Comments on: GOP Front Group AAPS Behind Bogus Biofuel Death Claims

By: Dave

Dave — Mon, 25 Apr 2011 17:21:00 +0000

Jo,
The precision of your counter-argument notwithstanding, my concern is you had entirely too much fun writing this. So I hope this was altruistic and not for pay. We wouldn’t want to get paid for doing what we love doing, would we?
One of the most well-articulated arguments I’ve read in a long time. Keep at it. I’ll be joining the CleanTechnica ranks as a new contributor very soon.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sun, 17 Apr 2011 15:37:00 +0000

The problem is that in the US biofuel is mostly corn because there is a very powerful corn lobby. It seem true to me based on the data that bio fuel caused world wide food prices to surge upward.

So I think we should abandon the term “biofuel”, its too broad, encompasses corn, sugar, soy based fuels which use fossil fuel based fertilizers and are not helping carbon output. And that term also contains switchgrass, which grows on infertile land and doesn’t need fertilizer or pesticides. We need terms to tell the difference so we can have a better conversation. I am against corn and palm and sugar based bio fuels, but for switchgrass and waste fuels.

By: 4 Eco-conscious Developments for the Super-rich of the Future – CleanTechnica: Cleantech innovation news and views

Tue, 12 Apr 2011 14:30:26 +0000

[…] use of locally produced energy. Indeed, the city’s primary source of energy will be rice. A new refinement process will convert non-edible rice husks (the protective covering on grains of ri…, which can then be burned by generators to create electricity. Taking the “reduce, re-use, […]

By: Bpl5019

Bpl5019 — Mon, 11 Apr 2011 15:10:00 +0000

OMG corn based ethanol may be a bad idea. Oh wait we’ve been saying that since it was first proposed on a large scale. Some days I can’t wait for all the underfunded research to come through so we can just get on with doing things intelligently.