Posted on 03/28/2015 8:38:22 AM PDT by aimhigh
A new study found that government biofuel policies rely on reductions in food consumption to generate greenhouse gas savings.
Shrinking the amount of food that people and livestock eat decreases the amount of carbon dioxide that they breathe out or excrete as waste. The reduction in food available for consumption, rather than any inherent fuel efficiency, drives the decline in carbon dioxide emissions in government models, the researchers found.
"Without reduced food consumption, each of the models would estimate that biofuels generate more emissions than gasoline,"
(Excerpt) Read more at sciencedaily.com ...
No need to read further, this isn't written by a scientist.
It's obviously written by a fool that somehow thinks livestock will go to market just as fast on a reduced diet as those on full feed.
Nice to have the idiot stuff right upfront. Saves time.
Ha...when global cooling kicks in there won’t be so much grain production....so there will be a lot less cows, sheep, pigs, goats.....and humans.
So that’s why a box of cereal is about as big as a box of smokes. I thought it was only to try to fool us into believing the low inflation lie.
The cereal companies will have to start making the physical flakes smaller so they may be put into the now smaller boxes.
Pretty soon we will be eating powdered cereal dust.
This fits right in with UN Agenda 21’s goal of killing-off 6.5 billion excess human beings.
Start with yourselves! Or have a bullet for lunch.
Biofuel policies seek ti milk the taxpayer and consumer of giga-dollars to the benefit of politicians and rentseeking oligarchical parasites.
He wrote it inartfully, the author could have stated that reduced feed for livestock results in higher prices for feed, resulting in lower numbers of livestock raised. He probably assumed that the reader would be intelligent enough to know this.
Your assertion that the author implied the same number of livestock would continue to be raised is far more specious than anything the author wrote. So perhaps you should reconsider who is a fool, and what is and isn’t “idiot stuff”.
Or the assumption that biofuels leads to less fodder for livestock and thus fewer livestock overall.
The emissions would either come out of you...the cow...or a tail pipe.
Don’t see that anything would be cut except the number of farts.
The slogan for us right wingers opposed to biofuel....More Farts.
Because, ya know, the world really needs more carbs, sugars and fats that biofuel is made from.
the exact same amount of carbon is turned into carbondioxide by burning it in a gasoline engine or burning it in a biological engine this entire premise is foolish, and a good example why government spending on social issues is also foilish.
Perhaps that has a lot to do with the lack of nutrition in processed foods? Lots of calories so you die fat.
The whole concept of CO2 as a pollutant is a lie.
The whole concept of freon destroying the ozone layer is a lie.
The whole concept of budget cuts is a lie.
Anything presented by the RATagansists is a lie.
Oh, so Michelle starving the school children is not enough? Now corn will be made into ethanol, even though it causes more pollution and ruins engines? Didn’t Stalin starve 50,000,000 citizens, because they would not go along with his policies? And what was the need for ethanol in the first place? To stop the use of fossil fuels? This administration is trying to kill us, one way or the other. Wake up America!
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.