Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Use of U.S. Croplands for Biofuels Increases Greenhouse Gases
Science Magazine ^ | February 7, 2008 | Timothy Searchinge

Posted on 02/11/2008 3:43:13 AM PST by angkor

Most prior studies have found that substituting biofuels for gasoline will reduce greenhouse gases because biofuels sequester carbon through the growth of the feedstock. These analyses have failed to count the carbon emissions that occur as farmers worldwide respond to higher prices and convert forest and grassland to new cropland to replace the grain (or cropland) diverted to biofuels. Using a worldwide agricultural model to estimate emissions from land use change, we found that corn-based ethanol, instead of producing a 20% savings, nearly doubles greenhouse emissions over 30 years and increases greenhouse gases for 167 years. Biofuels from switchgrass, if grown on U.S. corn lands, increase emissions by 50%. This result raises concerns about large biofuel mandates and highlights the value of using waste products.


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: biofuels; ethanol; globalwarming
corn-based ethanol ....nearly doubles greenhouse emissions over 30 years ...switchgrass... increase emissions by 50%.
1 posted on 02/11/2008 3:43:17 AM PST by angkor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: angkor

I hear the perpetual motion machine has a zero carbon footprint.


2 posted on 02/11/2008 3:45:06 AM PST by angkor (A conservative without hyphens, qualifiers, or a political party.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: angkor; Beowulf; Defendingliberty; WL-law; Normandy; TenthAmendmentChampion

Beam me to Planet Gore !

The Best Global Warming Videos on the Internet

3 posted on 02/11/2008 3:45:28 AM PST by steelyourfaith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: angkor

Albore and his myrmidons will have a ball IGNORING this one.


4 posted on 02/11/2008 3:54:03 AM PST by Turret Gunner A20
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: angkor

Those silly scientists...pay no attention to the man behind the curtain. The Great Oz Gore has spoken.


5 posted on 02/11/2008 3:59:00 AM PST by NautiNurse (Plants are people too)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Turret Gunner A20

It’ll be tough for Dr. Al to ignore the sources (not to mention that it’s in Science Mag):

1 Woodrow Wilson School, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ, USA. German Marshall Fund of the U.S., Georgetown Environmental Law and Policy Institute.
2 Agricultural Conservation Economics, Laurel, MD, USA.
3 Woods Hole Research Center, Falmouth, MA, USA.
4 Center for Agricultural and Rural Development, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, USA.


6 posted on 02/11/2008 4:02:07 AM PST by angkor (A conservative without hyphens, qualifiers, or a political party.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: angkor

You dare to bring real science into the debate about the religion of anthropogenic global warming? How dare you sir? How dare you? You know that our great Grand Poobah Al Gore has strictly forbidden the use of science in our religion...


7 posted on 02/11/2008 4:05:04 AM PST by Sudetenland (Mike Huckabee=Bill Clinton. Can we afford another Clinton in the White House...from either party?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: angkor

Increase In Greenhouse Gases IS Really a Decrease In Greenhouse Gases Because Biofuel Proponents Mean Well! - ROTFWL


8 posted on 02/11/2008 4:09:15 AM PST by ricks_place
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: angkor

Damned if we do and damned if we don’t! I guess we’re just damned then...


9 posted on 02/11/2008 4:10:31 AM PST by Virginia Ridgerunner ("We must not forget that there is a war on and our troops are in the thick of it!"--Duncan Hunter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sudetenland

>>>Grand Poobah Al Gore has strictly forbidden the use of science in our religion...

Take heart, the study doesn’t seem to deny global warming or its anthropogenic causes (in fact, if we eliminate those damned biofuels we’ll be better off).

Like I said, perpetual motion machines are the answer. Zero energy input and maximum energy output at 100 percent efficiency.


10 posted on 02/11/2008 4:25:14 AM PST by angkor (A conservative without hyphens, qualifiers, or a political party.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: angkor
It’ll be tough for Dr. Al to ignore the sources (not to mention that it’s in Science Mag)....

Why? He has been ignoring anything that even smacks of the truth for years. What makes you think it will be hard for him to ignore this time?

11 posted on 02/11/2008 5:09:11 AM PST by Turret Gunner A20
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: ricks_place
Increase In Greenhouse Gases IS Really a Decrease In Greenhouse Gases Because Biofuel Proponents Mean Well!

Well!!! I'm glad to see that someone has finally seen the light.

12 posted on 02/11/2008 5:12:27 AM PST by Turret Gunner A20
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: angkor
Like I said, perpetual motion machines are the answer.

Then I've got me of them thangs.

But I can't do nothin' with it -- hits agin tha law to sell two-year-old Great Grand Daughters.

13 posted on 02/11/2008 5:18:34 AM PST by Turret Gunner A20
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: angkor

Good idea, but you know that “Big Oil” will never allow any perpetual motion machines to reach the people. I have it on good authority that they have spent $400 Trillion-Billion buying up all of the inventions ever made to free us from being their slaves.


14 posted on 02/11/2008 6:13:23 AM PST by Sudetenland (Mike Huckabee=Bill Clinton. Can we afford another Clinton in the White House...from either party?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: angkor

As far as I’m concerned, green house gasses have never been a reason to consider biofuels.

Decreasing imports of petroleum from our enemies is a reason to consider them. Unfortunately, corn based biofuels does not decrease petroleum use enough to be a factor in our imports, thus it is a nonstarter.


15 posted on 02/11/2008 6:58:51 AM PST by dangerdoc (dangerdoc (not actually dangerous any more))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson