Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

 
 
Saturday, 19th July 2008

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Sign In
Register

Biofuels not without penalty to environment



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

GIVEN the threat posed by man-made global warming, it is urgent we find an alternative to burning fossil fuels. However, it is becoming increasingly apparent that there is no free lunch when it comes to finding other energy sources. For instance, it is obvious that switching to biofuels carries a penalty.
Relying on feedstocks such as corn is leading to a dramatic rise in the price of food, while the energy expended in turning corn or sugar into oil means that environmental gains are negligible.

Growing appreciation of the negative consequences of ...



The full article contains 506 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 25 March 2008 1:28 AM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Leader comment
 
1

Sierra Foothills Scot,

Diamond Springs 25/03/2008 05:28:58
"...from next month, energy companies will have to ensure that 2.5 per cent of supplies at the petrol pump come from biofuels. This will be mixed into ordinary petrol and diesel." And of course the price will be reduced to reflect the reduction in miles per liter that results from the lower-energy-content of the biofuels. In your dreams.

"The RTFO is designed to bring the UK into line with an EU biofuels directive which Britain cannot ignore." Why not? The RTFO is demonstrably stupid, and many EU countries have blithely ignored EU directives they disagree with even though the directives might be far less stupid than the RTFO.




2

eyeswider,

under the weather 25/03/2008 12:13:50
"None of this is sustainable and any reduction in emissions will be negligible."

It will still happen though. Along with raised prices for the lucky and starvation for the rest.

The complete and utter lie that plant food(CO2) causes warming will kill millions and bankrupt who knows how many. We will all pay the penalty for allowing politicians to play scientist and then believing their "results" and "recommendations" and allowing our glorious leaders in Europe to implement insane measures to combat a false threat.

But then most people believe that oil is a fossil fuel and is running out, our leaders have our best interest at heart and you can trust the media. Yeah, right.

I have changed my policy now. I post and leave, as I can no longer contain my contempt for the naive, dumbed-down, dogmatic, blindly fundamentalist, Malthusian, fascistic, belligerently ignorant or willfully counter-intuitive climate police.

Time is a luxury we no longer have, even though cooling is upon us and the Sun will out all these "learned" idiots, we are in the grip of dark forces that hide under a banner of green yet are anything but.

3

Alternative (High Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 25/03/2008 16:37:03
You are on the right track eyswider.

The root of any problems we may face in the future lies in the fact that oil, coal and gas are finite resources. Nothing more, nothing less. Anything that contributes to the reduction of consumption of these commodities is to be welcomed.

It is not a valid argument to say that burning biofuels releases CO2 in the same way that fossil fuels do and therefore the use of them does not help the situation. Even if the release of CO2 into the atmosphere caused problems, which it almost certainly does not, then then the CO2 released by biofuels is not the same as CO2 released by fossil fuels.

With fossil fuels, CO2 was adsorbed into plants millions of years ago, and there is therefore a long delay in release---which presumably is what the climate change brigade are always on about. The CO2 adsorbed into plants that go to make up biofuel was adsorbed as recently as last year, so there is no "locking in" of CO2 for later release.

Seeing as the bottom line is the finite nature of existing energy resources, the public attention should be focussed on this fact alone. Meaningless flim-flam about how the statue of liberty is going to be up to her waist in water in 50 years time, or how oranges will grow on the slopes of Ben Nevis is just un-needed, un-wanted rubbish that serves no purpose except to distract from the base-line issue.

If we carry on the way we are going with all these idiotic theorists being allowed to dominate the scene and put obstacles in the way of innovation and progress, then our grandchildren ARE going to have a problem on their hands.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
RSS Feed of this article's comments
Delivery formats: RSS, Atom, Javascript & Email
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.