The "Green" group think has lost the plot

[The Green Barbarian]

I havent been caught writing misleading headlins ]

uh yes, you have. Over and over again.

[The Green Barbarian]

Hg should be ashamed for misrepresenting the facts

Except that he hasn't done that. Big Green are a bunch evil scum.

[Jflem1983]

This is good for Canadian farmers.

[alanjh595]

This is good for Canadian farmers.

Not so good for Canadian food consumers.

[Verum]

This is good for Canadian farmers.

Not so good for Canadian food consumers.

We live in a Capitalist economy. If someone is driving up demand for a good, the price will almost certainly go up too, at least in the short to medium term. That's the nature of the beast. If you have a problem with it, you might prefer Communism.

[Ka-El]

I havent been caught writing misleading headlins ]

uh yes, you have. Over and over again.

Yup - feared so mj. Busted

[alanjh595]

This is good for Canadian farmers.

Not so good for Canadian food consumers.

We live in a Capitalist economy. If someone is driving up demand for a good, the price will almost certainly go up too, at least in the short to medium term. That's the nature of the beast. If you have a problem with it, you might prefer Communism.

I have absolutely NO PROBLEM with it at all. How about preaching your perspective to the renters of Kelowna real estate.? Good luck, may peace be with you.

[maryjane48]

Lol they are only misleading if you want to ignore the facts . I cant help if some folks want to remain ignorant of reality . Merry xmas

[Verum]

This is good for Canadian farmers.

Not so good for Canadian food consumers.

We live in a Capitalist economy. If someone is driving up demand for a good, the price will almost certainly go up too, at least in the short to medium term. That's the nature of the beast. If you have a problem with it, you might prefer Communism.

I have absolutely NO PROBLEM with it at all. How about preaching your perspective to the renters of Kelowna real estate.? Good luck, may peace be with you.

Sorry I misinterpreted your post. If anyone complains to me about rental prices, I will point out how it is driven by supply and demand with some silly market shenanigans going on. I'd also point out how they have significant power to influence the supply through municipal election votes. But there is no way we are going to have cheap rent with quality homes in relatively low density housing, unless Kelowna becomes a terrible place to live. The problem is that so many want a single family home, with a bit of land, a driveway for 2 cars, etc. which just keeps up pressure on land and increases cost of providing accommodation. In fairness, it's not as if Kelowna is actually that expensive for rent when compared with other relatively desirable locations.

[hobbyguy]

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.

1) No. It doesn't. They are simply transferring their CO2 footprint to another country, like Indonesia (palm oil production). It is likely actually increasing their total carbon footprint when consider the jungle burnt, the regular diesel used by the Indonesian farmers, the bunker oil used by the ships, the processing into biodiesel etc. As of 2015 Indonesia is ranked as the sixth biggest producer of greenhouse gas due to deforesting (burning) for palm oil and paper plantations.

2) It is inescapable fact that ethanol production in the US drove up corm prices, which in turn drove up livestock feed prices, which in turn drove up livestock prices. Similar effects are coming from conversion of food acreages to diesel biofuel production. Yes, I have noted a rise in cooking oil prices.

Then you have to start factoring in the fertilizers, insecticides, and herbicides manufactured for and used to grow the biofuel crops. The fuels used to work the land, transport the crops, process the crops. By the time you are done, it is little more than an analogy to money laundering. It is just "green laundering" to appease the folks who want to be "green" but won't reduce their consumption.

[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.

1) No. It doesn't. They are simply transferring their CO2 footprint to another country, like Indonesia (palm oil production). It is likely actually increasing their total carbon footprint when consider the jungle burnt, the regular diesel used by the Indonesian farmers, the bunker oil used by the ships, the processing into biodiesel etc. As of 2015 Indonesia is ranked as the sixth biggest producer of greenhouse gas due to deforesting (burning) for palm oil and paper plantations.If my reading of the report is correct, the end result is still a significant net reduction in CO2 emissions at about 50%.

2) It is inescapable fact that ethanol production in the US drove up corm prices, which in turn drove up livestock feed prices, which in turn drove up livestock prices. Similar effects are coming from conversion of food acreages to diesel biofuel production. Yes, I have noted a rise in cooking oil prices. So? Why would they care about what you pay for food or cooking oil. They don't need Canadian beef, or such, they have fairly good access to food, usually of significantly higher standard than we do.

Then you have to start factoring in the fertilizers, insecticides, and herbicides manufactured for and used to grow the biofuel crops. The fuels used to work the land, transport the crops, process the crops. By the time you are done, it is little more than an analogy to money laundering. It is just "green laundering" to appease the folks who want to be "green" but won't reduce their consumption.

Again, I am quite certain that while it is not clean fuel by any means, it still has a smaller footprint than oil, especially tar sands oil and other difficult to extract oils. Complaining about it, when it is clear that their numbers suggest it is doing what they want, and especially complaining about what they are doing because it increases demand for something, pushing up the prices you pay, seems a bit pointless to me. How would you respond if they complained that Canadian consumption of oil was pushing up oil prices? It's pretty much the same thing.

[Jflem1983]

From what i can surmise. Its much worse for the environment than traditional drilling. However. It stands to be a polically correct way for farmers to get a bit better returns. These are rare now days.
Keep in mind farming is the only industry in the world pays retail and sells wholesale.
U have rogue governments like Notley attacking Canadiam farmers.
Many farms are basically staying afloat cuz God gave em oil wells to help pay the bills .
So if we move to bio diesel and such. Yes bad for environment for a ton of reasons. Bad for consumers of food . But good for farming. So i sorta support it. Not too often i agree with Europe

[Jlabute]

Biofuel also has a much lower energy density. It takes a lot of farm land to make a little biofuel which in turn has only 2/3 the energy density of gasoline. So drive 600km on a tank of gas, or 400km on a tank of ethanol. Even the guardian says biofuel is not a green alternative and those guys are green nuts.

[hobbyguy]

Verum:

Nope, you are looking for a "free lunch". Biodiesel from waste products is one thing, but biodiesel that requires inputs to grow, land to grow on, inputs to process, and inputs to transport winds up being little more than greenwashing.

The EU is just offshoring its GHG production to places like Indonesia and Australia.

The EPA analysis here: http://www.biodieselmagazine.com/articles/8311/epa-finds-palm-oil-biodiesel-doesnt-meet-minimum-ghg-reductions

from 2012 states that palm oil diesel only reduces GHG by 11%. They did not anticipate the massive deforestation that followed the boom in palm oil.

[Verum]

Verum:

Nope, you are looking for a "free lunch". Biodiesel from waste products is one thing, but biodiesel that requires inputs to grow, land to grow on, inputs to process, and inputs to transport winds up being little more than greenwashing.

The EU is just offshoring its GHG production to places like Indonesia and Australia.

The EPA analysis here: http://www.biodieselmagazine.com/articles/8311/epa-finds-palm-oil-biodiesel-doesnt-meet-minimum-ghg-reductions

from 2012 states that palm oil diesel only reduces GHG by 11%. They did not anticipate the massive deforestation that followed the boom in palm oil.

So the EPA found an 11-17% reduction in 2012, and the EU found a different thing, which is a reduction of 50% in 2017. So it comes down to which do I trust? Let me put it this way, one has a track record of doing the right thing, such as preserving fish stocks better than other similar bodies on the planet, keeping their environment relatively clean, etc. I guess I trust the EU on this one.
Also, do you have the same qualms about Alberta oil, which is demonstrably more polluting to extract than some other sources of oil?