Focus on biofuels is foolish

[4dsc]

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/277179_fuels12.html

The corn and soybeans that make ethanol and biodiesel require huge quantities of fossil fuel in the necessary farm machinery, pesticides and fertilizer. Much of the fossil fuel comes from foreign sources, including some that may not be dependable, such as Russia and the Mideast.

Corn and soybean production as practiced in the Midwest is ecologically unsustainable. Its effects include massive topsoil erosion; pollution of surface and ground water with pesticides; and fertilizer runoff that travels down the Mississippi to deplete oxygen from a New Jersey-sized portion of the Gulf of Mexico.

Improving fuel efficiency in cars by just 1 mile per gallon -- possible with proper tire inflation -- would cut fuel consumption equal to the total amount of ethanol federally mandated for production in 2012.

The focus on biofuels as a silver bullet to solve our energy and climate-change crises is at best misguided. At worst, it is a scheme that could have disastrous environmental consequences. And it will have little effect on our fossil-fuel dependence.

We must reduce energy use now if we hope to kick our oil addiction and slow climate change. Pushing biofuels at the expense of energy conservation today will only make our problems more severe, and their solutions more painful, tomorrow.

Julia Olmstead, an Iowa State University graduate student in plant breeding and sustainable agriculture and a graduate fellow at the Land Institute, in Salina, Kan., wrote this for the institute's Prairie Writers Circle. It was published by The Providence Journal.

[pooja]

1. If they are going to use bio-fuels... they need to convert algae.

[HysteryDiagnosis]

2. Farm the ocean.... no plows, no tractors, no pig crap. n/t

[blueinchicago]

10. The article talks about proper tire inflation

and how it can replace the current call for ethanol.

And we could do a lot by eating way lower on the food chain. UofChicago study strongly suggests that vegan/vegetarian and poultry based diets would use less fossil fuels.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/04/060414012755.htm

[iamjoy]

3. How Naive

if the politicians talk about ethanol, they win votes in Iowa. If they talk about increasing fuel efficiency standards, they lose votes in Michigan.

[mopinko]

4. i reject the premise here

i don't think anyone is seriously looking for a silver bullet in the first place. most people in their right minds know that the energy situation is complex, with room to improve everything from light bulbs to airplanes.
secondly, most serious proponents of biofuels DO NOT propose using using corn and soybeans. algae is being heavily promoted, and would be a great alternative of a lot of reasons.
this sounds like the usual biostitute bullshit.

[farmbo]

5. BS alert...False choice. Biofuels AND lower CAFE stds AND public transport

This is not, as this authors imply, an 'either-or' proposition: biofuels or lower mileage standards. They start out with this strawman argument then go down hill from there.

Plus, increasingly, farmers are using no-till and integrated pest management...developments which have apparently escaped the narrow perceptions of the authors.

[4dsc]

7. So tell us where??

You claimed "Increasingly, farmers are using no-till and integrated pest management...developments which have apparently escaped the narrow perceptions of the authors.

Can you offer us some kind of proof to back up this statement?? Just exactly where have farmers increaded their practice of no-till?? In Iowa??

[farmbo]

9. Western Ohio, Indiana & Illinois that I know of...

My family farms corn wheat and soybeans and I advise farmers throughout the Eastern corn belt.
There's been a huge change here in the last 15 years.

I tried Googling for percentages but couldn't find a site.

I would expect the changeover to be occurring in Iowa as well.

[jpak]

12. Currently, 36% of US cropland is under conservation tillage (2000)

109 million acres - up from 26% in 1990.

Of that, 52 million acres were no-till (~18% of total - a 3-fold increase from 1990).

www.ers.usda.gov/publications/ AgOutlook/Mar2001/AO279c.pdf

http://216.239.51.104/search?q=cache:UZ34-yh4n-gJ:www.ers.usda.gov/publications/AgOutlook/Mar2001/AO279c.pdf+no+till+acreage+US&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1&ie=UTF-8

Does that answer your question????

[mirounga]

6. 50 MPH

You know, while we're on the subject, why have I not heard one word from anyone about going back to the old 50 MPH regulation? I always thought it was a very bad idea when we changed it. It was a good idea in Carter's time and should be adopted asap by our congress. It alone would save a lot of gas, though I don't have the statistics off hand. Does anyone know why the democratic party or anyone for that matter are not even considering this? Come on guys, time for a little sacrifice for our country. I know the oil companies and repugs would have a fit, but aren't we addicted to oil after all???

[Ready4Change]

8. Because I like to drive fast?

I know. I'm a bad, bad man.

I've done some informal tests and proved to myself that my milage improves dramatically if I drive at the speed limit, rather than, er, where I usually drive.

:blush:

[dcfirefighter]

11. Why not 25 mph?

Or 15?

Or perhaps, we could set it at 30 mpg - I can do 70 on a motorcycle or 20 in a full-size SUV?

I think the best bet is to charge polluters for using our atmosphere as a place to dump their carbon-waste.

So 20 people on a bus might only spend a little more, while someone who drives a hummer 20,000 miles a year would pay a lot more (and hopefully change their behavior).

Such a scheme retains the flexibility to deal with the modern world.

I beleive that a 50 mph speed limit would ENCOURAGE people to buy and drive big SUV road-yachts. No point in getting a sedan if you're only going 50. No point in getting a light, agile, and EFFICIENT coupe if th speed limit is 50 mph.

I also think that roads should be funded out of real estate taxes (because roads benefit real estate prices), tolls, and annual milage x vehicle weight charges.