OOPS!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: Shannow
ummmm...

who says that the land HAS to grow malnourishing corn ?

It's not like the settlers stumbled across virgin cornfields.


It's too complicated a concept to grasp.
LOL.gif


Many people also fail to realize how much more food we could grow, if we (in general) were eating less meat.
 
The way the US grows meat for sure.

There's heaps of cattle (and a fair few goats) raised in my district, which is pretty well useless for any type of intensive crop production. We haven't got much topsoil, and what we have is relatively poor.

Grass grows pretty well, and the animals turn it into human food.

(Nuts and olives grow OK here too - Trying to convince some of my farming mates to try some nuts - with a certain fungal root infection)
 
I would like to see algae used more for biodiesel. There is a lot of potential there since all the various city waste treatment facilities would have potential for algae production. Heck the cities could actually defray some of the cost for waste treatment. As was mentioned previously, there are a lot of farm ponds that go unmanaged and have a lot of algae growth occuring. Not sure of the feasability of utilizing that source. Heck, even cooling lakes used by power plants would make a good area for algae growth. Recently, the National Biodiesel Board sent out an email that showed how even the CO2 from a power plant was being fed directly into an algae prodution area and was providing great results in algae growth.

I guess I am just amazed that the biofuels subject lends itself to so much controversy instead of interest. I have become convinced that a lot of controversy is started by those that would prefer we not burn anything, be it bio or dino fuel. heck, these same people would seem to have a problem with using hydrogen in internal combustion engines, something that I have been captivated about since Popular Mechanics did a conversion of a AMC Gremlin V-8 back in the early 70's. The results were quite impressive. Always wondered why that avenue was not persued. Same technology as having an engine use LNG or LP for fuel, but the power output was very good and the emissions were almost non existent (nothing but a little NOx). Instead the only method that seems to be looked at are hydrogen fuel cells. While interesting, it would hardly seem like a cost effective way to get a 3/4 ton pickup to pull a livestock trailer.

Oh well......
 
Hydrogen has a couple of problems. First, we don't have any. We have to expend more energy to produce it than we get from it, much worse than ethanol from corn.

Second, it is tough to transport.

I agree too many of the greens would like to destroy industry completely.
 
Look at most of the arguments against biofuels on this site (and I mean rabid), and it's not generally greenies that are mounting the tireless and senseless arguments against them.

Hydrogen is the worst diversion that we can take...there's a reason that we can't mine it.
 
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Cows should be used to turn non foods (non digestible grass) into food, not inefficiently converting existing food into food - even if there is a fuel process in the middle.

The fatty acid profile of the meat thus produced is actually healthy, versus the rubbish profile when grains are fed.

I agree wholeheartedly.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top