Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

AverageJoe90

(10,745 posts)
9. There you go again with the "infinite" schtick.
Wed Nov 21, 2012, 09:16 PM
Nov 2012
You've been given the math multiple times by multiple people regarding yields and required acreage needed to fuel today's production.


Concerning hemp, yes. But again, what I said was, it certainly would be doable for corporations to start relying more on biofuels like vegetable oil, instead of petroleum.

These machines are burning the earth's legacy; millions of years of the suns solar energy stored beneath ground are being unlocked in a flash in time,


True, but these are hydrocarbons, though, not solar energy.

and you think we can infinitely power this level of exploitation/production


Again with the "infinitely" schtick.

with real-time biological solar yields (without subsidizing crop yields with oil-based fertilizer and depleted potash, all while the earth is experiencing flooding and drought)?


Pipe dreams is what it all is.


No, not really. I have admitted in the past, that of course, biofuels aren't really a silver bullet by any stretch; same thing goes with adaptation, less consumption, etc., though all of those things would help mitigate the problem.

What is a pipe dream, however, is thinking that we can solve our problem by not consuming energy. But of course, facts don't always matter to devotees to a pet theory, do they?

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»Climate change evident ac...»Reply #9