Planck Foundation Global Deserts Investment Economics (Salt Water Based)




Global Deserts Investment Economics (Salt Water Based)



Introduction
Farm Density Variable
Pipe Or Channel Variable
General Description
People Density Variable
Combined Financial Data
Farmer's Perspectives
Desert Nations' Perspectives
Europe/Africa Migrants Solution
Finance Basket
Global Impact



Introduction

This document shows the potential of using sea water irrigation for global development. Itís odd that while all total (active and inactive) fresh/sweet water resources only makes up 2.50 till 2.75% of earthís water resources, our whole agricultural system is based on the use of fresh/sweet water. But it even gets more odd: only 0.01% of all global water resources can be used/accessed for irrigation of the current fresh/sweet water crops based agriculture.

So itís quite clear that as mankind we've bet the last century too heavily on the wrong i.e. smaller water card in global agriculture. Why? Because there are also salt water loving crops (halophytes is their species family name). A whole family of species in nature weíve neglected too long due the fact that we didnít know they exist and therefore we didnít develop the way like we did with fresh/water loving crops. We as mankind could make a major leap forward on food/water resources if we would develop these species like we did with the fresh/sweet water flora/crops.

This document is about combining abundances (salt sea water, wide desert soils and huge biodiversity of crops available in salt water loving crops) and merge them into a) a global new economic cycle/century, b) a global ecologic/biodiversity revival, c) stopping almost all migration wave problems and d) eliminate almost all food/energy tensions/wars.

Enter your new narrative on the 21th century by just assessing the information below. Global game changers for the better. Build on existing yet not used huge abundances. Where our model is applied, regular rainfall is returning due increase of evaporation and increase of shadows, which both change air flows and cloud formation and thereby precipitation, making fresh/sweet water based agriculture also possible again in these regions.

But first two basic questions regarding desert economics should be answered, otherwise going any deeper into it is useless: Question 1: Grows anything on salt water? Yes, abundantly. Just visit sea side mangrove region and you will be surprised by the both flora and fauna abundance in and by salt water. Question 2: Ok, stuff grows well on sea water, but do commercial viable crops do? Yes, very good: the best known example is salicornia (for high grade proteins and oils): salicornia out of the deserts by the use of seawater can totally replace the global rain forests destruction production of soy (for proteins and oils). George Washington was also a salicornia farmer and he did well by it.

Before assessing these calculations the whole concept of desert greening by salt aquifer / sea water irrigation should be assessed first. You can find more on this on the following locations:

To break down the desert greening investment economics (based on a combined/integrated seawater driven agriculture, seawater driven aquaculture and livestock model) in easy to access figures we first should define the main calculations areas that are important to get more insight: First there are the farm density ratios/calculations (farm size), than there is the pipes or channels based variable, than there are the people density ratios/calculations, than there are the combined/integrated financial ratios/calculations based on all these ratios.





Farm Density Variable

There are 3 space calculation ratios: 1) gross calculation space unit, 2) number of farms per space unit and 3) the farm/nature ratio (gross/nett ratio). To fill this further in: We take the metric km2 as the first basic space calculation unit (but deliver also the imperial system data). There are two other basic space calculation variables: the number of farms per km2 (for example 3 or 4, but we advise a high ratio of 5, 6, 7 or 8 farms per km2, as the farms will be of a quite intensive type of combined agriculture, aquaculture and livestock based/integrated model) and the nature ratio (for example 25% or 20%, but 15% or 10% or 5% could also be variables).

By a choice of 3 farms per km2, this delivers 3 plots of gross 33.33 hectares (which is 33.333 square meters, which is 358,793 square feet as the square meter to square feet ratio is times 10.76391, which is 82.37 acres as the hectare to acre ratio is times 2.4711). By a nature versus farms space ratio of Ď25% nature and 75% farmsí this delivers 3 farms of 25 hectares (which is 25,000 square meters, which is 269,098 square feet, which is 61.78 acres) nett farm and 8.33 hectares (which is 8,333 square meters, which is 89,699 square feet, which is 20.59 acres) of external nature per plot. By a nature versus farms space ratio of Ď20% nature and 80% farmsí this delivers 3 farms of 26.67 hectares (which is 26,667 square meters, which is 287,038 square feet, which is 65.90 acres) nett farm plus 6.67 hectares (which is 6,667 square meters, which is 71,759 square feet, which is 16.47 acres) of external nature per plot.

By a choice of 4 farms per km2, this delivers 4 plots of gross 25.00 hectares (which is 25.000 square meters aka 269,098 square feet, as the square meter to square feet ratio is times 10.76391, which is 61.78 acres as the hectare to acre ratio is times 2.4711). By a nature versus farms ratio of Ď25% nature and 75% farmsí this delivers 4 farms of 18.75 hectares (which is 18,750 square meters, which is 201,823 square feet, which is 46.333 acres) nett farm and 6.25 hectares (which is 6,250 square meters, which is 67,274 square feet, which is 15.444 acres) of external nature per plot. By a nature versus farms space ratio of Ď20% nature and 80% farmsí this delivers 4 farms of 20 hectares (which is 20,000 square meters, which is 215,278 square feet, which is 49.42 acres) nett farm plus 5 hectares (which is 5,000 square meters, which is 53,820 square feet, which is 12.36 acres) of nature per plot. hectares (which is 6,667 square meters, which is 71,759 square feet, which is 16.47 acres) of external nature per plot.

By a choice of 5 farms per km2, this delivers 5 plots of gross 20.00 hectares (which is 20.000 square meters aka 215,278 square feet, as the square meter to square feet ratio is times 10.76391, which is 49.42 acres as the hectare to acre ratio is times 2.4711). By a nature versus farms ratio of Ď25% nature and 75% farmsí this delivers 5 farms of 15.00 hectares (which is 15,000 square meters, which is 16,146 square feet, which is 37.07 acres) nett farm and 5.00 hectares (which is 5,000 square meters, which is 53,820 square feet, which is 12.36 acres) of external nature per plot. By a nature versus farms space ratio of Ď20% nature and 80% farmsí this delivers 4 farms of 16.00 hectares (which is 16,000 square meters, which is 172.223 square feet, which is 39.54 acres) nett farm plus 4.00 hectares (which is 4,000 square meters, which is 43,056 square feet, which is 9.88 acres) of external nature per plot.

Setting out the basic design based on the km2 will be done with the use of advanced GPS and marked by wooden border marks. The same way the plots will be set out and marked. As the GPS grid is the foundation of it, no mistakes or misunderstanding nor farm border conflicts can occur.


Pipe Or Channel Variable

The two different design model (which are: a) roads and seawater pipelines or b) no roads and seawater channels) doesnít change the farm size. The channel based variant always will have a seawater supplying pipeline infrastructure (as not that much deserts are located at or near sea level, in natural planes or artificial channel level dredged. But the channel option does change the people density variable for two reasons: leisure and extended aquaculture. The channel based variant delivers much more leisure industry potential: such a massive complex of channels will boost the leisure/holiday part of these economies very much as it will be an accessible type of the Amazon region. The channel based variant also delivers a much bigger aquaculture industry (as the channels contains by the sun warmed water) and farmers just can order the dredging an own salt water basin for aquaculture in their land (done by mini dredger).

And there even more benefits to the channel instead of roads variant: The channel based variant also generates by natural upcycling (water flora and water fauna) more flora nutrient richer salt irrigation water. The channels based variant also will boost the biodiversity of the nature plots tremendously. It will capture the nutrients from liquids to more solids and enrich them (by micro biological species), so that they will be used maximal when used in irrigation. So the dredged channel variant has many upsides. The channel variant will have no peripheral salt water pipelines, no roads, nor bridges: it is by far the cheapest/fastest/greenest solution. The only thing that could block a choice for the channels based variant is if there are natural fresh water aquifers that need to be protected. Otherwise the channel based variant is always the better variant.

The choice between the pipe en channel variable is very much / totally geological facets driven (to be more precise: soil type, underground soil type, terrain elevation and fresh water aquifers are the three main decision drivers). As said before: the link between the seas and the farms mostly always will be a pipe line: pure/simple because of elevation issues (most of the continental landmass is above sea level).


General Description

Water Intake: The sea water intake will be done on sea in multiple feeder pump stations that each day that are located in shallow (biological rich: feed by the tides) waters. The pipe line corridor of the coast to the farm areas will be also a transport corridor with room for new freeways and new railways and new commercial spaces. A combination of geological and political facets are determining are determining the location of these hubs. If possible a harbour with attached inland railway hub will be located at these sea border hubs too. If there are underground salt water aquifers (and there are a lot of them worldwide and quite substantial in size) the sea connection is not needed: than pump station can replace the sea water intake and central corridors.

Central Corridors: From this on shore hubs around the pipe lines there will be a (5 + 1 + 5 =) 11 km wide corridor that will grow wider as the distance to the sea increases. The two times at least 5 km plots with farms and businesses will protect the pipe lines against demolishing by anyone that seeks to do harm to this crucial infrastructure. A combination of geological and political facets are determining the route of the pipe lines too (avoiding high grounds when possible, using lower than sea level regions to get free gravity driven 'pump volume/capacity replacements').

Farm Areas: At the farm areas the following 4 actions take place: 1) The borders are determined by GPS and border poles are driven into the ground. 2) The core fiber infra and LTE -mobile- cell towers are installed. 3A) In the channels variant the channels are dredged (done by two dredgers serial: the one deposits to the right, the other to the left (creating a levee on both sides). 3B) In the roads variant the saltwater pipelines are rolled out (wide in the core, smaller in the periphery) plus drop tube irrigation is installed (by just laying it on the ground and than covering it with sand to make the road higher and in the roman curved road model) on the road routes and activated and halophyte grasses are sowed. Cheap green roads are the result of this. 4) The nature parts of the between farms corridors (the 20% or 25% nature space designed in the model) will be left alone at first. Only 'soil transplantation' will be done: delivering some small soil samples out of mangrove type of natural habitats: this kick starts nature tremendously.

Farm Buildings: Farmers will go (by freight boat or freight truck) to their soil with the buildingmaterials/household/equipment plus temperately help of both specialists and heavy equipment. The house and barns are a semi underground model for two reasons: a) it's the most cost effective construction that lowers the start investment tremendously (less CAPEX), b) it's the most stable construction, c) it's the most high speed construction and d) it delivers the most cool internal climate for both the houses and the barns (10 till 15 degrees Celcius lower internal temperature). The house and barns will be (due the used construction method) relative quite big considering the low investment: the space investment ratio is very attractive. The solar panels will be used the roof of an extra open shadow/dry barn (which size depends on number of solar panels and if other materials are used too).

Farm Equipment: The farm produces own energy by solar panels and also produces own sweet water by a Reverse Osmosis Unit. Digital they are connected with the world by LTE (high speed mobile/cell technology). Transport/mobility connects by an electric scooters and an electric freight triwheeler (and in the channels variant also a flat shaped electric freight boat with a solar panel roof and a set of batteries, so with unlimited daytime reach). In the farm budget is E 25.000 reserved as budget for specific fauna or flora equipment, things like robotized weed removes on wheels powered by solar energy, physics based insect removers, etc: small intelligent equipment that can work day after day. At farm starts the farmers will have advanced equipment for sowing, but not for harvesting (for harvesting they need to hire this only some days a year needed capital goods by a harvest contractor).

Equipment Development: Decades long farm equipment only got bigger (and thereby heavier), delivering at least 6 challenges: too much biological monocultures with the attached problems, too much dependence on one crop in production, too much dependence one crop in market price, heavy investments/debt, heavy weight (ruining soil structure so ploughing by heavy equipment is needed), expensive fuel bills, etc. Bad economic farm performance by increased farm risks was the result of this development: producing with a kilo maximizing focus, instead of with an economic output and economic security maximizing focus. More kilos equals no longer more profit. The price of the one kilo is half the price of another kilo. Due robotization farm equipment will start a reverse development: smaller and thereby lighter). One frame wagon of 4 meters long en 4 meters wide with solar panels on the roof will have different function equipment that could connect to that frame (all automatic without human lifting). Equipment for seeding, for crop inspection with attached data collection, for weeding, for harvesting (with a following frame as harvest crop transport vehicle), for insect control by physics, etc, etc, etc. Now central computers for robot machines like the Raspberry Pi cost no more than E 20, the end of the heavy equipment based agriculture model (and therefore of large monocultures demanding lots of chemicals) is growing. In the farm investment budget is E 25,000 reserved for such Ďappliancesí. This development makes it possible to sow seeds without cutting soil toplayers (just pinning the seed into the ground), etc, etc. It will revolutionize agriculture, it will deliver more crops (and thereby biodiversity) to farms. It will have effects far further than desert agriculture. It also will reduce agriculture commodity trade (as it delivers more nearby production) and thereby monetary systems (less food imports). Daylight continuous machines.

Irrigation Method: The underground dense irrigation grid will also be installed and covered during the farm building. The irrigation method is based on a) a tight (0.5 or 1,0 meter distance) underground irrigation grid. This underground irrigation by continuous (full 24/7 hour or only at 12/7 night times) water drops delivering tubes delivers the most irrigation effects as it's the less evaporation option (preventing salt build-up in the soils). The first crops are sowed or planted. Farmers can harvest the grasses of the road areas to instant feed their goats while sowing/planting own crops on their own soils.

Rain Fall: As evaporation will deliver moisture to the air during daytime and condensation will retract moisture out of the air during nighttime and shadow structures will change air flows during daytime, overall airflows will change and normal rainfall/precipitation will return to these areas within years (and farmers can boost their harvest volumes and use more type of crops).

Covered Soils: The covered soils concept is about full/always by plants covered soils: Continuous by flora covered soils are done for two reasons: a) as otherwise the evaporation would go too fast (and there will be too much salt build up in the soil, which by covered soils not happens) and b) because it delivers at night time a water input for the plants/crops caused by dew (the mainly forgotten water source). Covered soils prevent salt build-up in the soils. It's somewhat semi-permaculture (as harvesting whole crops still is part of the model).

Ploughing Support: For this reason the soil is never ploughed, instead of ploughing special crops are used that loosen the soil by their wide roots. In regions where there was rainfall somewhere in the recent past (there was rainfall in the far past everywhere, but this is about rain in the recent past decades) the soil has a hard crust and will be ploughed once before the irrigation is installed (as this crust is also very fertile: it's a bio fertilizer) or the irrigation grid will be laid on top of it and than will be covered by sand (the no dig-in but cover-up way to apply the irrigation grid).

Fertilizers Support: Fertilizers are not needed due to the (very biological rich) designed type of seawater intake. Also farmers could further upgrade the sea water by aquaculture production basins. So fertilizers are not needed for normal growth. Than a choice for growing organic is relative easy i.e. a no brainer. Certainly as it delivers a price premium i.e. higher market price i.e. more demand, certainly by the sourcing transparency environment described below. If fertilizers are used they should be disclosed to the trade channel (transparency) in a facebook like environment described below. One thing that is often forgotten in plant/crop physiology is that plants/crops also acquire some needed chemicals out of the air, this is no replacement for fertilizer, just a fact in the whole plant/crop physiology. Some plants/crops (like lupin in non-salt agriculture) do this also in a fertilizing replacement way.

Chemicals Support: In agriculture most chemicals are used for fighting weeds to get an as empty as possible soil (beside the crop in progress), but in this model a covered soil is crucial for a higher goal: fighting evaporation. So no weed fighting chemicals are needed. Than a choice for growing organic is relative easy i.e. a no brainer (as it delivers a price premium i.e. higher market price i.e. more demand, certainly by the sourcing transparency environment described below). If chemicals are used they should be disclosed to the trade channel (transparency) in a facebook like environment described below.

Fighting Insects: Insects will be fight first by physics. Specific sounds and light micro waves are examples of such technologies. Grasshoppers for example fly into an artificial mating sound source where they will be grinded into grasshopper paste (for grasshopper burgers or as feed for aquaculture environments). Each farm also will have swallow bird nests (as they eat a tremendously volume of insects each day).

Fighting Patents: Patents (the foundation of the GMO system) are creating dead ended streets in agricultural innovation. All the post WWII progress in agriculture is delivered by the model of "breeders' rights". This seed system allows to build innovation on innovation: something the patent system (used by GMOs) prevents/forbids. Let's be frank: we don't like GMOs that much. Also because their performance is poor and their cost are high and they are designed for chemical weed fighting and that's not what is done here. Than a choice for growing organic is relative easy i.e. a no brainer (as it delivers a price premium i.e. higher market price i.e. more demand, certainly by the sourcing transparency environment described below). As said: We at Planck Foundation are not that fond on GMOs: it's a lot of marketing bla bla, a lot of invoices, more debt, but less performance. Another facet is that GMO corporations patent existing nature (transit it by that from the public domain to the private domain): which is a crime in our perception. Another facet is that GMO corporations push the 'DNA patent' model (which creates agricultural 'dead ended streets' as no innovation can build on top of another innovation) and lobby intensively against the "breeders' rights" model (which has brought us all post WWII agricultural progress due its innovation on innovation model). But a farmer wants to imprison his/her self by patents/GMOs: we wish them luck (they will need it), but the farm mortgage (and the legal protection it delivers) is superordinated by legal over patent/GMO invoices (preventing GMO corporations to bankrupt the farmers by invoices for seeds or even otherwise: like they do in Canada). In the first 12 years farmers can acquire all seeds for free (keeping patents out for sure).

Grow Support: Not only the farmers will get finance for the land, buildings, equipment, etc, etc. They also can get any support per crop or animal type by specialists in those crops and animals. All targeted to realize maximal out of each farm hectare and thereby the farmer's income.

Harvesting Support: At farm starts the farmers will have advanced equipment for sowing, but not for harvesting. Why? The needed harvesting equipment varies per crop. For harvesting they need to hire this only some days a year needed capital goods by a harvest contractor. Later on farmers will specialize, work together, etc and maybe get own harvesting equipment.

Transport Support: Each farm will be service by a daily (or later on: more times a day) transport/mobility system with cooling. Delivering them the logistics to the nearest trade/logistics support facilities. A public product transportation system (that also will offer people mobility).

Storage Support: At farm starts the farmers will not have the barns nor the equipment to store their harvests for long periods (as no farmer knows his/her niches yet). This is solved by the storage facilities offered by the trade support facilities.

Grading Support: At farm starts the farmers will not have grading equipment (as no farmer knows his/her niches yet). This is solved by the grading facilities offered by the trade support facilities.

Packaging Support: At farm starts the farmers will not have export ready packaging equipment (as no farmer knows his/her niches yet). This is solved by the packaging facilities offered by the trade support facilities.

Trade Support: But without connection to national and international markets the whole concept would be build on economic quick sand. From the nearby collection points where the output is (super high tech) graded, cooled and packed and joint send by trucks, rail and sea to the demand markets with an attached digital market place. Delivering them maximal connection to the national and international markets. These trade services are operated not for profit and farm democratic vote driven. The whole process will be a digital market place (where the farmer is in the driving seat of his/her own products) with attached track/trace.

Brand Support: The 'Desert Brand' will deliver this some upwards price incentive. Upgrading instead of downgrading nature by agriculture is something a huge part of the global consumers in interested in. So there's a turnover premium and a price premium in this.

Transparency Support: All trades will be done in a directly to the farmer pegged way in IT technology: the farmer can see where his/her products end up and the traders and consumers can see where a product is producers. This 'sourcing environment' will also deliver an upwards price premium. It's something like the 'facebook for food' type of transparency.

Choice Freedom: All these facets are voluntary, not mandatory (besides paying back the investment). New soon to become farmers will similar interest (like organic, or no-chemicals-yet-fertilizer, GMO-free, GMO, regular, etc can request a region based cluster. Several of these clusters are turn key templated by the core organization.


People Density Variable

As stated earlier we advice a higher than 3 of 4 farms per km2 ratio, as those intensive combined agriculture/aquaculture/livestock farms delivers a more economic vibrant/condensed area, as such farms will be of a relative intensive family ran business type.

We advice at least a 5 farms per km2 ratio. Why? In a combined agriculture, aquaculture and livestock based model, smaller sizes can be as viable as the bigger ones. Quality and diversity are for sure better / more viable economic drivers than the just monoculture weight output model the struggling western agriculture is based on (which bankrupts farmers at alarming rate). Itís about creating jobs in an economic intensive way driven by family profits and thereby contributing to the whole economy and delivering a tax base to the host nations. Itís not about building economic extensive monoculture low value adding agro giants of which only a few profit of which and host nations canít tax.

Our calculations are based on 2 or 3 adults and 2 or 3 children per farm, with an average of 5 people living/working per farm. Our calculations are based on a service economy at the start of the same size as the farmers economy/population, so each farm will give one family at the farm and one family in the service industry an economic base. This ratio of 1 to 1 (200%) will grow via 1 to 2 (300%) to 1 to 3 (400%). In reality the farm will be used more intensive and the number of people economic served by each km2 will be somewhere north of 100 (5 farms with 5 people is 25 farm people with an attached service economy of 1 versus 3 is 400% total). The result is a model that supports economic 100 people per km2 (equals a density of 1 person per hectare).


Combined Financial Data

There are 5 financial calculation ratios: these are: 1) the direct investment ratios/calculations, 2) the indirect investment ratios/calculations (infrastructure/facilities), 3) the annual cost ratios/calculations (per farm, inclusive payment for central facilities), 4) the annual output ratios/calculations (what delivers each farm to the market) and 5) the annual amortization ratios/calculations (in what time the farmís ownership is transferred to the farmer, but some farmers just want to have a life long lease agreement).

The sum of the direct investments (E 100,000) and the indirect infrastructure investments and facility costs (E 100,000) per farm is E 200,000. Farmers get for the building materials and building equipment and building help for erecting the buildings and a whole modern household set. The complete set of everything supplied can be requested.

The annual costs per farm are a) power line connection and power of the grid use minus power to the grid deliveries, b) fresh/sweet water connection and use, c) salt water connection and use (not or different by the channels instead of pipes based model), d) high speed fiber telecom connection and use, e) high speed LTE/G4 telecom connections and use, f) garbage pickup fee, g) insurance fee, etc, etc, etc (see the specs).

The operational costs and the cost of living and the cost of seeds are granted during the first 2 years (and are part of the initial investment amount calculation). In the initial investment is an electric scooter (so solar driven free mobility) and an electric freight triwheeler. In the initial investment there are own food producing facilities (chickens for eggs/meat, goats for milk/meat, fodder for the chickens/goats, vegetable grow facilities, aquaculture flora/fauna producing facilities etc and food coupons for the first months. So own food producing is not a problem. Own food storage is also not a problem (refrigerator and deepfreeze unit). The initial investment also covers solar panels so the farmers have no electricity costs, the grid is the online power storage/battery. Fertilizers are not needed as the sea water intake will be done in biological rich shallow waters where biology is exploding each day (delivering the highest nutrients water supply).

The annual turnover per farm is a mix of sweet water irrigated vegetables, salt water irrigated vegetables, fruits, nuts, seeds, commodity crops, aquaculture vegetables, aquaculture fish/scrimps, eggs, milk, meat, wood, insects, honey, herbs, etc, etc. Each family farm will do what theyíre good at (and each farmer family member will do where they are good at) and by that find their niches. See for more on this in the 'farmer's perspective' part below.

The annual amortization per farm (inclusive liquidity fee and risk fee: so an interest free Islamic Sharia Compliant model) starts in the third year (the first 2 operational years have an amortization holiday).

Commercial/village/cities space in these areas will be smaller and therefore relative more dense/expensive and will pay (partial or whole) the amortization (and maybe also the operational cost) of the infrastructure.


Farmer's Perspectives

Whatís in it for the new farmer? He/She gets a full equipped house/farm with anything needed for operating a well performing salt water driven desert farm able to generate an E 48,000 and up annual revenue stream (certainly when also aquaculture is practiced too). With the backing of crop specialists, animal specialists, seafood specialists and an international sales organization for national sales and international export of the outputs.

As the demand for farms in such a setting always will higher than the 'supply' only those who score the best in both online and offline courses will get a farm. The selection is not so much about intellect, but more about willingness to learn and feeling for i.e. 'click with' farming. This selection is very important for all stakeholders.

The farmers and his/her family can chose the shape, sizes and location of the buildings out of a whole assortment of template designs and modify them as wanted (as the buildings are designed based on standard components). The can chose too for a road farm or a channel farm when this choice is available, in which region they want their land, which land plot in that region they want.

The farmer and his/her family get everything (materials, help and equipment) to realize in two weeks a full equipped (all modern appliances: to make this more clear: till even a web enabled flat screen television) and furnished (all furniture needed, both inside as outside) 167 m2 / 500 m3 relative cool half underground house, several relative cool half underground barns of total 500 m2 / 1500 m3, an half underground hen house with hens (eggs), an half underground goat house with a goat (milk).

The farmer and his/her family get all needed facilities/equipment: a 15,000 watt solar roof (so no grid power bills and E 1,000 annual revenues of power deliveries to the grid), a reverse osmosis unit to generate sweet water on location (or if they don't want that an other 10,000 watt solar roof installation, delivering them another E 1,000 annual revenues of power deliveries to the grid), a sweet water storage, multiple saltwater basins, an own waste water purifying facility, an electric scooter, an electric freight tri-wheeler, electric/power grid connection, salt water grid connection, fiber infra connection, LTE wireless access, etc, etc, (see the full specs list).

The farmer and his/her family get (and this is really big) an 2 year both income so they can start the farm without problems and build reserves in the first 2 years of operation.

The farmer and his/her family get (and this is important) a full knowledge support package, by which they can get any knowledge on any agriculture, aquaculture, livestock, crop and equipent they want (see the full specs list).

Those who put effort in certainly will succeed in building a profitable family farm business (as specific knowledge support of all facets is available). As there are investments involved and at the start thereís not much of equity by the new farmers, pre-selection is done by offline meetings and selection is done by online courses. The buildings will be build in two weeks by the owner (with support of external knowledge/help and external heavy equipment). For each potential farm crop and farm animal there are knowledge centers that operate test field farms for it and publish all knowledge online will giving tours and helping regional farms that want to specialize in it (distributing the knowledge).

The investment per farm is E 200,000 (E 100,000 directly in the farm and E 100,000 indirectly in feeding infrastructure and facilities) and will be financed and can be paid back in 10 years long E 2,200 per month after a 2 year payment holiday to get the farm up and running and productive. This is a 12 year 4% interest arrangement with the first 2 years a payment holiday even of the interest payments). So the farmers (and other commercial and domestic soil buyers) will pay the whole infrastructure building (with the commercial and demestic soil sales as buffer for covering the few non-performing farm loans, those will be rather few as the farmers will be selected very wisely/smart/selective).

What will be the market output of these farms? Beans, grains, nuts, seeds, milk, cheese, meat, eggs, fruits, vegetables, herbs, olives, bananas, oils, bread, pickles, dried food, fish, seafruits (all kind of small sea fauna), sea vegetables/weeds, scrimps, oysters, fibers (the new cotton competitors), fodder, etc, etc, etc, etc.

Any farmer can make his/her own choices/niches/specialities. Seeds, young plants and young animals can be acquired for free instant/directly at the central organization (for the 2 + 10 = 12 year relation period) or bought externally (there's a monthly farm budget for it) to speed up the start of production. Specialists, their websites can be visited and their lectures and demonstration farms can be attended/visited too (online and offline). And a sales organization with attached logistics can be used if wanted (not mandatory) to sell to national and international markets.

Due to the sunny climate and unlimited salt water supply there can be multiple harvests a year (harvesting the whole year around) and there will be a wide range of agriculture and aquaculture possibilities: each farmer has in these 2 starting years many, really many, changes to develop his specific farm model in all its variety. Certainly in later years when -as due these projects- the rain will start to fall again, the farms will gradually turn to more than salt water driven agriculture and salt water driven aquaculture.

Where the channel variant instead of the roads variant is implemented aquaculture will surge tremendously in volume. Also than there will be a surge in leisure revenues too (as it will become a very biological rich green paradise). It will deliver an additional huge tourist sector too. But the channel variant will only be applied if there's no threat to underground fresh water aquifers, something that needs to be determined by local underground research.

Those who with hindsight conclude that theyíre no farmers at all (better said: those who will not be able to save equity or havenít done further investments out of farming revenues in the two starting years with payment holiday), but earn their living by servicing other farmers or other ways economic can make an arrangement to keep the farm with only 1 ha or soil, if they can prove to be able a payment schedule of E 600 per month a 15 years period. So they will not pay (as they don't got it) the budget room of E 30,000 and also not the infrastructure part of E 100,000 to make the choice for those who haven't well performed to step back as farmer (but still be able to stay in the same house if they have non-farming income) a little easier. On the other large part of the soil a new farmer will start/build a new company than. This arrangement is also the reason why at the start the buildings should be located/concentrated at a side of the land plot. As this will leave those who later on chose for external work and this land less payment model instead of farming will still be able to hold their buildings after they turned in their land. But the selection at start should prevent those detours.


Desert Nations' Perspectives

Whatís in for it for the desert nations? They get a lot. For free. Things like a massive investment wave, distributed private desert soil property rights by family farmers, free huge infrastructure projects (salt water, fresh water, roads, railways, harbours, airports, etc), free generation of a huge new tax base, a boost of employment rates at no state costs, a free huge agriculture/aquaculture focused education program, improvement of food security at no state costs, lowering of food prices at no costs for the state, electrification of the desert areas at no state costs, broad monetary stability (due structural less imports and structural more exports), green nature to the max for free, biodiversity to the max for free, human well-being to the max for free, approval ratings to the max for free, etc, etc, etc.

The desert nations will have this all at no own costs for them all at it. Even education (elementary school and high school) of also the children are integrated. Even fire fighters are integrated. Police tasks will be done by the nationís own police (but the wages and facilities will be paid for by the project). Military task will be done by the nationís own army (but the wages and facilities will be paid for by the project). So they get economic growth, a huge tax base enlargement and wide food security really at no costs.

In case of absorption of foreign migrants/refugees together with local entrepreneurs in a 1 to 1 ratio: The desert states can get this all somewhat subsidized (as foreign nations deliver some of the equity on which the finance is further build). In case of no absorption of foreign migrants/refugees (or lower ratios) the states still can get all of this at no costs nor budget issues, if they use our non-profit PPP joint realization model based on mix of state guarantee and (if wanted) also boosted by non-toxic/non-inflationary Productive QE of the central bank (as it reduces imports and boost exports, central banks can be interested a lot to extend the reach of their currency). Land ownership is crucial as foundation. Therefore the PPP model (so that the state by this has and holds it veto rights, but the interests of all other stakeholders (like investors and farmers) are protected too.


Europe/Africa Migrants Solution

Europe has an exploding immigrant problem, bigger than they could handle. Europe also has a protein production deficit. Africa has besides a young population just not yet the economy to serve these people. But Africa also has three yet not appreciated big advantages: deserts and access to sea water and has giant salt water aquifers. Why not combine those all and solve the mutual problems?

To break down the above described basic economics in some nutshell lines in the realm of an Europe/Africa migrants solution: All inclusive direct investment per family farm is E 100,000, this is inclusive startup period finance that ensures the first 2 years of operation of the farm. The external indirect investments (infrastructure and facilities) are also E 100,000 per farm. So the total investment is E 200,000. The equity/guarantee demand is 25%, so E 50,000 equity needed. An average refugee/migrant family/unit is 5 persons. So the investment/equity/guarantee is E 10,000 (aka E 10k) per refugee/migrant.

But: The host nations of course will demand something in return. Negotiations will start at the 'we do the same for your own population' negotiation position. But maybe they will demand more (even up to a 1 to 1 ratio: for each 1 refugee/migrant family 1 national family should have a farm too). This increases the equity/guarantee demand per migrant from E 10,000 to E 20,000, so we'll not be that easy with that. And there will be some competition between desert nations do the demands of the desert nations will not be that big, as the outcome of those investments are too attractive for them.

Note that this is an investment/equity/guarantee, this is not a cost. So the solution to the refugee/migrant problem can be done without costs. With as model bonuses: a) more rest/peace in the backyard of Europe and b) more turnover for European industries. Quite a paradigmatic change.

Migrants who don't pass the education/attitude tests or who donít want to become farmer can work at the construction or by facility companies. The migrant / domestic worker ratio is also something that will be used in the host nation negotiations. These workers will increase the tax base instantly: the workers will be paid national average wages and taxes will be paid on their wages. The host nations can demand import duties, but we will try to get an initial suspension of this (or it will be paid subordinated, as in woven it into the equity structure).


Finance Basket

As stated above the needed regular equity level at start isseued by a stakeholder will be 25%, the other 75% will be acquired out of the market. Later on the equity percentage needed will decline gradually as in slices structured finance and subordinated loans/guarantees will take over the role of regular equity.

Financing the capital demand will be done in a very diversified mix. But there are four central foundations under the finance structure.

1) Governments of desert nations that want to have their deserts transformed into economies can deliver state guarantees, the result is besides economy/employment/infrastructure also a tax base enlargement.

2) Central Banks of desert nations that want their currency to become more important in regional, continental, intercontinental and global trade can do DQE/PQE (by purchasing bonds) under conditions that parts of the trades will be done in their currency etc.

3) Governments of foreign nations that have for specific reasons interests in the realization of these desert economies (examples: Europe due to the migrant issue, China due to their silk road economic belt strategy, USA for don't want to be left behind reasons, etc) can deliver state guarantees under specific conditions to the design/function/output).

4) Central Banks of foreign nations that want their currency to become more (or stay) important in regional, continental, intercontinental and global trade can do DQE/PQE (by purchasing bonds) under conditions that parts of the trades will be done in their currency etc.

On top of these 4 finance 'foundations' also market finance will be realized, not only from pensionfunds and SWFs, but very diversified. Many of the finance models made by Planck Foundation for the energy transition market in the last 15 years (which can be found at http://www.planck.org/downloads/Energy-Finance.pdf) will be applied to the desert investments too.

On the external capital supply side profits can be made by external market actors. Just as that will be done in the external manufactured goods supply side. External finance actors can make profits on their capital supply/efforts for this hige development. The core organization which will have also a finance branch, and this branch will act just like all other branches in all it's functions 'not for profit', but just by the supply of manufactured goods almost all work is done by external parties, in capital arrangements much of the work will be done external parties too. The finance part of the core organization just/only make the arrangements market parties can fill in. Just as that's done with the procurement of manufactured goods.

Maintaining empires is quite expensive. The current empires are USA, EU, Russia and China. If the empires think their economic/political/monetary interests are served by our efforts: We happily facilitate them in their empire agendas as we have only one agenda: building vibrant desert economies by the use of salt water. We deliver. We take care that the empire 'subjects' this time for a change profit from the empire efforts. There's nothing wrong with a common realm of interest between desert nations and empires. As long both sides of the cooperation are served this is good and fruitful. Our model ensures / only delivers the realization of mutual/common interests.


Global Impact

Besides the huge regional impact, thereís also a huge global impact. When the Sahara desert in an area of 1,500 km times 5,000 km will be greened by this market driven relative very low investment combo model of seawater/halophytes this will deliver an 7,500,000 km2 green zone in the Sahara, the impact is huge. If the Middle East and Central Asia is done too the total greened area will be far more than 12,000,000 km2: which on itself already is quite a volume (25% of the global deserts which are 51 million km2, which is 1/3 of the global land mass). The global impact has three main facets: a) global economic, b) global ecologic and c) global (food) security.

The global economic impact is delivered as this model will lift the poorest 1.2 billion out of poverty and deliver them an economy (with the huge impact this will have on the global economy). Each 1 million km2 done lift 100 million people out of poverty (economics for 100 people per each 1 km2). Desert greening by seawater/halophytes based economics will end poverty in the Global Middle for ever.

When 12 million km2, which is only 25% (12 million km2 of the 51 million km2 actual global deserts there is) of the global desert areas will be greened with 5 farms of 5 people per farm per km2 and the surrounding economy first is 1 to 1 (200% total), growing via 1 to 2 (300% total) to 1 to 3 (400% total).

This 25% of the global desert surface (global deserts are in total 33% of the global landmass, so 25% of global deserts is 8% of global landmass) than delivers 12,000,000 times 5 farms per km2 is 60,000,000 farms, times 5 people per farm times is 300,000,000 direct by farms serviced people, times 4 for the non-farm sector that initial is powered/ignited by the farm sector is an economic foundation/prosperity for 1,200,000,000 (1.2 billion) people. The overall people density ratio than is 12 million km2 for 1.2 billion (is 1,200 million) people which is 100 people per km2. The overall investment amount than is 5 times E 200,000 is E 1,000,000 per km2, is E 10,000 per hectare, is E 1 invested per m2. The overall investment per local capita than is E 200,000 per 5 people farmer family, plus the 1 to 3 derivated economy, so 4 times 5 is 20, so E 10,000 per capita.

The total investment? That is 60,000,000 times a desert farm investment of E 200,000 (being E 70,000 buildings/equipment/household investment per desert family farm + E 30,000 first 2 year farm costs / family income per desert family farm + E 100,000 infrastructure/facilities) = E 12,000,000,000,000 aka E 12.0 trillion.

Doing another 12 million km2 (as in: an other 25% of the global deserts) will be another E 12.0 trillion. So for E 24.0 trillion investment we fix the world economic in a sustainable way in the 21st century: economic, ecologic and regarding to tensions/peace/migration. Plus we lift the poorest 2.4 billion into the global economy in a sustainable way, changing their/our lives/perspectives. As bonus we change 50% of the global deserts into sustainable wide biodiversity regions.

The return? Multiple of the investment in a sustainable way. By this model is getting an E 120 trillion advanced and sustainable global GDP/economy (now somewhere south of E 80 trillion) possible. We're already somewhere at 66% right now, this is the way to realize the last 33%. So each E 1 Trillion invested gives an annual (each year recurring) contribution of E 1 Trillion to the global GDP. Giving each of the 9 billion people on earth in 2050 an average E 13,333 (due an E 120 trillion global GDP by a 9 billion people population). Of course the average household income is quite higher than the per capita income, as households mostly are made out several persons. Speaking on global GDP figures: the concept of calculating the global GDP in one region's currency (USD, EUR, RUB or CNY) is not valid (it delivers too much weight to the value of one of those).

Investing by market means 20% of the global GDP over a period of 20 years (so only 1% of global GDP by market investment per year) will deliver this. And the already existing global economy will blossoms by it and become also more sustainable too. So the wanted/needed global GDP of E 120 trillion can become a reality. In a sustainable economic, ecologic and fiscal way. It's all about making the right choices. The beauty of it all: it can be done completely market driven, so it will not burden any government with debt (governments just have to regulate it). Another beauty of it? It can be done everywhere (in any desert) on any scale (national/bilateral/multilateral or even just regional) and by everyone (it's no rocket science). Yes, it's a configuration of several very specialist realms, but we know but we have the specialists in these realms (from finance, via realization, to output).

The global ecologic impact is delivered as the desert greening model turns 50% of 1/3 of the global landmass (which are deserts: 33% of global landmass) into huge biodiversity. Delivering rain (due cooling by water presence and water evaporation) to this 50% of 33% of the global land mass driest regions. It will store tremendous amounts of CO2 organic into the soil (something the global warming movement/believers like). In the business model the carbon rights are not calculated: we see them as a fraudulent system (both in science as in operation). Who said that all green or sustainable economy lovers should be of the fanatic branch of based on the exessive fear mongering Al Gore religion? Science and consensus are by definition two contrary words. Those who use those two contrary words in one line are not scientists, but more politicians: opinions over research. Science is about keep asking questions with an open mind. Always. And fear mongering is just wrong. Good models don't need to push fear or tell lies to convince people and governments.

The global (food) security impact is due the supply of such a productive volume will deliver global food security for ever, certainly as storage, grading and export facilities are integrated. The food output of such an area based on the intensive combined/integrated saltwater driven agriculture, salt water driven aquaculture and livestock is huge. Malthus his black views can be archived for ever. They already have been proven wrong since he invented them: they ignored the positive effects of both trade systems and human intellect driven innovation. So finally the Malthusian vision will be become a fossil of the past: obsolete for ever, even in energy terms (as the model is renewable energy based and energy positive: more clean power export than hydrocarbon import). Malthusians need just to increase their daily Prozac intake, their dark views will not have any scientific foundation. Desert greening will not lead to overpopulation of the world (as the world population will peak at 9 billion in 2050 and then sharply will age and decline due low birth rates: the Japan syndrome). But the impact of this goes further than food security only: it delivers wider security/peace by less tensions.

This desert economics model is not only for Africa or the Middle East. Just one other example: China and the AIBB can use this model too to empower/diversify the 'iron silk road'/'silk economic belt' model. It delivers instant revenues and empowers the hinterland economies and will deliver food surpluses that could be export directly by rail to the whole of China. This desert economics model could empower the 'heartland' (the EurAsian landmass) very much (see MacKinder's heartland theory to understand the importance of this). After decades where the high seas determined the global economy, for the 21th century the inlands will quest this position of the high seas severely: delivering huge geo-economic and therefore geo-political changes.



See also International Currency Stability
See also Europe: Diagnosis and Prescription
See also Governmental Funding Turbulence
See also Labour Taxation
See also Money Creation
See also Energy Open Finance Platform
See also Global PV Solar Energy Finance Model
See also EQE/EBS Model Summary Diagram
See also BQE: Bilateral Currency Swaps
See also Gold Backing vs EQE/EBS Backing
See also Secular Stagnation as Denial Term
See also Financial QE vs Productive QE
See also Productive Capitalism Perspectives
See also Emerging Nations - Electricity PPP
See also Emerging Nations - Solar PPP
See also Easy Instant Solarizing Nations
See also Making The Euro More Offensive
See also Structural EU/EC Boat Refugees Solution



See also International Currency Stability
See also Europe: Diagnosis and Prescription
See also Governmental Funding Turbulence
See also Labour Taxation
See also Money Creation
See also Energy Open Finance Platform
See also Global PV Solar Energy Finance Model
See also EQE/EBS Model Summary Diagram
See also BQE: Bilateral Currency Swaps
See also Gold Backing vs EQE/EBS Backing
See also Secular Stagnation as Denial Term
See also Financial QE vs Productive QE
See also Productive Capitalism Perspectives
See also Emerging Nations - Electricity PPP
See also Emerging Nations - Solar PPP
See also Easy Instant Solarizing Nations
See also Making The Euro More Offensive
See also Structural EU/EC Boat Refugees Solution



See also Global Solar Rollout - Description - Diagram
See also Regional Solar Rollout - Description - Diagram
See also Obama Administration Energy Strategy
See also China As Global Leading Solar Energy Nation
See also Open Finance Platform for Energy Investments
See also Iceland 3.0: Geothermal and Energy as Currency
See also Addressing Economic Decline of the Global West
See also IntraContinental: Continental Rail Schedules
See also Global West Enters Economic Adulthood
See also Global East Driven Globalization 2.0
See also Financial Capitalism vs Productive Capitalism
See also CIRI (China India Russia Iran) Avoids Dollar
See also Global West Gets A Common Currency
See also What Ended Global West Dominance
See also National Economic Development Organizations
See also Desert Investment Economics
See also Ending Global Poverty (By Sea Water Irrigation)



See also Global Deserts Exploration Model
See also WaterTech and MicroCredit Merge
See also Lupin As Soy Replacer
See also Global Seed Cartels Aren't Right
See also Global Food Model: Local to Global
See also Sun / Earth Interactions
See also Telco 3.0 : Telco out of the Cloud
See also National Business Clusters Abroad
See also Scientific Education/Research Funding
See also Iran: National Economic Plan
See also Immigrants and Trade
See also Emerging Nations - Minerals PPP
See also Emerging Nations - Deserts PPP
See also Emerging Nations - Energy PPP
See also National Solar Fund Model
See also Secular Islamic Finance
See also Open Energy Finance Platform



Gijs Graafland / Planck Foundation / Amsterdam 2015





Back to Main Site





Planck Foundation