| Subject: It would seem that "Ex-bushy" can't walk, chew gum and spell at the same time. |
Author:
Carbonicus
|
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 15:18:53 08/17/07 Fri
In reply to:
Ex-bushy
's message, "So you're in favor of Carbon Offsets used by Al Gore and the Hollywood glitteriara" on 09:35:29 08/17/07 Fri
The word you seek, buffoon, is "glitterati", not "glitteriara" or whatever gibberish it is you spelled above.
Please get a dictionary and expand your horizons, lad.
Does this community silently suffer such fools?
>Some people can walk and chew gum and the same time,
>even while we run out of oil.
>
>>It sounds counterintuitive, but burning oil and
>>planting forests to compensate is more environmentally
>>friendly than burning biofuel. So say scientists who
>>have calculated the difference in net emissions
>>between using land to produce biofuel and the
>>alternative: fuelling cars with gasoline and
>>replanting forests on the land instead.
>>
>>They recommend governments steer away from biofuel and
>>focus on reforestation and maximising the efficiency
>>of fossil fuels instead.
>>
>>The reason is that producing biofuel is not a "green
>>process". It requires tractors and fertilisers and
>>land, all of which means burning fossil fuels to make
>>"green" fuel. In the case of bioethanol produced from
>>corn – an alternative to oil – "it's essentially a
>>zero-sums game," says Ghislaine Kieffer, programme
>>manager for Latin America at the International Energy
>>Agency in Paris, France (see Complete carbon footprint
>>of biofuel - or is it?).
>>
>>What is more, environmentalists have expressed
>>concerns that the growing political backing that
>>biofuel is enjoying will mean forests will be chopped
>>down to make room for biofuel crops such as maize and
>>sugarcane. "When you do this, you immediately release
>>between 100 and 200 tonnes of carbon [per hectare],"
>>says Renton Righelato of the World Land Trust, UK, a
>>conservation agency that seeks to preserve
>rainforests.
>>
>>Century-long wait
>>Righelato and Dominick Spracklen of the University of
>>Leeds, UK, calculated how long it would take to
>>compensate for those initial emissions by burning
>>biofuel instead of gasoline. The answer is between 50
>>and 100 years. "We cannot afford that, in terms of
>>climate change," says Righelato.
>>
>>The researchers also compared how much carbon would be
>>stored by replanting forests with how much is saved by
>>burning biofuel grown on the land instead of gasoline.
>>
>>They found that reforestation would sequester between
>>two and nine times as much carbon over 30 years than
>>would be saved by burning biofuels instead of gasoline
>>(see bar chart, right). "You get far more carbon
>>sequestered by planting forests than you avoid
>>emissions by producing biofuels on the same land,"
>>says Righelato.
>>
>>He and Spracklen conclude that if the point of
>>biofuels policies is to limit global warming, "policy
>>makers may be better advised in the short term to
>>focus on increasing the efficiency of fossil fuel use,
>>to conserve existing forests and savannahs, and to
>>restore natural forest and grassland habitats on
>>cropland that is not needed for food."
>>
>>They do admit, however, that biofuels made from woody
>>materials such as prairie grasses may have an
>>advantage over reforestation – although it is
>>difficult to say for now as such fuels are still in
>>development (see Humble grasses may be the best source
>>of biofuel).
>>
>>Forests at high latitudes have been found to sequester
>>less carbon than tropical forests (see Some forests
>>may speed global warming). But Righelato says this
>>does not affect his calculations as biofuel crops are
>>not, by and large, grown in these areas.
>>
>>
>>href="http://environment.newscientist.com/article/dn12
>4
>>96-forget-biofuels--burn-oil-and-plant-forests-instead
>.
>>html">http://environment.newscientist.com/article/dn12
>4
>>96-forget-biofuels--burn-oil-and-plant-forests-instead
>.
>>html
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
| |
Feedback: 