Science

Dr.Jones

(32 posts)

7. Robbing Peter to pay Paul

Fri Oct 28, 2016, 08:06 AM

Oct 2016

There's no doubt about the accuracy of the raw data in those studies, but as I said they don't account for the effect of replacing the nutrients contained in the removed corn stover or switchgrass. They don't account for the irreplaceable nature of the protein that would be lost in their process. They don't account for the value of the DDG's which carry 3x the protein per lb that whole corn does, which also saves on emissions when it's shipped to those needing the feed. They also don't account for the fact that electric cars, even though they run super efficient, are still little more than a novelty item.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

60 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Have We Already Won the Renewables Revolution? [View all] kristopher Oct 2016 OP

Ethanol Dr.Jones Oct 2016 #1

The numbers might change your view... kristopher Oct 2016 #4

Fertilization? Dr.Jones Oct 2016 #5

That's a comparison of two methods for producing (bio)fuels for ICEs kristopher Oct 2016 #6

Robbing Peter to pay Paul Dr.Jones Oct 2016 #7

Actually they do consider the nature and role of the feedstocks.... kristopher Oct 2016 #9

Ummmm... Dr.Jones Oct 2016 #11

Ummmmm.... kristopher Oct 2016 #12

Maybe you grabbed the wrong link? Dr.Jones Oct 2016 #13

So you aren't referencing sustainability practices ... kristopher Oct 2016 #14

? Dr.Jones Oct 2016 #15

It isn't complicated kristopher Oct 2016 #16

DOA Dr.Jones Oct 2016 #17

You are making the unwarranted assumption that it isn't included. kristopher Oct 2016 #18

Biology 101 Dr.Jones Oct 2016 #19

Which has nothing at all to do with the specious nature of the criticism. kristopher Oct 2016 #20

WTF? Dr.Jones Oct 2016 #21

. kristopher Oct 2016 #22

Food vs. Fuel Dr.Jones Oct 2016 #23

"Since you're hell bent on playing stupid..." kristopher Oct 2016 #24

Food vs. Fuel....again Dr.Jones Oct 2016 #25

Subject kristopher Oct 2016 #26

Food vs. Fuel.....take 3 Dr.Jones Oct 2016 #27

The fact that you think you're offering cogent criticism is astounding. kristopher Oct 2016 #28

Food vs. Fuel.....take IV Dr.Jones Oct 2016 #29

If you want to have a discussion about ethanol start another thread. kristopher Oct 2016 #30

My bad. Dr.Jones Oct 2016 #31

Yes, it is. kristopher Oct 2016 #32

My F150 gets about 4 mpg less with E85 than E10. When I pull my trailer is goes to about 5.5 less. tonyt53 Oct 2016 #52

e-cars just shift the dirt around if powered by coal generated electricity instead of petroleum nt msongs Oct 2016 #2

I don't think that's accurate, but... kristopher Oct 2016 #3

Have we won? progressoid Oct 2016 #8

Good to know. kristopher Oct 2016 #10

"What could derail the revolution?" NickB79 Oct 2016 #33

Saying it will fail because it will fail is a fail in itself. kristopher Oct 2016 #34

Yeah, I'm sure things will work out just fine for us NickB79 Oct 2016 #39

How is that related to the OP? kristopher Oct 2016 #40

The idea of a 'trajectory' implies 'momentum' or 'inertia' muriel_volestrangler Oct 2016 #35

That's an interesting thought... kristopher Oct 2016 #36

I don't see at all that "we as a species" have deliberately chosen renewables muriel_volestrangler Oct 2016 #37

It sounds like you're describing the inertia of the existing fossil system. kristopher Oct 2016 #38

I'd like to cover one point I neglected to address earlier kristopher Oct 2016 #42

Shot down because as a whole, people don't care enough about it muriel_volestrangler Oct 2016 #44

I'm sorry but "the same thing" did not happen in the UK. kristopher Oct 2016 #45

"the challenge is to make that work" - you were saying the revolution was already won muriel_volestrangler Oct 2016 #46

I'm sorry, but are you equating a single minor battle with an entire war? kristopher Oct 2016 #47

Here's what I was referring to muriel_volestrangler Oct 2016 #48

"The article says that victory is inevitable. It's wrong." kristopher Oct 2016 #49

The support is the figures. We have fuck all renewables so far. muriel_volestrangler Oct 2016 #50

"And, as I said, there is no 'inertia' in economics. That's wishful thinking." kristopher Oct 2016 #51

No, I'm not claming inertia there muriel_volestrangler Oct 2016 #53

You haven't made a single legitimate argument yet. kristopher Oct 2016 #54

No, you've misread that. I attacked you for knowing *less* muriel_volestrangler Oct 2016 #55

Nope. kristopher Oct 2016 #56

Your complacency is worrying muriel_volestrangler Oct 2016 #57

Great way to "win" by false framing. kristopher Oct 2016 #58

UK drops to new low in global renewable energy league table kristopher Nov 2016 #60

Inertia and trajectory kristopher Nov 2016 #59

I believe big oil has realized it Victor_c3 Oct 2016 #41

It hasn't been OPEC so much as it's been Saudi Arabia. kristopher Oct 2016 #43