The tide turns against biofuels

More at http://therealnews.com/c.php?c=080401YT
As biofuel production booms, concerns grow about food supply

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• climate
• change
• global
• warming
• news
• biofuel
• food
• crisis

[withoutmercyuk]

Grow HEMP! Ethanol can be derived from cannabis, the trees are saved, the air is clean, the soil is perfect, the wildlife is cared for, it needs NO pesticides. It replaces OIL. Go on, run from the solution...and while your at it, run from the cure. I can think of 75,ooo reasons to use a herb that has a 10000 year GOOD, GLOBAL history. All most can think of is smoking it causes axe murderers. Who told you that??? Oh ya, dupont. Whos among those behind all this bio-fuel, wood burning, no food BS??

[Rle8752]

The future lies in nuclear/solar power.

[mphello]

How will biofuels grown from algae in ANY way hurt food supply?

Do millions of people eat algae?

I have ZERO tolerance for the hypocrisy of those who object to biofuels hurting food supply but who EAT MEAT and saying nothing about half our crops destroyed to feed livestock, and who say NOTHING about world overpopulation and stand in the way of anti-natalists who fight to reduce population humanely with birth control.

[mphello]

anoniab is just a paid propagandist by the Koch brothers.

What a TOTAL lie that he's "examined both sides". What a load of BULLSHIT.

The proof of anthropogenic global warming (AGW) is stronger now than it was a year ago. Go to climatecrocks (dot) com or skepticalscience (dot) com to get educated.

[mphello]

The REAL evil is MEAT!  Murdering BILLIONS of animals each year unnecessarily because selfish crybabies won't go vegan.

Meat is the BIGGEST waste and destroyer of crops. Half our crops are fed to livestock. Those crops could feed people DIRECTLY much more efficiently.

[anoniab]

You've not addressed one single concern I've raised, like the latex paint, nor the misplacement of the surface stations, nor the fact that it's been hotter in the past with lower CO2. If you want to discuss this further, then start addressing the problems with the theory of AGW. Until then I've no mor to say to you.

[anoniab]

Whether you believe the Bible or not is irrelevant, the Tower of Babel is an appropriate analogy to what's going on here.

[anoniab]

It is you that doesn't recognize the lack of consensus on the global warming issue; it is you that is being selective and are ignoring those that disagree. As per the IPCC, I prefer to examine evidence, not follow the high priests that are following one - I repeat, 1 set of data that has been grossly manipulated to mean whatever they want it to mean. I used to be a believer in AGW; I'm not any more. I've examined both sides; there's evidence enough to refute it.

[anoniab]

"The current consensus"

What "concensus"?

[anoniab]

"the only switch we're actually touching right now is the CO2 (and maybe methane from our cattle"

I don't think we have any more cattle than there were buffalo when the US was first settled. What about the herds of wildebeast, zebra, etc in Africa? Is their methane any different?

[anoniab]

It's not a switch because we don't have enough of an effect when 96-97% is created by something else. Trying to control the climate is man's new "Tower of Babel". Climate models don't work. You want to know what the climate is doing, read the Iowa report on the last 10 years - and if I recall correctly, there are other states with similar studies that show they are also cooling.

[anoniab]

We will not have a "runaway greenhouse effect". You fail to see how well balanced the planet is.

The glaciers were melting faster in the 40's. Where you hiked won't be all rock for long if the ice stays gone. Take a look at the Muir glacier before and after. Glaciers advance and recede; always have. It's far from a catastrophe (unless you're living in the way of one that's advancing.)