It would be better if we, as in the US, would drill more and pump more oil. That is plenty of oil under ANWR Alaska but the environmentalist have prevented us from drilling there. Environmentalist have also prevented drilling near shore in the gulf of Mexico. So in the eyes of the environmentalist it's better to let people in the world starve to death and have up pay higher food prices just so we can turn food into fuel and not drill for oil in the vast wasteland of northern Alaska.
--The rainforests cannot be replaced by agricultural production related with biofuels production. The region is not suitable for soy or sugar cane plantations.--
If it's so unsuitable, then why are there crops growing on two thirds of the deforrested area?
Brazil is decreasing deforestation while increasing sugar cane production! The rainforests cannot be replaced by agricultural production related with biofuels production.. The region is not suitable for soy or sugar cane plantations. In the other regions, the farmers are replacing their traditional production by sugar cane or soy beams... as for CO2 emissions, the relevant fact is the CO2 balance... thats why biofuels are important.
You said pump more oil... but in fact it means: hey Saudis, Iranians, Hugo Chaves, Russians pump more oil for us please! Youre kidding dude... you must be kiddin.. and not mentioning the fact that they will answer: OK pay me 100 bucks per barreln and Ill do it... You said diesel also. Are you talkin serious? Diesel comes from oil dude.. oil! And you cant produce one barrel of diesel from one barrel fo oil.. so, youre wrong dude.. wrong.
Listen, in Brazil is MANDATORY to commercialize gasoline blended with 24% of ethanol... so, your 14% is strange. And I didnt mention the cars that are running 100% ethanol right now. And now, brazilian diesel is blended with biodiesel and Hbio.. and goal is to REDUCE consumption of oil not to eliminate it... thats the goal dude, oil independence not oil elimination
Brazil shows how crappy ethanol can be with even the best feedstocks. Brazil gets less than 14% of it's fuel from ethanol greyfalcon. net/ brazil.png And while Diesel is a good step forward, Thats only because of it's 41% more fuel effecient than gasoline. A Diesel VW Jetta is comprable to a Prius. You want the REAL Green cars of the future, right now? Go electric. And fill up for only 3 cent per mile. greyfalcon. net/ electriccars.png greyfalcon. net/ electriccars2.png
It would be better if we, as in the US, would drill more and pump more oil. That is plenty of oil under ANWR Alaska but the environmentalist have prevented us from drilling there. Environmentalist have also prevented drilling near shore in the gulf of Mexico. So in the eyes of the environmentalist it's better to let people in the world starve to death and have up pay higher food prices just so we can turn food into fuel and not drill for oil in the vast wasteland of northern Alaska.
robertg222 3 years ago
If CO2 is the relevant factor, then why is Brazil doing Biofuels?
Locally grown switchgrass would produce roughly double the ammount of ethanol as sugarcane.
And yet Switchgrass would only decrease CO2 by 4% compared to Oil.
Meanwhile slightly raise smog and cancer causing emmisions if it were burned as E85.
And if it had to be imported from thousands of miles away, it could quite easily be worse than Oil.
greyfalcon. net/ ethanol2
greyfalcon. net/ ethanol3
greyflcn 4 years ago
re: jlxp1960
--The rainforests cannot be replaced by agricultural production related with biofuels production. The region is not suitable for soy or sugar cane plantations.--
If it's so unsuitable, then why are there crops growing on two thirds of the deforrested area?
greyfalcon. net/ biofuels4
greyflcn 4 years ago
Brazil is decreasing deforestation while increasing sugar cane production! The rainforests cannot be replaced by agricultural production related with biofuels production.. The region is not suitable for soy or sugar cane plantations. In the other regions, the farmers are replacing their traditional production by sugar cane or soy beams... as for CO2 emissions, the relevant fact is the CO2 balance... thats why biofuels are important.
jlxp1960 4 years ago
But I can tell you what is happening from their biofuels program
Deforestation
news. bbc. co. uk/ 2/ hi/ americas/ 4561189.stm
Hell of a lot more CO2 emissions than they prevent.
greyfalcon. net/ biofuel
And all the while the air quality still sucks.
greyflcn 4 years ago 2
Uhm no, I mean BRAZIL pump more oil for BRAZIL.
They pump a comparable amount as Venezuela. (i.e. where America gets about 1/4th their oil, more than we get from Saudi Arabia)
Hell, if you check the buildup schedule they have for their oil drilling, thats pretty much exactly what they are doing.
They aren't making any headway with their biofuels at all.
greyfalcon. net/ brazil
greyflcn 4 years ago
You said pump more oil... but in fact it means: hey Saudis, Iranians, Hugo Chaves, Russians pump more oil for us please! Youre kidding dude... you must be kiddin.. and not mentioning the fact that they will answer: OK pay me 100 bucks per barreln and Ill do it... You said diesel also. Are you talkin serious? Diesel comes from oil dude.. oil! And you cant produce one barrel of diesel from one barrel fo oil.. so, youre wrong dude.. wrong.
jlxp1960 4 years ago
If oil independence is the goal, they could easily just pump more oil.
Ironically Brazil has horrible air pollution.
Their solution?
1) Only allow people to drive every other day of the week.
2) Hybrid Electric Buses
eia. doe. gov/ emeu/ cabs/ brazenv.html
greyflcn 4 years ago
Listen, in Brazil is MANDATORY to commercialize gasoline blended with 24% of ethanol... so, your 14% is strange. And I didnt mention the cars that are running 100% ethanol right now. And now, brazilian diesel is blended with biodiesel and Hbio.. and goal is to REDUCE consumption of oil not to eliminate it... thats the goal dude, oil independence not oil elimination
jlxp1960 4 years ago
greyflcn 4 years ago