with slightly acidic, loamy topsoil containing relatively little organic material, because that is the environment where I live. And that is what I will concentrate on when talking about detailed plans later on.