IPCC to declare biofuels an environmental hazard

[Quantum Windbag]

They do more harm than good? Really? Damn, who has been saying that same thing for years? Can we finally get rid of that stupid ethanol subsidy that takes food off people's tables?

The United Nations will officially warn that growing crops to make “green” biofuel harms the environment and drives up food prices, The Telegraph can disclose.

A leaked draft of a UN report condemns the widespread use of biofuels made from crops as a replacement for petrol and diesel. It says that biofuels, rather than combating the effects of global warming, could make them worse.

The draft report represents a dramatic about-turn for the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

Biofuels do more harm than good, UN warns - Telegraph

 

[Politico]

Good.

 

[westwall]

Yippee, the "deniers" win another one. What's sad is we had to fight this in the first place.

 

[Crystalclear]

I do not agree with federal alternative energy research at all. Stop giving subsidies to wind power energy and such. Let the private sector do the research, because the government subsidies and research are costing all the taxpayers a lot of money and it is also a waste of money, because private sector can do this research just as good or even better.

 

[Abraham3]

What research are you talking about?

It was government research that seems to have finally determined that biofuels are a net loser. As to wind and solar, the industry conducts the vast majority of the research being done. Photovoltaics have benefited from private research funding for decades. And the money that governments have spent improving the efficiency of alternative energy sources has not been wasted. It has allowed their growth as part of our total energy solution and reduced GHG emissions.

Or is that the problem? How much value, Crystalclear, do you put on producing energy without GHG emissions?

 

[Iceweasel]

What research are you talking about?

It was government research that seems to have finally determined that biofuels are a net loser. As to wind and solar, the industry conducts the vast majority of the research being done. Photovoltaics have benefited from private research funding for decades. And the money that governments have spent improving the efficiency of alternative energy sources has not been wasted. It has allowed their growth as part of our total energy solution and reduced GHG emissions.

Government forced it on us and you give credit to them concluding it's wasteful? They can do no wrong in your book. They've also wasted a LOT of taxpayer dollars funding green energy scams like Solendra. Where have you been?

 

[mamooth]

It's good to see the conservatives finally catching up with the liberals on opposition to ethanol subsidies.

Why were they so late to the party? Too much government cash flowing into Republican districts.

 

[Iceweasel]

It's good to see the conservatives finally catching up with the liberals on opposition to ethanol subsidies.

Why were they so late to the party? Too much government cash flowing into Republican districts.

No, apparently your head was up your ass too far to hear it. Ethanol was a conservative idea? On what planet?

 

[boedicca]

Great catch, QW.

I've long said that Burning Food For Fuel is the sign of a highly dysfunctional society.

 

[boedicca]

Yippee, the "deniers" win another one. What's sad is we had to fight this in the first place.

We haven't won yet. We need to see the subsidy programs and regulatory mandates eliminated.

 

[mamooth]

]No, apparently your head was up your ass too far to hear it. Ethanol was a conservative idea? On what planet?

So Bush no longer qualifies as conservative?

Yes, Obama has continued the Bush programs, much to the dismay of liberals.

The tax breaks in the USA for ethanol were recently dropped, but they were just window-dressing, insignificant. The real money is in the program of government guarantees to buy corn for ethanol, which drives up the price of corn in general. That program is going strong.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

]No, apparently your head was up your ass too far to hear it. Ethanol was a conservative idea? On what planet?

So Bush no longer qualifies as conservative?

Yes, Obama has continued the Bush programs, much to the dismay of liberals.

The tax breaks in the USA for ethanol were recently dropped, but they were just window-dressing, insignificant. The real money is in the program of government guarantees to buy corn for ethanol, which drives up the price of corn in general. That program is going strong.

Bush was president in the 1990s? Who'da thunk it?

 

[westwall]

It's good to see the conservatives finally catching up with the liberals on opposition to ethanol subsidies.

Why were they so late to the party? Too much government cash flowing into Republican districts.

No, apparently your head was up your ass too far to hear it. Ethanol was a conservative idea? On what planet?

Only on his planet. His planet exists outside of the Time/Space continuum, so the laws of physics and common sense don't apply there. That being said, I can't think of a SINGLE sceptic that was in favour of ethanol as a fuel source. Further, as we have brains, we said if it must be done then using suger cane (as Brazil does) was more efficient and wouldn't impact the food supply.

Funny how an asshat, like the admiral here, always, and I mean always, forgets those conversations.

 

[westwall]

What research are you talking about?

It was government research that seems to have finally determined that biofuels are a net loser. As to wind and solar, the industry conducts the vast majority of the research being done. Photovoltaics have benefited from private research funding for decades. And the money that governments have spent improving the efficiency of alternative energy sources has not been wasted. It has allowed their growth as part of our total energy solution and reduced GHG emissions.

Or is that the problem? How much value, Crystalclear, do you put on producing energy without GHG emissions?

People who understand science and the scientific method are beginning to realize that the production of GHG's is no big deal. Particulate pollution is absolutely a concern, and a damned important one at that. But the failed theory of AGW is no longer a concern.

Now, hopefully, we can stop wasting time on something that the IPCC itself admits is a non problem, after all their report says that after rebuilding our entire energy infrastructure to conform to their ideas we might be able to reduce the global temp by one degree in 100 years.....maybe..

All for a mere 76 trillion dollars mind you, tells me that the prime motivation for them is not environmental but asset redistribution.

 

[westwall]

Great catch, QW.

I've long said that Burning Food For Fuel is the sign of a highly dysfunctional society.

Yeppers!

 

[Iceweasel]

]No, apparently your head was up your ass too far to hear it. Ethanol was a conservative idea? On what planet?

So Bush no longer qualifies as conservative?

When was he ever a fiscal conservative? Liberals should have been in love with him.

Yes, Obama has continued the Bush programs, much to the dismay of liberals.

The tax breaks in the USA for ethanol were recently dropped, but they were just window-dressing, insignificant. The real money is in the program of government guarantees to buy corn for ethanol, which drives up the price of corn in general. That program is going strong.

It needs to be drug out into a corn field and a stake driven through its' heart.

 

[Iceweasel]

Only on his planet. His planet exists outside of the Time/Space continuum, so the laws of physics and common sense don't apply there. That being said, I can't think of a SINGLE sceptic that was in favour of ethanol as a fuel source. Further, as we have brains, we said if it must be done then using suger cane (as Brazil does) was more efficient and wouldn't impact the food supply.

Funny how an asshat, like the admiral here, always, and I mean always, forgets those conversations.

My gas mileage has suffered with ethanol with two motorcycles and two trucks. Where is the energy savings there?

 

[Abraham3]

Great catch, QW.

I've long said that Burning Food For Fuel is the sign of a highly dysfunctional society.

Do you have any examples of any other society doing it?

 

[Abraham3]

It needs to be drug out into a corn field and a stake driven through its' heart.

It needs to be DRAGGED out into a corn field...

 

[mamooth]

So "Bush wasn't a conservative!" is the excuse the faux-skeptics are trying to peddle. Good luck with that.

The faux-skeptics should be condemning, by name, all of those corn belt politicians now that put these policies in place. That presents an interesting problem for the faux-skeptics. They'll handle it in their usual way, by doing whatever TheParty tells them. If TheParty says to ignore the people who did it and blame it on the liberals, then that's what they'll do.