March Against Monsanto

[Steve Rozmiarek]

There is round up ready sweet corn
Seminis.com

Sort of. I tried to buy some this year, and couldn't get any. I'm not so sure it isn't hung up in a regulatory process.

[Dave Sheldrake]

Correct Steve, energy cannot be neither created or destroyed. (First law of thermodynamics)

NO energy source is a net gain, it is simply not possible due to the second law of thermodynamics (Entropy of an isolated system always increases)

That said there are other fundamentals to consider such as Fusion that if perfected can liberate more energy than is used in the liberation process.

In laymans terms, you simply cannot make something out of nothing.

cheers

Dave

[David Weaver]

I like that, but personally prefer the use of rye to corn.

This thread is on the verge of rehashing an old subject, so here is a link to a thread that we discussed the ethanol subject, and I put this farmers perspective into.

http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthre...-here-Vs-there

David, you'll probably agree that there is very little new energy created on this planet. It's a balanced system for the most part, whatever we use for fuel has turned light water and nutrients that something else has already synthesised, into a form that we can use. Coal, wood, natural gas, oil, and corn all follow that idea. Even nuclear, you have to go way back in time to see when the process that turned subatomic particles into uranium, and I am certainly no expert, but the release of energy from our splitting of atoms probably corresponds to the stars initial energy put into the creation of that uranium. My point is, what we humans do is manipulate energy and build a civilization around it. Releasing the stored energy that matter contains drives this human race. Humans have figured out how to store energy and use it. We don't make new energy, to the best of my limited knowledge.

So, I ask you, how can any energy source be a net gain? Isn't it all a zero sum game if you dig deep enough?

I think we're getting mixed up about energy available for use vs. potential energy or stored energy. If the comparison is taking cheap saudi oil out of the ground (back when it was that easy) where it existed in large pores and refining it into gasoline, it is a far less economically involved method of making energy available for use. The idea that there is no net change in energy would allow us to argue that things with no net energy production or negative net energy production are good ideas, and I odn't agree with that.

The problem with biofuels is they are very energy intensive to raise, convert and transport, and the total potential generation of energy from them each year is abysmal. It is probably actually cheaper to make energy from solar panels, it just isn't convenient to put a solar panel on a car and turn the key at midnight and get energy from it. We've already seen that solar doesn't much benefit us locally, either, because it's going to be a long time before it's cheaper to manufacture panels or vacuum heating tubes, etc, here vs. doing so overseas.

The cost of energy is a huge deal in an economy, though, and treading water and raising the price of it is a quick way to become noncompetitive and lower the standard of living for all involved, so having a bias toward locally available energy that generates votes but not much net usable energy is not a good long term plan.

[Scott Shepherd]

In laymans terms, you simply cannot make something out of nothing.

cheers

Dave

Clearly you never met my ex-wife

[Dave Sheldrake]

hahahah nice one Scotty