The last two posts both demonstrate a misunderstanding and complete ignorance of where ecologists stand on the issues of food security and biofuels.
Biofuels at best is a solution on a small sustainable community level where the community makes it such a manner that their inputs and outputs are balanced. It is not a solution to keep our cars, busses, airplanes, trains, heating houses and buildings, or space ships running.
Let me say it clearly ... There is no technical solution currently to keep all of this infrastructure running. There may be solutions utilizing sustainable materials but we are so far away from solving this problem, that we all probably should not have cars. Yes, I'm sure if we run the numbers, that will make an enormous impact.
Before y'all start running at the mouth about environmentalists, please do a few things ....
1. Take a look at our own environment forum where the ecology minded amongst us has long said that biofuel is most probably
the most idiotic thing that mankind can do to itself at this stage. Food riots in Mexico and Italy for starters is but the tip of what Monbiot calls "a formula for environmental and humanitarian disaster".
2. Take a look at some of my posts where I talk about food security for the DR in the light of the DR-Cafta. Simple, if the DR loses their own mind-share as to how to produce their own food sustainably, they must please not think that DR-Cafta bring any kind of food security to the country.
3. Then, you could read what the ecology minded are looking at today. Here is one example from the US, and another from the UK, chosen because they're both in English.
The first is from Jim Kunstler, who makes this comment: "the idea that we can simply shift millions of acres from food crops to ethanol or biodiesel crops to make fuels for cars represents a staggering misunderstanding of reality".
Making Other Arrangements | James Howard Kunstler | Orion magazine
And the 2nd from George Monbiot, whose polemic is more targeted to governmental actions.
Monbiot.com ? A Lethal Solution
There are two words being used a lot among the real environmentalist circles these days.
The 1st is 'greenwash'. By this we mean pretending that you're doing good things whereas your actions are not consistent with your words.
The 2nd is 'ecocide', which speaks for itself.
The idea of biofuels being mankind's saviour, has become both greenwash and ecocide.
How long ago was it the so called "greenies" were knocking and protesting nuclear energy as a fuel source? It's starting to not look so "ungreen" anymore.
Unless solutions can be found to solve the two problems remaining in the use of Nuclear Energy it is not a technical solution. You know of course the problem with waste and the second problem with weapons. It is not a sound ecological and sustainable method of generating power, propulsion, heat and cooling.
.....quit eating meat - then we can really be just like them with their pseudo religion and pseudo respect of their fellow man.
Quitting eating meat surprisingly will help a tremendous amount. Please go and have a good look at the numbers.
I agree with you that there are many environmentalists that are perhaps not admirable people. You will also agree that this is equally true of other professions. Following old earth religions is probably very prevalent amongst people that try to live an environmentally sustainable and sound life. The earth religions are the oldest in the world you know, and very attuned to the earth and its cycles. In my experience, if one respects the religious beliefs of others, you may just find that they respect yours in turn. So, I prefer to not ridicule the religious beliefs of others, even if it looks really kookoo to me. I do find it really difficult to understand your comment. It is clear that you have a fascination for all things Taino and that you do active research, reading and education which is admirable. But have you ever thought that they most probably followed one of the old earth religions? Why the ridicule?
Why dig that black goop out of the bowels of the earth where it's useless ...
Did you not get what the issue is pelaut. There is not much more of the black goop left. Besides the point that the black goop is killing the planet where we live on, the issue that worries most people is that it is almost finished - se fue.
.... when you can burn our food supply, exhaust our topsoil and contaminate our water supplies with potash and nitro runoff?
I have a problem in understanding your comment here. I think you're accusing the wrong people. Ecologists or 'greenies' are not in the business of burning food supplies. Securing healthy and non-contaminated food supplies is one of the burning issues on the table. Ecologists don't use chemical fertilizers. They use sustainable composting methods to enrich the topsoil or they make sustainable non-chemical fertilizers.