The horrors of biofuels.
in [UK Drivers]
|
From: ash on 27 Apr 2010 04:24 On 27 Apr, 08:15, "Brimstone" <brimst...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > "Derek C" <del.copel...(a)tiscali.co.uk> wrote in message > > news:9abac1a2-0d78-405f-9ebc-9095d91ef429(a)b6g2000yqi.googlegroups.com...> On 27 Apr, 08:07, Doug <jag...(a)riseup.net> wrote: > > >> > Don't cyclists eat? > > >> The point you are deliberately missing is that human food is wasted on > >> making biofuels for cars, while eating is necessary to sustain life > >> and well-being. Food itself is not classed as a biofuel. > > >> -- > > It is when it is converted into cycling miles! > > Does anyone know how much land is required to fuel a (say) ten mile bicycle > trip? If the cyclist is a Vegan and buys any food from supermarkets in the UK, then I'd say that they are responsible for a substantial amount of fossil fuel being burnt to grow and transport their foodstuffs - especially greenhouse grown tomato's/peppers etc
From: bugbear on 27 Apr 2010 04:43 Doug wrote: > They thought it would be the solution to their polluting, motorised > wanderlust but this BBC radio programmed tells a very different story. > Isn't it great that bicycles don't need biofuels? > > http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p00775jj/The_Monday_Documentary_The_Price_Of_Biofuels_Episode_1/ Whereas your vehicle is nuclear, gas or coal. BugBear
From: Adrian on 27 Apr 2010 04:46 Doug <jagmad(a)riseup.net> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: > The point you are deliberately missing is that human food is wasted on > making biofuels for cars Since when was "human food" in short supply?
From: boltar2003 on 27 Apr 2010 04:58 On Mon, 26 Apr 2010 10:53:15 -0700 (PDT) Doug <jagmad(a)riseup.net> wrote: >They thought it would be the solution to their polluting, motorised >wanderlust but this BBC radio programmed tells a very different story. >Isn't it great that bicycles don't need biofuels? > >http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p00775jj/The_Monday_Documentary_The_Price_ >f_Biofuels_Episode_1/ Reality finally hits home with some parts of the "eco" lobby. One can only hope that the eco nutters will one day wake up to what a complete waste of time wind farms are and how we should have invested in new nuclear power stations decades ago. And we probably would have done if it hadn't been for loud mouthed but tiny brained right-on dole scroungers and out of work students looking for a cause protesting about anything with "nuclear" in the title. B2003
From: ash on 27 Apr 2010 05:54
On 27 Apr, 09:58, boltar2...(a)boltar.world wrote: > On Mon, 26 Apr 2010 10:53:15 -0700 (PDT) > > Doug <jag...(a)riseup.net> wrote: > >They thought it would be the solution to their polluting, motorised > >wanderlust but this BBC radio programmed tells a very different story. > >Isn't it great that bicycles don't need biofuels? > > >http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p00775jj/The_Monday_Documentary_... > >f_Biofuels_Episode_1/ > > Reality finally hits home with some parts of the "eco" lobby. > > One can only hope that the eco nutters will one day wake up to what a > complete waste of time wind farms are and how we should have invested in > new nuclear power stations decades ago. And we probably would have done if > it hadn't been for loud mouthed but tiny brained right-on dole scroungers > and out of work students looking for a cause protesting about anything with > "nuclear" in the title. > > B2003 Nuclear is not a viable solution because those countries who have it don't want those who don't have it to acquire it due to the potential to build weapons with the fuel. There is also the problem the only way that nuclear is a viable proposition financially is that the electricity generation plants are subsidised by the weapons industry. BNF went bankrupt twice in the last 5 years and had to be bailed out for about £1/2 billion last time before being given away to the French. The nuclear weapons industry is one in decline due to the end of the cold war and all the treaty's to reduce their numbers. There will come a time that the ability to harvest these old warheads for fuel will be so diminished that production of the fuels through mining and refining will not keep up with demand. There is also the issue of safety - are you old enough to remember the events surrounding the meltdown of Chernobyl as I remember it well. There is no such thing as a 'safe' dose of radioactive contamination. Wind power generation is also a very expensive way of generating power as it is reliant on the use of aerospace technology to make the moving parts. They also wear out quickly like any other machine in high stress conditions. Wave power generation like Pelamis is the best of the bunch for renewable generation being fairly unobtrusive, and using conventional (cheaper) engineering solutions like hydraulics to spin electric generators. It also has the advantage that the tides are very reliable - unlike wind power. Ultimately, it is the 80 million per year global population growth which is the cause of the problems, not how those on the planet make use of its resources. Those who pontificate about change and global warming seem to forget that the only constant in the eco system on the planet is change itself ! |