Although I don't agree with George "Moonbat" on much or with the anthro global warming comments within the piece, I agree with the salient points made here. I think it's bizarre to burn food for fuel, and awful to plow forests for this purpose. Some of the emerging algae-based biofuels processes seem encouraging to me, but growing corn or palm oil for this purpose is a path I think we'll regret.
1 posted on
03/30/2007 6:21:51 AM PDT by
Uncledave
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-28 next last
To: RedStateRocker; Dementon; eraser2005; Calpernia; DTogo; Maelstrom; Yehuda; babble-on; ...
Renewable Energy Ping Please Freep Mail me if you'd like on/off
2 posted on
03/30/2007 6:22:15 AM PDT by
Uncledave
To: Uncledave
I guess it's lights-out for planet Earth, then. Hey, let's not all be sad. It was a good run.
3 posted on
03/30/2007 6:28:48 AM PDT by
Rutles4Ever
(Ubi Petrus, ibi ecclesia, et ubi ecclesia vita eterna)
To: Uncledave
4 posted on
03/30/2007 6:29:31 AM PDT by
Incorrigible
(If I lead, follow me; If I pause, push me; If I retreat, kill me.)
To: Uncledave
Growing plants to use for fuel is somthing that would not happen in today's world, except for the intervention of busybodies in the marketplace.
And to stop it, all that needs to happen is for the busybodies to but out. Geroge Moonbat is one of the busybodies himself. And I'm sure that his solution is one that will involve more busybody tinkering to fix the problems caused by previous busybody tinkering.
To: Uncledave
I guess we better take care of the environment.
6 posted on
03/30/2007 6:33:11 AM PDT by
DungeonMaster
(Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's.)
To: Uncledave
We'll never "save" the planet. It'll die off eventually as the sun burns itself up.
To: Uncledave
Some of the emerging algae-based biofuels processes seem encouraging to me, but growing corn or palm oil for this purpose is a path I think we'll regret.Is there a coherent reason for your aversion? Why is burning crops for fuel bizarre? The diesel engine was originally designed to run on peanut and corn oil, so its certainly not something new.
The only objections in this article are the usual enviro-wacko BS; killing rainforests, starving the poor, CO2 causing global warming.
Diesel engines running biodiesel is one of the only workable energy solution to reduce dependence on foreign oil, and when Honda releases their diesels in the US, I'll be first in line to get one. They're more efficient, faster, and can run on fuel that doesn't come from terrorist countries.
Honda Diesel Sets New World Records
8 posted on
03/30/2007 6:37:03 AM PDT by
GunRunner
(Rudy 2008, because conservatives can't win.)
To: Uncledave
The governments using biofuel to tackle global warming
What governments would those be?
9 posted on
03/30/2007 6:37:16 AM PDT by
P-40
(Al Qaeda was working in Iraq. They were just undocumented.)
To: Uncledave
Although I don't agree with George "Moonbat" on much or with the anthro global warming comments within the piece, I agree with the salient points made here. I think it's bizarre to burn food for fuel, and awful to plow forests for this purpose. Some of the emerging algae-based biofuels processes seem encouraging to me, but growing corn or palm oil for this purpose is a path I think we'll regret.
If every arable acre of land in this country was planted with corn, and every bit of that corn used to make ethanol, it still wouldn't be enough. Making ethanol from crops is a losing proposition.
10 posted on
03/30/2007 6:38:58 AM PDT by
JamesP81
(Eph 6:12)
To: Uncledave
Do you think wholesale milk prices rising 9% by next fall has anything to do with converting corn into ethanol instead of feed?
Poor Mexicans are having problems buying tortillas because of corn prices rising to unaffordable levels.
Also read a couple days ago that some farmers are having problems getting seed corn because more corn is being planted.
11 posted on
03/30/2007 6:39:15 AM PDT by
zek157
To: Uncledave
This is what happens when the governments try to fix "social" problems. They can't see past their own nose.
MTBE anyone? C'mon California, tell 'em about MTBE.
13 posted on
03/30/2007 6:41:28 AM PDT by
Tenacious 1
(No to nitwit jesters with a predisposition of self importance and unqualified political opinions!)
To: Uncledave
I'm surprised that the hemp folks haven't chimed in yet. The stuff grows like weeds in places where food crops don't do well and has a number of other uses (besides the the favored one of the hemp crowd).
Wasting corn on biofuel does not make sense due to the degree of care and cultivation required.
15 posted on
03/30/2007 6:44:00 AM PDT by
JimRed
("Hey, hey, Teddy K., how many girls did you drown today?" (Hello, I'm a TAGLINE virus. Please help m)
To: Uncledave
If we are going to grow a crop for fuel, it won't be corn or soybeans. We have to be careful here not to throw the baby out with the bathwater. Enviro objection to biofuels is grounded in their desire to reverse the industrial revolution. They advocate alternative energy specifically because they think it's not feasible. When they start backpedaling, that indicates to me that they are afraid it might actually work. I don't think any one alternative energy source will cure all of our problems. But a mix of alternatives along with conservation and nuclear would make a big dent.
16 posted on
03/30/2007 6:44:21 AM PDT by
beef
(Who Killed Kennewick Man?)
To: Uncledave
Hey, I just had an idea. Let the price of fuels go up as demand outstrips supply and prople will find ways to live with less fuel. And besides that, they will be forced to find practical alternatives. Where do I sign up for my Nobel prize?
17 posted on
03/30/2007 6:44:33 AM PDT by
tickmeister
(tickmeister)
To: Uncledave
Malarkey. The long-term effect of the increase in biofuels will be a LARGER availability of food. What do you think is going to happen to the left-over protein portions from corn and soybeans after the sugar content of the first and the oil content of the second is removed?? They'll be sold AS FOOD.
The current price increase is simply a temporary phenomenon as the US farmers gear up for increased production.
To: Uncledave
We need a five-year freeze on the enviralists.
To: Uncledave; sully777; Fierce Allegiance; vigl; Cagey; Abathar; A. Patriot; B Knotts; getsoutalive; ..
First rule of civilization: Don't burn your food.......
28 posted on
03/30/2007 6:57:24 AM PDT by
Red Badger
(If it's consensus, it's not science. If it's science, there's no need for consensus......)
To: Uncledave
From the Guardian, no less.
29 posted on
03/30/2007 6:59:00 AM PDT by
Yo-Yo
(USAF, TAC, 12th AF, 366 TFW, 366 MG, 366 CRS, Mtn Home AFB, 1978-81)
To: Uncledave
So where did they get five years from? I figure it's from the same place most statistics come from with envirowhackos, from their tuckus.
37 posted on
03/30/2007 7:03:52 AM PDT by
dfwgator
(The University of Florida - Championship U)
To: Uncledave
40 posted on
03/30/2007 7:07:06 AM PDT by
anglian
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-28 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson