[GSBN] Update, question re: proposed SB code (hay bales) ( GSBN Digest, Vol 11, Issue 2)
archilogic at yahoo.ca
Wed Feb 8 23:05:54 CST 2012
On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 21:50:29 -0500, <GSBN-request at sustainablesources.com>
> Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2012 18:24:26 -0800
> From: martin hammer <mfhammer at pacbell.net>
> Even without hay being defined in the code, I don?t think hay vs. straw
> is as fuzzy as you suggest.
I've been waiting for Habib to chime in and tell us about the Timothy hay
bales that he has built with.
In my neighbourhood, where it's not unusual to see Timothy grass that is a
metre-and-a-half (~five feet) tall , one will often see bob-o-links
perched on atop a gently arching slender stalk , swaying gently in a
Although I've never done a thatched roof, I could easily imagine bundles
of nice, long-stemmed Timothy hay being used to make a pretty
respectable-looking/serviceable roof. Good enough for a roof, good enough
for a wall.
And I'm certainly no agronomist but in noticing the seed heads of mature
"wild" grasses, one can't help but think that "cereal grains" are grasses
which our distant forebears saw value in cultivating for food.
(ie I would agree that the distinction between hay (ie "cut/dried grass")
and straw (stalks of cereal grains) is as fuzzy as the Derelict suggests.)
I would suggest that the distinguishing characteristic between the two for
the purposes of building bales is the amount of vegetative matter (ie leaf
-- more cellulose than lignin) vs fibrous material (ie stalk -- more
lignin than cellulose).
=== * ===
Kanata, Ontario, Canada
< A r c h i L o g i c at Y a h o o dot c a >
(manually winnow the chaff from my edress if you hit "reply")
More information about the GSBN