The Stern Report (aka Global Warming)

JohnD said:
There is no particular reason to suppose that this country would stop importing sources of energy just because the form those sources took was different. This is a specious argument intended to confuse. The inabiity of the GB land mass to provide enough food, or enough oil and petrol is nothing new.

Intended to confuse? How so?

Presently bio-fuels are mostly imported, not grown here. They come from palm oil plantations in one-time tropical forest areas.

However much anyone wants to think life can go on the way it has up to now, the changes will be dramatic, and except for saving their own necks, governments will not care (and when the crunch comes, I doubt anyone else will be very different).
 
Sponsored Links
Here's a snip from a good site. If you want to read about the REAL state of oil I suggest you read it.

<snip>


"What About Biofuels Such
as Ethanol and Biodiesel?"


Biofuels such as biodiesel, ethanol, methanol etc. are great, but only in small doses. Biofuels are all grown with massive fossil fuel inputs (pesticides and fertilizers) and suffer from horribly low, sometimes negative, EROEIs. The production of ethanol, for instance, requires six units of energy to produce just one. That means it consumes more energy than it produces and thus will only serve to compound our energy deficit.

In addition, there is the problem of where to grow the stuff, as we are rapidly running out of arable land on which to grow food, let alone fuel. This is no small problem as the amount of land it takes to grow even a small amount of biofuel is quite staggering. As journalist Lee Dye points out in a July 2004 article entitled "Old Policies Make Shift From Foreign Oil Tough:"

. . . relying on corn for our future energy needs would
devastate the nation's food production. It takes 11 acres to
grow enough corn to fuel one automobile with ethanol for
10,000 miles, or about a year's driving, Pimentel says. That's
the amount of land needed to feed seven persons for the
same period of time.

And if we decided to power all of our automobiles with
ethanol, we would need to cover 97 percent of our land with
corn, he adds.



www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net
 
Thanks for your quote from a well-known pro-oil site.
 
Sponsored Links
JohnD said:
Thanks for your quote from a well-known pro-oil propaganda site.

I hardly think the site is pro oil. :rolleyes:

There is not much point in being "pro" a soon to be scarce commodity, with a limited supply.
 
Joe, I notice you do not say if you think you have given an explanation.
Very evasive of you.

Please do.
 
John. The proof is in the snip above. Try reading it and not deriding it.
 
Joe, what do you reckon the energy payback period for solar panels in this country is at present?
 
Joe, as you know very well, I said
"Please explain why you think bio fuels cost more energy than they give, for example:

- vegetable oil used to fuel a diesel car
- wood chips used to fuel a steam boiler
- dried straw or reeds used to heat a house"

I do not see that you have answered this question.

Do you think you have? Please explain how.
 
Biofuels such as biodiesel, ethanol, methanol etc. are great, but only in small doses. Biofuels are all grown with massive fossil fuel inputs (pesticides and fertilizers) and suffer from horribly low, sometimes negative, EROEIs. The production of ethanol, for instance, requires six units of energy to produce just one. That means it consumes more energy than it produces and thus will only serve to compound our energy deficit.
 
I see the word "ethanol" in your reply (though no evidence to support the claim made).

I see no reference to the three examples I gave.

You have failed.

You may go now.
 
JohnD said:
I see the word "ethanol" in your reply (though no evidence to support the claim made).

I see no reference to the three examples I gave.

You have failed.

You may go now.

Read the article. It is in there.

You seem not to choose to see that building tractors uses huge amounts of oil as does running it. Cutting the crop and processing it. Storing the yield and distributing it in tankers that have been built with ORDINARY oil. And what happens to the waste? Burn it and add to global warming? What happens to the ash? Think it through, mate and you will realise that bio fuels are only there to give the punters hope - and scientists big research grants. It won't work because the figures don't add up. The trouble is, John
, that you don't want to add them up.
 
It's OK, Joe, you needn't try any more. I gave you three chances to substantiate your claim, and you failed. There's no sense in you failing any more times. Case closed.
 
An interesting article that claimed global warming does not exist. It appears to have been written about 1998 when, especially in the US, there was a lot of resistance to the idea.

I don't know if the authors still maintain that claim. Glaciers in Switzerland that have been in place for thousands of years have now melted, and the polar icecaps are smaller than they have ever been seen before.

You can find a scientist to say that warming does not exist, in the same way that you can find a lawyer who says that Geoffrey Archer is an honest man.
 
Sponsored Links
Back
Top