Monday, July 07, 2008
BIOFUEL - SUBSIDY, RISING FOOD PRICES, NO OIL SAVED
The promotion of alternative energy source biodiesel as an alternative to oil and fossil fuels has led to serious consequences for food prices, which have risen up to 75% as a result of farmers’ preference for growing biofuel products rather than basic foods.
This is according to a confidential report from the World Bank, the results of a study undertaken by a team of recognized standing in the international economic community who met in April, but the results were not published to avoid damage to U.S. President George W. Bush, one of the greatest proponents of biodiesel as the best new vehicle fuel alternative.
The analysis takes into account the upward trend of prices and contradicts the opinions from Washington who argue that biofuel energy has had a minimal effect of just 3% on the increase in food prices.
The reason for subsidising biofuels was because it would cut oil use but that seems unlikely.
Measurements of emissions from the burning of biofuels derived from rapeseed and maize have been found to produce more greenhouse gas emissions than they save.
In the long term I think biofuel made from genetically engineered organisms or algae designed to produce straight oil, of refinry quality, because
So we have the invisible foot of government screwing up in 3 different ways. their biofuels are pushing up food prices. They aren't saving oil. They aren't the effective way to do it.
This is according to a confidential report from the World Bank, the results of a study undertaken by a team of recognized standing in the international economic community who met in April, but the results were not published to avoid damage to U.S. President George W. Bush, one of the greatest proponents of biodiesel as the best new vehicle fuel alternative.
The analysis takes into account the upward trend of prices and contradicts the opinions from Washington who argue that biofuel energy has had a minimal effect of just 3% on the increase in food prices.
The reason for subsidising biofuels was because it would cut oil use but that seems unlikely.
Measurements of emissions from the burning of biofuels derived from rapeseed and maize have been found to produce more greenhouse gas emissions than they save.
In the long term I think biofuel made from genetically engineered organisms or algae designed to produce straight oil, of refinry quality, because
"We have modest goals of replacing the whole petrochemical industry and becoming a major source of energy," Venter told an audience that included global warming fighter Al Gore and Google co-founder Larry Page.Well not exactly the long term to do it but possibly a relatively long term before government decides that even though Not Invented Here it works.
"We think we will have fourth-generation fuels in about 18 months, with CO2 as the fuel stock."
Simple organisms can be genetically re-engineered to produce vaccines or octane-based fuels as waste, according to Venter.
So we have the invisible foot of government screwing up in 3 different ways. their biofuels are pushing up food prices. They aren't saving oil. They aren't the effective way to do it.
