The "Green" group think has lost the plot

[hobbyguy]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/rural/2017-12-18/australian-canola-approved-as-low-emission-fuel-for-europe/9269232

Good grief! The "green" leaders in Europe are doing what!??

Turning farmland into production zones for biodiesel is just nuts! We already have the lunacy in the US with subsidized ethanol from corn. Now we have this nonsense of turning canola into fuel for cars. Note also that European "green" leaders are buying up palm oil to turn into biodiesel! Sigh. What lunacy!

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/palm-oil-impacts_us_55a4c391e4b0b8145f737dd5

We all know that the US decision to subsidize and mandate ethanol drove up food prices. Now we have the Europeans doing another bit of nonsense in "the name of green". Really? Millions and millions undernourished and starving around the world and they want to use food/farmland for biodiesel? Palm oil that is a major cause of deforestation?

A couple thousand acres of farmland to be flooded for site C renewable electricity, and the "green" bunch go crazy. Yet here we are talking about thousands and hundreds of thousands of acres, maybe millions, being converted from farmland to "oil production". Hundreds of thousands of acres of forest habitat being destroyed!

Forgive me, but it seems to me that the green group think has a big problem. It is causing more harm than good.

[maryjane48]

If you read huff post link from 2015 hobby posted you will see its not fuel using most palm.oil its multinationals like nestle . So again i catch hobby telking non truths

Infact the huff post link says its enviromentalists sounding the alarm

[maryjane48]

http://www.ethanolproducer.com/articles ... ving-again

According to this the eu is slowing down on bio fuel production .thats a,recent link unlike the 3 yearold one hobby put which talks more about big multinationals using the palmoil .not fuel companies.

So as far as im concerned anything hobby and his cohorts post should be taken with lots of skeptism since facts and truth elude them

[hobbyguy]

If you read huff post link from 2015 hobby posted you will see its not fuel using most palm.oil its multinationals like nestle . So again i catch hobby telking non truths

Infact the huff post link says its enviromentalists sounding the alarm

Nope. From the new ABC article:

"Professor Kingwell said Europe had found sources of biodiesel such as palm oil were creating more emissions at their origin, so although the Europeans were reducing their emissions, the production was using more."

Plus I never said that the palm oil exports to Europe were primarily for biodiesel.

Your reaction is precisely my point. The green group think folks trying to justify a fundamentally counter productive and irrational notion of taking food crops and farmlands and converting them to biodiesel production is hardly environmentally sound nor is it justifiable from the perspective of poor folks all over the world who go hungry.

Are you saying that it is ok to do that? Proving my point? The whole biodiesel thing is a sham, and completely irrational beyond the recycling production (deepfryer used oil etc.).

[hobbyguy]

http://www.ethanolproducer.com/articles/14877/how-to-get-euundefineds-biofuels-policy-moving-again

According to this the eu is slowing down on bio fuel production .thats a,recent link unlike the 3 yearold one hobby put which talks more about big multinationals using the palmoil .not fuel companies.

So as far as im concerned anything hobby and his cohorts post should be taken with lots of skeptism since facts and truth elude them

Read the ABC article. Europe has INCREASED the percentage of diesel that must be biodiesel.

[Ka-El]

So as far as im concerned anything hobby and his cohorts post should be taken with lots of skeptism since facts and truth elude them

Seriously? No offence intended, but given all the times you've been caught creating deliberately misleading thread titles and posting links to articles you haven't even read, you really think that you are the flag bearer for facts and truth?

Misrepresenting a story makes you look. Unreliable

[hobbyguy]

I included the Huffington article about biodiesel/palm oil as a point of reference. Here is a more recent one: https://www.wired.com/2007/08/cant-see-the-fo/

"People feel they're saving the planet. They're not. The real issue we should be concerned with is reducing consumption and improving fuel efficiency," said Righelato. "Biofuels are essentially being used as a way of avoiding the real problem: reducing the use of fossil fuels."

Millions of metric tons of crops going intro biodiesel alone! Just for the US. That's just stupid.

[hobbyguy]

For clarity on the palm oil issue and Europe: https://gain.fas.usda.gov/Recent%20GAIN%20Publications/Biofuels%20Annual_The%20Hague_EU-28_6-19-2017.pdf

"Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) noted that 46 percent of imported palm oil is used to produce biofuels, requiring the use of about one million hectares of tropical soils.

Yuck! 1 million hectares of tropical forest burnt and orangutans and indigenous people driven out of their homes! Just so "virtue signaling" Europeans can puff up their so called "green".

[maryjane48]

I have read less biased reports . You should delete this thread and try save face . Misrepresenting a story makes you look. Unreliable

[alanjh595]

The title and the 1st paragraph as well as the original publish date shows that it was January 2017. Not so recent now is it?

How to Get EU’s Biofuels Policy Moving Again
FROM THE JANUARY ISSUE: Emmanuel Desplechin, secretary general of ePure, talks about the importance of transportation fuels in the European Union's greenhouse gas reduction goals.
By Emmanuel Desplechin | December 18, 2017

That would make hobby guy's article more current than the repeated one from the other poster.
Just so that the link doesn't get lost, I will reinclude it below.
http://www.ethanolproducer.com/articles ... ving-again

[Verum]

HG, does this reduce EU carbon footprint relative to that which they would otherwise have?
Will this make it more likely that they will meet stated goals of CO2 emission?
Are they driving up costs of food for EU citizens?
What downside does this have for the EU beyond increasing fuel costs, which is their choice, and prolonging the use of diesel cars, which are a trade-off?

It's a bit rich to whine about the EU and when they are actually making being Green work fairly well for their citizens. They are generally far Greener than we are, with <50% the CO2 emissions per person and we could certainly learn from them in many ways, since they have smaller, better vehicles, similar productivity with fewer resources, high-density living with similar quality of life, etc. Of course, they could learn from us too, since we do some things rather well, but being Green certainly isn't one of them.

[Jlabute]

Why the US uses more energy per capita than some EU countries can be complex. Americans tend to drive much further in their vehicles, and their homes tend to have swimming pools, air-conditioning, and heating, which are a lot less common in Europe due to their milder climate. The US exports more food goods to a lot of the world, among many things. Still, energy usage is a mishmash on a per country basis, some countries much worse than the US, and some barely anything due to poverty. Canada is worse than the US since we are further north and drive further distances perhaps. The big energy users are cooling/heating/transportation/industry I suppose.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_energy_consumption_per_capita

(KG oil equivalent/annum)

Energy consumption per capita - USA
7164.5 kgoe/a
Energy consumption per capita - Qatar
12799.4 kgoe/a
Energy consumption per capita - Kuwait
12204.3 kgoe/a
Energy consumption per capita - Luxombourg
8342.5 kgoe/a
Energy consumption per capita - Canada
7379.6 kgoe/a
Energy consumption per capita - China
1806.8 kgoe/a

[Verum]

Why the US uses more energy per capita than some EU countries can be complex. Americans tend to drive much further in their vehicles, and their homes tend to have swimming pools, air-conditioning, and heating, which are a lot less common in Europe due to their milder climate. The US exports more food goods to a lot of the world, among many things. Still, energy usage is a mishmash on a per country basis, some countries much worse than the US, and some barely anything due to poverty. Canada is worse than the US since we are further north and drive further distances perhaps. The big energy users are cooling/heating/transportation/industry I suppose.

Yes, the US and we here in Canada make decisions which mean that we use far more of the World's resources and far more contribute to the climate change problem. We can say that it is about the climate we live in, or distances we travel, but that's a cop out, we choose to live here, choose to travel long distances in horribly inefficient vehicles, and choose to not make the changes which would lessen our impact on the environment. Were we to choose to live in smaller houses, or high density housing, to choose to invest in quality public transport, to choose to drive smaller, more efficient vehicles, to choose to waste less food, etc. we could have similar quality of life to that we have now and have far less damaging impact on the environment. We would be more efficient and less wasteful. It's also important to note that the EU also exports lots of food goods, especially at the luxury end of things, and they make lots of cars, which uses lots of energy, etc. but they still generally get more out of less.

[maryjane48]

I havent been caught writing misleading headlins ka some folks just cant handle reality and cry to the mods .

Its multi nationals using palm oil and its enviromentalists sounding the alarm
On palm oil abuses by companies such as nestle . Europe is using less bio fuel ftom palm oil and using more rapeseed .

Hg should be ashamed for misrepresenting the facts

[The Green Barbarian]

So again i catch hobby telking non truths

This has literally never happened, so you are in error to use the word "Again".