[WMCoolmon]

Virgin makes the first biofuel-powered flight

Funny how sustainability and environmentalism are diametrically opposed here.

[Nuclear1]

Hippies don't like a lot of things.

[Ford Prefect]

Eh, my understanding is that environmentalist objections to biofuel are pretty much valid.

[Zoltan]

Eh, my understanding is that environmentalist objections to biofuel are pretty much valid.

Actually, they really aren't valid.

They are dead wrong on issues ranging from ethanol being a poor fuel, to canola ruining the environment.

[Ford Prefect]

I was under the impression that the agricultural processes that produce the crops are nowhere near carbon neutral.

[perihelion]

Your impressions are correct.  Even if the majority of bio-ethanol in the US wasn't being produced from corn (one of the least efficient of all possible methods available), it still would not be carbon neutral because modern agriculture is not carbon-neutral irrespective of crop.  This biofuel craze is just an excuse to pump more money into an already horrifically bloated corn industry.  And, the automotive industry loves it because it requires hardly any new innovation on their end.

[Zoltan]

I was under the impression that the agricultural processes that produce the crops are nowhere near carbon neutral.

That particular controversy revolves around ethanol produced from corn. Some studies say that quite a bit of energy is gained, while others say that energy is lost; it really depends on who you are going to believe. Regardless, this is just for ethanol made from corn, ethanol can be made from other crops, and even some of the studies that state that ethanol from corn is inefficient, still support ethanol made from other crops.

I admit that I'm not that knowledgeable about ethanol, I'm much better informed when it comes to biodiesel, especially biodiesel made from canola.

[Zoltan]

Your impressions are correct.  Even if the majority of bio-ethanol in the US wasn't being produced from corn (one of the least efficient of all possible methods available), it still would not be carbon neutral because modern agriculture is not carbon-neutral irrespective of crop.  This biofuel craze is just an excuse to pump more money into an already horrifically bloated corn industry.  And, the automotive industry loves it because it requires hardly any new innovation on their end.

I have to disagree with you, especially in regards to biodiesel. I don't see rapeseed crops adding to the "bloated corn industry".

[Col. Fishguts]

Regardless of which crop you use, if you do some number crunching to estimate how much crop would be needed to produce enough biofuel to replace the majority of the current fossil fuel consumption  ... well it's an awful lot. And considering that there are still an awful lot of people starving each day, it seems even more cynical.

[Kazan]

there are a lot of valid complaints about biofuel

A) it's still a green house gas emitting fuel
B) raising crops to make it displaces food crops
C) it's caused more land to be cleared (cut out more rainforest, etc further harming the environment).

list goes on

[Admiral_Stones]

Regardless of which crop you use, if you do some number crunching to estimate how much crop would be needed to produce enough biofuel to replace the majority of the current fossil fuel consumption  ... well it's an awful lot. And considering that there are still an awful lot of people starving each day, it seems even more cynical.

You know, if we wouldn't all feed our ****ing crop to animals (I'm ESPECIALLY looking to you americans right now), there would be more then enough food for everyone. Transport and such are other terms though.

[Kazan]

because.. yeah.. we can all become vegetarians

or NOT because that's not ****ing healthy.. plus there is plenty of land that is good for grazing but bad for growing crops.

[TrashMan]

what's wrong with animals?

You got some problems with humans  having pets or feeding animals?

[Kazan]

what's wrong with animals?

You got some problems with humans  having pets or feeding animals?

he's talking about how much land it takes growing feed for animals that are raised just for the meat industry.

yes.. sure if we didn't raise them we could have enough cereal grains to feed the entire planet.... an unhealthy diet lacking essential proteins.

sorry i'm not giving up MY HEALTH so that excess population can be fed.

want to really fight world hunger? teach people not to squeeze out babies every 9 ****ing months uintil they have a brood of a dozen.

[Admiral_Stones]

I'm not talking about removing all animals. But a simple look will tell you that many humans are eating more then a healthy amount of food. Also it would reduce the methan (which is about 20 times worse then CO2 and the like) which currently sits at a whopping 50 Million tons a day. 150 Gramm meat every two to three days is enough.

[Zoltan]

there are a lot of valid complaints about biofuel

A) it's still a green house gas emitting fuel
B) raising crops to make it displaces food crops
C) it's caused more land to be cleared (cut out more rainforest, etc further harming the environment).

list goes on

A) The US Department of Agriculture has stated findings that show that biodiesel reduces green house emissions by up to 50%
B) This is a common misconception, but definitely not true. Most people think that if a farmer is growing one thing, he can certainly not grow another, but this is false. The truth is that there are periods where fields are being unused (often for a year), and crops such as rapeseed and other biofuel crops could provide a valuable rotation crop for an otherwise unused field.
C) In point "B" I stated that farmers could use their existing land, and they in fact will. It is certainly true that new land could be cleared if biofuels became important enough, but I have always viewed biofuels as a temporary, yet important, solution.

[achtung]

I see biofuels as great transitional fuels.

[NGTM-1R]

I'm not talking about removing all animals. But a simple look will tell you that many humans are eating more then a healthy amount of food. Also it would reduce the methan (which is about 20 times worse then CO2 and the like) which currently sits at a whopping 50 Million tons a day. 150 Gramm meat every two to three days is enough.

If you want to cut down on the methane emissions, then much as the cows would like to be destroying the world, the real problem is the goats.

And most of them don't live here.

[Nuke]

i think we should melt all the fat people and use their oils as fuel.

[Admiral_Stones]

You want to wipe the USA clear of life?