Gore's World Collapsing. BioFuels twice as bad as Fossil

[Titantron]

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releas...l-ns102009.php

[duane1969]

Actually the article speculates that the clearing of forestation to make room for biofuel crops will cause a greater problem because there will be less trees and plants to convert carbon dioxide. It doesn't really say that biofuel is worse for the environment that fossil fuels.

What's more, this is a theory based on just two studies. Two studies does not make fact.

[Titantron]

"What's more, this is a theory based on just two studies. Two studies does not make fact."

Its fact if you apply the same standards that the global warming crowd uses. I can take anything like this and present it as "proof". There would be no need to have these studies or for me to make this post if the Global warming issue had anything to do with the logic and common sense displayed in your post above.

[theonedru]

Biofuel is a renewable resource, oil is oil once its gone its not coming back.... Common sense, just some right wing nut jobs who fear change

[Titantron]

"The MBL is a leading international, independent, nonprofit institution dedicated to discovery and to improving the human condition through creative research and education in the biological, biomedical and environmental sciences. Founded in 1888 as the Marine Biological Laboratory, it is the oldest private marine laboratory in the Americas."

doesnt seem very right wing to me, but I guess anything that refutes the Far left liberal Agenda is now right wing......Unfortunately, that includes reality, morals, and common sense.

[theonedru]

It just sounds like something Lyndon LaRouche would promote seeing how he touts nuclear energy safer and more efficient then solar, wind or water power....

[Titantron]

Im not comfortable at all with nuclear power plants being the future for America. Why bother disarming and preventing Terrorists and terrorist nations from having nuclear Weapons when we would be providing them more and more nuclear targets. They wont really need the nuclear part anymore.

[WantToTrade]

I've heard many arguments that Nuclear Power Plants are not the same as they were back then and that in today's society there is no reason to fear nuclear power. On the radio it was said that France almost entirely uses nuclear power as its source of energy.

[theonedru]

Nuclear power is outdated and wind/water power is clean and renewable, whereas nuclear energy you have highly poisonous toxic waste that has to be delt with no so with wind/ water or solar

[OnePimpTiger]

I've heard many arguments that Nuclear Power Plants are not the same as they were back then and that in today's society there is no reason to fear nuclear power. On the radio it was said that France almost entirely uses nuclear power as its source of energy.

Exactly right. Ignorant lobbying is all that has kept a rapid increase in nuclear power plants in America. It's much more efficient than fossil fuels, requires less land (for mining or farming) than fossil fuels or bio fuels, and is very renewable. But people still have the image of Chernobyl and Three Mile Island, which the problems that caused those have long since been fixed.

Nuclear power is outdated and wind/water power is clean and renewable, whereas nuclear energy you have highly poisonous toxic waste that has to be delt with no so with wind/ water or solar

As of now, though, wind and solar power is much less efficient than nuclear...and, I don't have a problem with it so much, but a lot of people are starting to knock wind power because the windmills are killing a lot of birds apparently. I don't think nuclear is a long-term solution, but in the interim 20-50 years (anyone who thinks a sustainable transition will happen quicker than that is naive), nuclear would be a very helpful short-term solution while other, more sustainable solutions are developed.