[DRB]

I wonder who put the bee in Castro's bonnet about biofuel....

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17850102/

In Thursday's article Castro said more than 3 billion people in the world were condemned to die prematurely of hunger or thirst from plans by his ideological foe, the United States, to convert foodstuffs like corn into fuel for cars.

"This is not an exaggerated figure, it's more likely cautious," Castro wrote in the ruling Communist Party's daily newspaper. "I've been meditating quite a bit since President Bush's meeting with North American automobile makers."

I suspect it won't be long before his "boy" begins a rant about biofuel.

 

[DRB]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18551000/

Uh oh now the UN doesn't like biofuel...

Biofuels like ethanol can help reduce global warming and create jobs for the rural poor, but the benefits may be offset by serious environmental problems and increased food prices for the hungry, the United Nations concluded Tuesday in its first major report on bioenergy.

 

[Silver]

They are talking about corn ethanol. Sugar cane produced stuff is ok.

 

[MikeD]

America needs cars that run on fat. Lipo yourself and keep that SUV rolling at the same blissful time...

 

[$tinkle]

America needs cars that run on fat. Lipo yourself and keep that SUV rolling at the same blissful time...

add to that bass.
like that sub in hunt for red oktober that ran on magnetohydrodynamic energy

 

[jimmydean]

In Oregon, the biofuel used by Tri-Met to run all the city buses is made from soybeans that weren't selling in Eastern Oregon. They signed a contract that allowed the farmers to keep farming while helping reduce the use of fossil fuel.

Tri-Met is using something like 5% bio, but it's in every bus in town.

Also, the corn that will be used to produced E85 in Pendleton, OR is a fraction of what gets shipped overseas. The number of trips will increase slightly, but the availability of corn for livestock and food will remain unchanged.

 

[3D.]

I look at it like;

higher biofuel production = more established farms that run on biofuel to grow it

I'm not so sure it will effect the food industry like these clowns (UN) are scaring people into believing... might give us a cheaper round trip to the grocery store though.

You have to consider that these guys are looking out for the oil industry as well, a major decline in petro production means much larger problems than global warming and world hunger, for them of course.

I run B20 in my truck when ever I can get it, same price as D but something like 400 times more lubricating.

 

[DaveW]

Well at least we have found you a new country to invade........ Looks like they got themselves plenty of fuel! irate2:

 

[fluff]

Surely it is inevitable that if we use crops for fuel then there is more pressure on the crops used as food?

 

[jimmydean]

Surely it is inevitable that if we use crops for fuel then there is more pressure on the crops used as food?

The issue is there are failing farms because they can't compete on a global scale. It costs too much to grow a food source in some areas because (like many other things) it's cheaper to do it elsewhere. But Growing something like grass or soy beans is highly cost effective for bio fuel production.

So the way I see it, instead of subsidizing food farmers, shift their crop to something worth farming.

Hemp is also an option, but that's a whole other can of worms.

 

[rockwool]

Surely it is inevitable that if we use crops for fuel then there is more pressure on the crops used as food?

Of course, there's already a food shortage in the world. If the money heavy western countries start buying up those 3rd world acres, that are left producing food for people, and make bio fuel out of it, there wil be even less food for the poor. Probably, it will also mean that our own food prices rise.

It's simple math, we westerners can pay more for our pleasures than the 3rd world can do for their needs. Fidel has right about this.
DRB, that linky don't work anymore.. And about "his boy", if you mean Chavez, tell your self to chill, he's on the mf.

The issue is there are failing farms because they can't compete on a global scale. It costs too much to grow a food source in some areas because (like many other things) it's cheaper to do it elsewhere. But Growing something like grass or soy beans is highly cost effective for bio fuel production.

So the way I see it, instead of subsidizing food farmers, shift their crop to something worth farming.

Hemp is also an option, but that's a whole other can of worms.

In Sweden aswell as Brazil they are talking about cutting down even more forrests, than they're doing right now, to try and fill the need of ethanol. What harm won't that do to mother earth?

Hemp is the **** when it comes to this. It has as far as I know the highest cellulose of all oil producing plants, can be grown further north than any other plant (except trees perhaps), can yeald twice a year in southern Sweden (maybe more further south, but only once in nothern Sweden) which means even more cellulose compared to any other plant, cleans the air far better than a cut down forrest... There are probably even more reasons that I've forgot about that speaks for the use of Hemp instead of other things.

The subsidizing of farmers has to stop as it is unfair against the farmers of the 3rd world whose products become too expensive in comparison and thus worsening the problems of poverty; they can't export their crops to us, while we export our high tech goods to them aswell as out compete their crops.

That F's their countries export/import balance even more, and impoverishes them further.

“More and more, people are realizing that there are serious environmental and serious food security issues involved in biofuels,” Greenpeace biofuels expert Jan van Aken said. “There is more to the environment than climate change,” he said. “Climate change is the most pressing issue, but you cannot fight climate change by large deforestation in Indonesia.”

Starving is not an issue for non of us on this forum, but imputate our lungs so that we can feed our cars with them?

there has long been opposition among U.N. member states — including OPEC, nuclear and other energy lobbies— to have any kind of international dialogue on energy. There is for example, no U.N. Millennium Goal for energy, and recent U.N. working documents on sustainable development continue to be very fossil-fuel oriented, Best said.

Ohh, those lovely lobbies now again... Still think you (I mean all of us) live in a democracy?

 

[valve bouncer]

Plenty of food in the world. The problem is and has always been getting it to the people who need it.

 

[luelling]

The subsidizing of farmers has to stop as it is unfair against the farmers of the 3rd world whose products become too expensive in comparison and thus worsening the problems of poverty; they can't export their crops to us, while we export our high tech goods to them aswell as out compete their crops.

We subsidize becuase there is no way American farmers can compete with someone who will work for next to nothing. It doesn't go against the 3rd world, it levels the playing field. If we don't control import/export (and subsides) here it kills our economy. I have a degree in software engineering and make good money here, but someone from India with the equivelant degree will do the same work for a quarter(or less) the cost. I couldn't even live here on that much money.

 

[rockwool]

Plenty of food in the world. The problem is and has always been getting it to the people who need it.

Yeah, but that food, or more propperly put, that land to grow that food is today used to grow fodder to feed the live stock that feeds us few that can afford to buy it. That land could be enough to feed all of us but not if we eat meat for lunch, dinner aswell as on our morning sandwiches.

We have to restrain our selves and find an alternative protein source on two of those daily meals.

We subsidize becuase there is no way American farmers can compete with someone who will work for next to nothing. It doesn't go against the 3rd world, it levels the playing field. If we don't control import/export (and subsides) here it kills our economy. I have a degree in software engineering and make good money here, but someone from India with the equivelant degree will do the same work for a quarter(or less) the cost. I couldn't even live here on that much money.

They work for next to nothing because of us and the system that we dictate, not because they want to.

We, together with the IMF and the World Bank force them to neo liberalize their economies; let go of their import/export controls and selling out their common means of income, but we don't do the same for them.

This kills their economies and it litteraly takes their lives. We can do this as we have that mighty power while they as prays can do nothing but hope some crumbles will fall. Better alive and hungry than dead from the strike of Montezuma (God on earth).

Fact is that we can't continue living as we westerners are. Not while saying that we want a beautiful and equal world. Not without lying while saying that. We consume too much, we probably earn too much. We surely have too little life quality as we don't have enough time to do all our daily chores, be relaxed and healthy as we could. Parents surely don't have enough time to help their kids be good humans overcome them, as obvioulsy too many fail.

All this while a great populace of the world don't even have work and therefore an income for them and their families. We need to share our work with those Indians.

Yeah, it's going to cost us $, but that is of lesser importance to what we will achieve; our ethics that we will finaly live up to and the better societies we will build.