The Best Global Warming Videos on the Internet |
Posted on 05/01/2008 11:40:48 AM PDT by ChessExpert
Why are 2.5 billion people -- more than 40 percent of the human race -- in imminent danger of famine? The threat is real, but its solutions aren‘t what the United Nations, the Green Lobby, or the Carbon Threat/Greenhouse Gases lunatics want you to believe.
A billion people live on less than $1 a day. Another 1.5 billion people live on $1 to $1.5 a day. For them, any substantial rise in the price of staple grains like rice or wheat is potentially fatal. Yet since January, according to The Economist magazine, global rice prices have soared 142 percent. Last year, global wheat prices rose 77 percent. Why?
The first crucial point to remember is that global harvests have been excellent for the past two years, especially in the leading food producing nations.
(Excerpt) Read more at humanevents.com ...
BIODIESEL IS PEOPLE! (A tribute to Charlton Heston in Soylent Green)
Non-corn ethanol
Outlaw all use of food crops for biofuels.
Solving the obesity problem the good old fashion way...
You’d think no one has ever heard of switch grass.
Diesel.
Farming runs on diesel.
And food distribution runs on diesel. Raise the price of diesel and you raise the price of everything. Its the hidden cost that drives almost everything. Diesel goes up, milk goes up, and eggs, and everything else along with it.
I prefer corn ethanol sipped from a bottle of good A.H. Hirsch bourbon whiskey.
With all this Socailist wealth redistribution, you gonna lose a few off the bottom rung.
No, No, No.
No.
Just stop mandating the use of any particular chemical. Let the market decide. Only a government mandate can cause a famine.
Oddly enough, the morons who caused this disaster will not accept any responsibility for the consequences. Mostly because they are the ones in control of the LSM.
Just remember to look every politician who touts their vote for the Energy Bill straight in the eye and say:
“Baby Killer.”
It is time to treat them all the same way they have treated anyone who supports the military.
I don’t understand all the panic about ethanol. Up untill this past year the price of wheat has been so cheap that many farmers couldn’t even afford to grow it. We grew it one year because we had rented land that we wanted to keep control of and so we needed to plant something but it cost more to raise the wheat then we could get in payment for it. Now, this last year, the price of wheat has shot up to several times what it was which is great for farmers because there it means that there are now some open land crops that are actually worth growing. However, biofuel didn’t just start up this last year so I think it is unfair to blame the price of wheat on bio-fuel’s. I also think it is crazy to expect food to remain so cheep that noone can afford to grow it.
The environmentalists want us to walk and die, not necessarily in that order, so as to protect “mother earth”.
Ethanol is a win-win for them.
“Why are 2.5 billion people — more than 40 percent of the human race — in imminent danger of famine?”
What is not being considered is that these 2.5 billion starving people are great candidates to become communists and Muslim fundamentalists. This world will regret having started on this ethanol path to social destruction.
Wheat, as you surely know, has its own dynamic: recent droughts and/or crop failures in Pakistan, Kazakhstan, parts of Europe, Ukraine, and Australia (2 bad years in a row for the Aussies).
Couple of good crop years, and wheat is back to $4.00-4.50. It's far less water-intensive than corn, beans, cotton, milo and rice, too, which will encourage heavy planting of the winter crop this fall in numerous locations.
Ok, most of the complaints I had heard where dealing with the price of food generally and so I assumed they were including the price of bread in their complaints. As long as the price of wheat is high, however, I am sure that it will raise the price of corn and other open field crops. Since, wheat can be relatively easily grown in most climates and people will switch to wheat if the prices for the other crops don’t raise somewhat to match.
The Best Global Warming Videos on the Internet |
Price of bread is driven mostly by price of energy. Heat to bake it, of course, plus bread, on a per weight basis, is VERY expensive to transport.
Net effect: a worldwide shift away from motor gasoline to #2 oil. And the farmer and the trucker will pay disproportionately for these loony policies in China and Wonderland (that's the Eurozone, for those in Rio Linda). And then, naturally, the consumer will pay.
Dontcha just LOVE goobermint?
This is bunk. Even the UN says 850 million, which is about the usual percentage and the problem is distribution.
China is **demanding** that their citizens drive diesel cars, and the Euroweenies are ''suggesting'' the same thing (it will shortly become a demand, don't worry).
Net effect: a worldwide shift away from motor gasoline to #2 oil.
Actually, a hybrid-electric car could be made with a diesel engine which ran on (mostly) gasoline.The "dual fuel diesel" was invented for use in Alaska, I believe, for remote locations where natural gas was locally available and diesel fuel was expensive to ship in. The trick was to use a carburetor set too lean to autoignite, and use the diesel fuel injectors to inject only a pilot charge to function as an overgrown spark plug to cause combustion. The system gave better fuel efficiency (and less diesel knock) than the conventional diesel.
The chief limitation on it is that you can't vary the amount of fuel you provide to the engine per power stroke since the fuel mixture is uniform, and its richness must be set within narrow limits for the unit to operate.
The only control you can impose on its power output is by holding down the RPM by controlling the torque load the engine sees. Thus, you need an electric generator as your load, rather than a mechanical transmission with discrete gear ratios. The use of a dual fuel diesel in a hybrid car would seem to be the system of choice for those who are fanatical about fuel economy . . .
The laws requiring ethanol production should be repealed. They are counter-productive and harmful to consumers and the economy.
http://www.energyjustice.net/ethanol/factsheet.html
Actually, the Department of Energy should be dismantled. Government is not the “solution”, government is the problem.
Everyone who agrees, please write to your Congressmorons.
Drive whatever widget you like. Until we drill, and nuke, and do coal liquefaction and gasification, all your twaddle about ''hybrid-engine'' and ''hydrogen'' and, for all I know, ''100-mpg carbeuration'' will continue apace.
It's all crap, all of it, illiterate both as to chemistry and as to physics.
The fact that goobermints, China and the Wonderlanders, are effectively INSISTING on a shift in product demand from motor gasoline to diesel (#2 oil) SHOULD tell you something -- such as, specifically!, how to make all the profit you want for the rest of your life.
Truly, I'm sorry it has not. Or, ideally, has not yet told you how. Well, here's a hint, anyway: When the power-mad assert a 'consensus', fade their sorry asses. When the power-mad are known to be bureaudorks and other assorted parasites, BORROW MONEY, and fade the sorry asses.
I trust that I was sufficiently clear, here. (g!)
I sometimes think that I would give -- purely give -- an eye if I could see any 100 high-level goobermint Dep't of Energy bureaudork morons shot at dawn. Yes, before you ask, the energy bureaudorks are -- regarding fact -- QUITE that useless and dangerous. It'd be worth an eye.
Knock off the friendly fire!I have no brief at all for the Democrat's implementation of rules which force the oil companies, collectively, to behave exactly as they would if they had a monopoly. That is, to drill less and refine less oil than the market will pay for.
The Democrats want to produce a monopoly profit situation in the oil companies, then demonize the oil companies and appropriate those profits to their own ends. Which, ultimately, is no different from nationalizing the oil companies. They have no intent to benefit the public.
The use of a dual fuel diesel in a hybrid car would seem to be the system of choice for those who are fanatical about fuel economy . . .
I am not fanatical about fuel economy. I think it is good, but there are other qualities I like in a car - such as a sticker price I can afford, room for the grandchildren, and the ability of a car to get out of its own way.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.