Comments on: Reject fields could produce lots of biofuel http://www.futurity.org/earth-environment/reject-fields-could-produce-lots-of-biofuel/ Research news from leading universities Sat, 25 May 2013 01:44:55 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.4 By: Colin Van Leuven http://www.futurity.org/earth-environment/reject-fields-could-produce-lots-of-biofuel/comment-page-1/#comment-559182 Colin Van Leuven Mon, 21 Jan 2013 12:15:51 +0000 http://www.futurity.org/?p=273732#comment-559182 LOL.....sorry for the spelling of my earlier post.......I was trying to clean it up, but I had an Irish Setter pup bouncing all over me to go out......he doesn't like it that the squirrels and rabbits want to steal the bird seed.......... LOL…..sorry for the spelling of my earlier post…….I was trying to clean it up, but I had an Irish Setter pup bouncing all over me to go out……he doesn’t like it that the squirrels and rabbits want to steal the bird seed……….

]]> By: Colin Van Leuven http://www.futurity.org/earth-environment/reject-fields-could-produce-lots-of-biofuel/comment-page-1/#comment-559172 Colin Van Leuven Mon, 21 Jan 2013 12:11:44 +0000 http://www.futurity.org/?p=273732#comment-559172 Well my guess is that the shot was some where in Iowa. As to the payback versus input, I have to agree with Deane, though not quite for the same reasons. I'm sure if it does fly, you can bet our tax dollars will pay for it. As for "global warming", I still don't belive what a computer model designed on systems that are less than forty years old, and filled with input from even less relauible sources that have been around for even shorter periods, says. Since we only recently found out we have a hole in the ozone, how in the heck are we suposed to know how big or small it can get? As I haven't seen a summer as hot as the one I experienced in the early 1960's, I find it difficult to believe it is getting hotter. As the water in front of my Lake Michigan home was as low as it is now, back in the 1960's, I chalk it up to a cyclical pattern and not some manmade thing. Albeit, we're in a 16 year drought around the Great Lakes. Am I against striving for less emiisions? Not at all, as I also remember the skies around Detroit being yellow back in those 60's........... Well my guess is that the shot was some where in Iowa.

As to the payback versus input, I have to agree with Deane, though not quite for the same reasons. I’m sure if it does fly, you can bet our tax dollars will pay for it.

As for “global warming”, I still don’t belive what a computer model designed on systems that are less than forty years old, and filled with input from even less relauible sources that have been around for even shorter periods, says.

Since we only recently found out we have a hole in the ozone, how in the heck are we suposed to know how big or small it can get?

As I haven’t seen a summer as hot as the one I experienced in the early 1960′s, I find it difficult to believe it is getting hotter.

As the water in front of my Lake Michigan home was as low as it is now, back in the 1960′s, I chalk it up to a cyclical pattern and not some manmade thing. Albeit, we’re in a 16 year drought around the Great Lakes.

Am I against striving for less emiisions? Not at all, as I also remember the skies around Detroit being yellow back in those 60′s………..

]]> By: Deane Rimerman http://www.futurity.org/earth-environment/reject-fields-could-produce-lots-of-biofuel/comment-page-1/#comment-557342 Deane Rimerman Fri, 18 Jan 2013 08:41:50 +0000 http://www.futurity.org/?p=273732#comment-557342 Here's the article with the 1% reference: http://www.treehugger.com/renewable-energy/all-biofuels-are-nonsense-says-nobel-winning-photosynthesis-expert-hartmut-michel.html Here's one about how biofuels are killing people: http://www.smh.com.au/business/carbon-economy/biofuels-may-not-be-as-green-as-hoped-nature-20130107-2cbn5.html Here’s the article with the 1% reference: http://www.treehugger.com/renewable-energy/all-biofuels-are-nonsense-says-nobel-winning-photosynthesis-expert-hartmut-michel.html

Here’s one about how biofuels are killing people: http://www.smh.com.au/business/carbon-economy/biofuels-may-not-be-as-green-as-hoped-nature-20130107-2cbn5.html

]]> By: Robert Reed http://www.futurity.org/earth-environment/reject-fields-could-produce-lots-of-biofuel/comment-page-1/#comment-557122 Robert Reed Fri, 18 Jan 2013 02:14:17 +0000 http://www.futurity.org/?p=273732#comment-557122 Deane, you come off so convinced of a plot that I almost believe you. But I need more fact checked data to make up my mind. What can you provide? I look at the photo at the top of the article and I don't even know where this is, or if this a sample of the study area. The article doesn't say. Yes, it does look like a poster child of industrial agriculture desertification in North America. But I can see how it might be brought back into some kind of production other than bad hay. I think I could do a labor / equipment and materials costing of the effort. If a local refinery was buying cellulosic ethanol feedstock from me at ($???) per ton, you could do some kind of analysis to determine if it was worth it. It seems plausible that the researchers might be right, as well as yourself. I just returned from a portion of rural America that has large swaths of plowed up, logged off land that is just terribly managed and produces no income for anybody and supports no wildlife to speak of, no bees, no birds. Filled with invasive plants. Couldn't this land be brought back into some kind of positive production, along with native Flora and Fauna component, in a $6 or $7 a gallon ethanol scenario? Seems worth it to me if we are going to survive Global warming and maintain American hegemony. But this is all speculation. I'm very grateful to the researchers for all their hard work and I do hope that absolute certainty was the desired end goal. Best wishes to all, Robt Deane, you come off so convinced of a plot that I almost believe you. But I need more fact checked data to make up my mind. What can you provide?
I look at the photo at the top of the article and I don’t even know where this is, or if this a sample of the study area. The article doesn’t say.
Yes, it does look like a poster child of industrial agriculture desertification in North America.
But I can see how it might be brought back into some kind of production other than bad hay. I think I could do a labor / equipment and materials costing of the effort. If a local refinery was buying cellulosic ethanol feedstock from me at ($???) per ton, you could do some kind of analysis to determine if it was worth it. It seems plausible that the researchers might be right, as well as yourself. I just returned from a portion of rural America that has large swaths of plowed up, logged off land that is just terribly managed and produces no income for anybody and supports no wildlife to speak of, no bees, no birds. Filled with invasive plants. Couldn’t this land be brought back into some kind of positive production, along with native Flora and Fauna component, in a $6 or $7 a gallon ethanol scenario? Seems worth it to me if we are going to survive Global warming and maintain American hegemony. But this is all speculation.
I’m very grateful to the researchers for all their hard work and I do hope that absolute certainty was the desired end goal.
Best wishes to all,
Robt

]]> By: Deane Rimerman http://www.futurity.org/earth-environment/reject-fields-could-produce-lots-of-biofuel/comment-page-1/#comment-557012 Deane Rimerman Thu, 17 Jan 2013 22:32:56 +0000 http://www.futurity.org/?p=273732#comment-557012 This is totally bogus... True cost accounting of the amount of fossil fuels needed to gather the material and convert it to fuel and then distribute it as fuel is way beyond any amount of energy that the material can provide. Of course if you do your book keeping the way Enron does you make a nice profit before it all goes belly up, which is the real intent of this plan.. This is a racket to generate funding for more research, as well as to generate money for farmer's who have poisoned their land and depleted their topsoil so thoroughly that the land is no longer productive for growing food. It's the equivalent of scraping the bottom of our nations once vibrant food producing barrel. On an ecologic scale this will have huge and harmful long-term negative consequences to diversity of flora and fauna, as well as topsoil production. Credible studies have shown that typically biomass provides about 1% energy output for the amount of energy input... This study is a scam written for low interest loans of millions if not billions of dollars to produce a refinery that will fail, but make a profit to the swindlers building it. This is totally bogus… True cost accounting of the amount of fossil fuels needed to gather the material and convert it to fuel and then distribute it as fuel is way beyond any amount of energy that the material can provide. Of course if you do your book keeping the way Enron does you make a nice profit before it all goes belly up, which is the real intent of this plan..

This is a racket to generate funding for more research, as well as to generate money for farmer’s who have poisoned their land and depleted their topsoil so thoroughly that the land is no longer productive for growing food. It’s the equivalent of scraping the bottom of our nations once vibrant food producing barrel.

On an ecologic scale this will have huge and harmful long-term negative consequences to diversity of flora and fauna, as well as topsoil production.

Credible studies have shown that typically biomass provides about 1% energy output for the amount of energy input… This study is a scam written for low interest loans of millions if not billions of dollars to produce a refinery that will fail, but make a profit to the swindlers building it.

]]>