10 1 min 14 yrs

Bio-fuel production is seen as a "good thing" by many who embrace the green agenda. But the President of the World Bank doesn’t think so! Robert Zoellick has criticised Europeans and Americans for diverting agricultural land away from growing food in order to pursue the elusive goal of saving energy and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. This is leading to rocketing food prices, causing food riots and horrendous scarcity. Land used to grow corn or other base bio-fuel crops could be used to grow wheat and some of that land could be used to grow rice. Clearly, the massive committment of America and Europe to bio fuels is having the effect of raising food prices to the point that real harm is being felt by poor people around the world.  He has a point, don’t you think?

Click to rate this post!
[Total: 0 Average: 0]

10 thoughts on “THE BIO-FUEL BARMINESS…

  1. He has indeed got a point. There is evidence that not only are crop-growing areas being converted to bio-fuel growing areas, but that virgin rainforest is also being cleared for the same purpose. I think that bio-fuels will soon turn out to be an environmental disaster and will be mostly abandoned within a few years.

    They are not the sole reason for the escalating grain prices however. Increasing meat consumption in China and India means more grain is needed to feed the beasts. Meat is a vastly less efficient form of food in terms of the acreage of grains needed to feed cows to slaughter, compared to growing grains for human consumption. So go veggie to save the planet.

  2. Food prices are already going up in the States. Everybody (not just the poor) are going to pay unintended consequences of the flawed policies now in place because of the Global Warming hoax.

    Also, I have recently learned that America gets most of her oil from Canada and Mexico (not the Middle East) The whole political brouhaha over breaking US reliance to ME oil is based on false assumptions.

    Also, America has her own oil off the coast of Florida, and in the Anwar region of ALaska. Enough to last 1000 years. But America doesn’t drill (or build refineries) because of the environmental crusaders, and gutless politicians who will not lead.

    America could have nuclear power and/or her own oil supply with no adverse effect to the economy or to the world’s food supplies.

    This fake oil crisis is really a scandal in my opinion.

  3. Patty

    Oil is expected to run out this century, no-one is sure when, but we may have already passed the point of peak production. As it’s an international market (including US reserves) we are faced with increasing demand chasing diminishing supplies. And as any economist will tell you, that means that the price will have to rise to keep supply and demand in balance. No-one knows by how much, but it’s already risen from around $70 to $100 within a few years. By 2020 it could be $200 and heading upwards as supplies are diminished.

    So alternative sources of energy will have to be found. Nuclear will be part of the solution. It may eventually fill the growing gap left by oil and coal in terms of elcectricity generation (supported by wind, wave, tide and solar), but unless there is a massive break-through in battery technology they will never be a source of power for transport.

    So we’re going to have to develop new technologies for transport. Possibly hydrogen, or maybe something else will come along. But we must stop clearing the rainforests to grow bio-fuel crops (and soya).

  4. Patty –

    The Gulf and Alaska are the least of it:


    America is sitting on top of a super massive 200 billion barrel Oil Field that could potentially make America Energy Independent and until now has largely gone unnoticed. Thanks to new technology the Bakken Formation in North Dakota could boost America’s Oil reserves by an incredible 10 times, giving western economies the trump card against OPEC’s short squeeze on oil supply and making Iranian and Venezuelan threats of disrupted supply irrelevant.

    Saudi Arabia’s reserves are greatest at 264 billion barrels, but it looks like there are 200 billion barrels under North Dakota alone. Best get there quick though, the greenies will be chaining themselves to the trees as we speak.

  5. Pete

    Given the source of your 200 billion Dakota barrels story, am I being too cynical in detecting a touch of hype verging on wishful thinking, from a vested interest? Perish the thought…

  6. Peter –

    You mean that newsfeed promoting new technologies and renewables? Where’s the vested interest?

  7. First the DDT ban, then AGW, now bio fuels. It would not surprise me if the enviromental lobby didn’t turn out to be the largest mass murdering bunch of all time…just jesting – of course! but you would think they understood the law of unintended consequences by now.

  8. Pete Moore,

    "America is sitting on top of a super massive 200 billion barrel Oil Field"

    Even according to that source this has been known about for about 10 years – it is only economically viable now because the cheap stuff is running out.

    "Saudi Arabia’s reserves are greatest at 264 billion barrels"

    Is that before or after they made up random and apparently everlasting amounts to increase their quotas?

  9. Hey, guys, look at this. In the Next Energy News story that Pete cited it says:

    In the next 30 days the USGS (U.S. Geological Survey) will release a new report giving an accurate resource assessment of the Bakken Oil Formation that covers North Dakota and portions of South Dakota and Montana.

    Sure enough, a month later, the USGS report says:

    3 to 4.3 Billion Barrels of Technically Recoverable Oil Assessed in North Dakota and Montana’s Bakken Formation

Comments are closed.