Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

livingontheland - Re: [Livingontheland] SPAM-LOW: Livingontheland Digest, Vol 111, Issue 2

livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Healthy soil and sustainable growing

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Dan Conine <dconine@bertramwireless.com>
  • To: livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [Livingontheland] SPAM-LOW: Livingontheland Digest, Vol 111, Issue 2
  • Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2007 12:16:38 -0500


-----------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2007 05:43:26 -0500 (CDT)
From: <activism98201@verizon.net>
Subject: Re: [Livingontheland] Biofuels could increase global
warmingwith laughing ga
To: Healthy soil and sustainable growing
<livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org>
Message-ID:
<17997529.18084521190630606820.JavaMail.root@vms074.mailsrvcs.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

The point, or rather question is: what is the question/problem that we're
trying to address?

Rapidly liberating biomass that is "already in the cycle" isn't any solution
to the problem of CO2 emissions. We already know that it isn't an answer to our energy
needs. The only question that it's applicable to is: how to make the rich even richer?

The agrofuels mania WILL make things worse. It threatens our ability to grow
food as it creates large-scale monoculture plantations, which mine our
topsoils as it wipes out our (CO2 sequestering) forests.

If the question is about energy, then that's an issue that's better left off to another
group. But suffice it to say, our ability to grow food shouldn't be sacrificed by our
_desire_ (read "non need") for fuel to run machines.

The following clearly identifies agrofuels as the big scam that it is, that
it clearly is NOT an acceptable solution for sustaining life:
http://www.grain.org/seedling_files/seed-07-07-en.pdf


-Mark Nagel
Everett, WA

As it applies to this list, I think the information on biofuels is important because we can find quantitative data to use for designing better small farms. Just as farmers of old had to allow for land to feed their horses, a modern small farmer should be able to decide if they have enough land and time to run machinery. Biofuels should never be considered as a replacement for oil if the oil was being used to entertain people with a nice, long drive to a job that didn't do anything useful. However, if the oil was being used to lift painful burdens or improve lands that otherwise couldn't be improved upon, then biofuels may be worth considering. The Net Creative gain is the important part, I think. In some cases, it is worth growing enough to fuel a tractor for a few hours a year. Small farmers could also look toward tractor sharing, machinery sharing, etc. It wouldn't pay to have a tractor to run it for a few hours on one farm, but the investment could benefit several farms if they work out their timing issues. Farmers like to be independent, also. Those few hours in a few years may not be enough for the individual to justify a tractor, but if the tractor is going to last 50 years or more (as most of mine have), then it can be worth the investment.
It all comes down to typical business numbers and how long term your business plan works for. Biofuels aren't going to replace petroleum at the scale we have now. SOME biofuel systems (cellulosic, methane collection from manure digesters, corn-burning stoves) are highly efficient and provide a net gain when used properly. Others (corn ethanol, soybean fuel oils, feeding corn mash to cows) are destructive to soils, animals, and the environment, and they discourage small scale operations.

I think that if things were evaluated on whether they work on a small local scale without large processing facilities, then they are generally useful, and not insignificantly: they can easily be replaced without bureaucratic inertia, and they don't endanger large numbers of people if any one of them fails periodically. It's not the 'most efficient' way to do things, but then, neither is a system that spends so much on advertising how great the system is and how much more you need to buy to keep the system running. If we took the average company's advertising budget and spent it on solar panels and electric cars.....well...you get the picture, but until the stock market fails, the 'leaders' won't.

Dan C.
Belgium,WI





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page