How will it be explained?

[ChrisT]

well it seems like the policy will help preserve the rain forest. But go ahead and read the piece yourself - by Andres Oppenheimer of the Miami Herald...

[KaskadskyjKozak]

well it seems like the policy will help preserve the rain forest. But go ahead and read the piece yourself - by Andres Oppenheimer of the Miami Herald...

 

Damn it! There's no URL in there...

[Squid]

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/columnists/andres_oppenheimer/11238815.htm

[KaskadskyjKozak]

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/columnists/andres_oppenheimer/11238815.htm

 

now I have to register

[Squid]

Posted on Sun, Mar. 27, 2005

 

THE OPPENHEIMER REPORT | FOR PAST COLUMNS, GO TO HERALD.COM/COLUMNISTS, CLICK ON COLUMNISTS

 

Brazil's alternative-fuel strategy is model for U.S.

 

This is what President Bush should do to bring down $55-a-barrel oil prices, solve the Middle Eastern crisis, shrug off Venezuela President Hugo Chávez's daily tirades against ''U.S. imperialism,'' and make all Americans happier: Follow Brazil's example.

 

No, I'm not talking about making friends with oil-rich dictators, nor shutting down the country for a whole week to celebrate Carnival (although, come to think of it, the latter wouldn't be a bad idea). I'm talking about Brazil's successful reduction of its foreign oil dependence through the development of alternative fuels.

 

The issue was brought to my attention in a recent interview with Sao Paulo GovGeraldo Alckmin, a possible contender for the 2006 presidential elections, who said that 50 percent of all new cars sold in Brazil this year will be ''mix-fuel,'' or able to use a combination of gasoline and ethanol.

 

''It's already a reality,'' Alckmin said. ``And in four years, virtually all new cars in the country will be mix-fuel.''

 

Brazil's reliance on oil imports has plummeted from 85 percent of its energy consumption in 1978 to 10 percent in 2002, according to that country's National Petroleum Agency. And this year, it will be nearly zero, Brazilian officials say.

 

Granted, ethanol already is used in U.S. Midwestern states, although in small quantities, as an additive. But Brazil has done something more radical: It pressed car makers to modify engines, so they can run on much higher percentages of ethanol.

 

DECADES OF WORK

 

Brazil's program started three decades ago with a government program to mix gasoline with sugar-based ethanol. Problem was, many car engines had trouble starting on the ethanol-mixed gasoline. In 1979, when oil prices soared, Brazil poured more money into research, and began producing ethanol-only cars.

 

Today, nearly 20 percent of Brazil's cars run on ethanol only, in addition to the 50 percent of new cars that have ''mix-fuel'' ethanol-and-oil engines.

 

In addition, Brazil is beginning to use biodiesel -- diesel made out of vegetable oils -- for its trucks and buses. Last week, Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva dedicated a biodiesel plant in Minas Gerais state, which will produce 12 million liters a year of this fuel.

 

FINANCIAL INCENTIVES

 

''We are telling the world that it is absolutely possible to produce fuel from renewable resources,'' Lula said at the dedication ceremony. The plant will produce fuel made from sunflower oil, soybeans and African palm. Peasants who sell these products to diesel refineries will get tax breaks ranging from 32 percent to 100 percent.

 

As part of its plan, Brazil wants to sell its ethanol to the United States, arguing that it's cheaper than U.S. corn-made ethanol.

 

''The United States would have a lot to gain by exporting its corn to Asia for human or animal consumption, and importing our ethanol for fuel,'' Brazil's Ambassador Roberto Abdenur says. ``We could be of great help to reduce the U.S. dependence on foreign oil.''

 

U.S. oil experts say it will be a hard sell. The U.S. government subsidizes U.S. corn producers, who would be up in arms if Washington lifts barriers to Brazilian ethanol. Also, the Bush administration's pet alternative fuel program is based on hydrogen, rather than ethanol.

 

BOOM TIMES AHEAD?

 

Be patient, U.S. officials say. If oil prices continue rising, sales of hybrid cars -- powered by electricity and oil -- will boom. And the Bush administration has asked Congress for $360 million for its ''Freedomcar'' hydrogen-powered-car research program in 2006.

 

My conclusion: I don't know whether U.S. cars should be running on ethanol, hydrogen, electricity or something else. But what's pretty clear to me is that Bush's current policy of spending $80 billion a year in Iraq while only $360 million for its ''Freedomcar'' alternative fuel program is absurd.

 

PUNITIVE CHARGES

 

Why not impose a 10 percent tax on the purchase of gas-guzzling SUVs, and a 50 percent tax on purchases of Hummers? And, also, why not punish Detroit automakers that put out inefficient cars?

 

If Bush did that, the United States would no longer live in fear of oil-rich tyrants, be they in Saudi Arabia or Venezuela. Oil prices would go down, and the air we breathe would be cleaner. It can be done -- just look at in Brazil.

[ChrisT]

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/columnists/andres_oppenheimer/11238815.htm

 

now I have to register

 

exactly...I didn't want to register. I actually read it in the paper. TO save you some time: they don't mention the rain forest but do you honestly think an energy conservation/alternative program is harmful to the rain forest. The only thing I can come up with is the farm fields needed to grow the corn to produce the ethanol (and maybe the biodiesel plant). Come to think it, I haven't heard Sting stumping for the rain forests lately. Too busy with tantric karma I guess...

[olyclimber]

You've got to watch Squid, KK...he cut out the last bit of the article.

 

Posted on Sun, Mar. 27, 2005

 

THE OPPENHEIMER REPORT | FOR PAST COLUMNS, GO TO HERALD.COM/COLUMNISTS, CLICK ON COLUMNISTS

 

Brazil's alternative-fuel strategy is model for U.S.

 

This is what President Bush should do to bring down $55-a-barrel oil prices, solve the Middle Eastern crisis, shrug off Venezuela President Hugo Chávez's daily tirades against ''U.S. imperialism,'' and make all Americans happier: Follow Brazil's example.

 

No, I'm not talking about making friends with oil-rich dictators, nor shutting down the country for a whole week to celebrate Carnival (although, come to think of it, the latter wouldn't be a bad idea). I'm talking about Brazil's successful reduction of its foreign oil dependence through the development of alternative fuels.

 

The issue was brought to my attention in a recent interview with Sao Paulo GovGeraldo Alckmin, a possible contender for the 2006 presidential elections, who said that 50 percent of all new cars sold in Brazil this year will be ''mix-fuel,'' or able to use a combination of gasoline and ethanol.

 

''It's already a reality,'' Alckmin said. ``And in four years, virtually all new cars in the country will be mix-fuel.''

 

Brazil's reliance on oil imports has plummeted from 85 percent of its energy consumption in 1978 to 10 percent in 2002, according to that country's National Petroleum Agency. And this year, it will be nearly zero, Brazilian officials say.

 

Granted, ethanol already is used in U.S. Midwestern states, although in small quantities, as an additive. But Brazil has done something more radical: It pressed car makers to modify engines, so they can run on much higher percentages of ethanol.

 

DECADES OF WORK

 

Brazil's program started three decades ago with a government program to mix gasoline with sugar-based ethanol. Problem was, many car engines had trouble starting on the ethanol-mixed gasoline. In 1979, when oil prices soared, Brazil poured more money into research, and began producing ethanol-only cars.

 

Today, nearly 20 percent of Brazil's cars run on ethanol only, in addition to the 50 percent of new cars that have ''mix-fuel'' ethanol-and-oil engines.

 

In addition, Brazil is beginning to use biodiesel -- diesel made out of vegetable oils -- for its trucks and buses. Last week, Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva dedicated a biodiesel plant in Minas Gerais state, which will produce 12 million liters a year of this fuel.

 

FINANCIAL INCENTIVES

 

''We are telling the world that it is absolutely possible to produce fuel from renewable resources,'' Lula said at the dedication ceremony. The plant will produce fuel made from sunflower oil, soybeans and African palm. Peasants who sell these products to diesel refineries will get tax breaks ranging from 32 percent to 100 percent.

 

As part of its plan, Brazil wants to sell its ethanol to the United States, arguing that it's cheaper than U.S. corn-made ethanol.

 

''The United States would have a lot to gain by exporting its corn to Asia for human or animal consumption, and importing our ethanol for fuel,'' Brazil's Ambassador Roberto Abdenur says. ``We could be of great help to reduce the U.S. dependence on foreign oil.''

 

U.S. oil experts say it will be a hard sell. The U.S. government subsidizes U.S. corn producers, who would be up in arms if Washington lifts barriers to Brazilian ethanol. Also, the Bush administration's pet alternative fuel program is based on hydrogen, rather than ethanol.

 

BOOM TIMES AHEAD?

 

Be patient, U.S. officials say. If oil prices continue rising, sales of hybrid cars -- powered by electricity and oil -- will boom. And the Bush administration has asked Congress for $360 million for its ''Freedomcar'' hydrogen-powered-car research program in 2006.

 

My conclusion: I don't know whether U.S. cars should be running on ethanol, hydrogen, electricity or something else. But what's pretty clear to me is that Bush's current policy of spending $80 billion a year in Iraq while only $360 million for its ''Freedomcar'' alternative fuel program is absurd.

 

PUNITIVE CHARGES

 

Why not impose a 10 percent tax on the purchase of gas-guzzling SUVs, and a 50 percent tax on purchases of Hummers? And, also, why not punish Detroit automakers that put out inefficient cars?

 

If Bush did that, the United States would no longer live in fear of oil-rich tyrants, be they in Saudi Arabia or Venezuela. Oil prices would go down, and the air we breathe would be cleaner. It can be done -- just look at in Brazil.

 

DESTROYING THE RAINFOREST

 

However, as a side effect, Brazil's alternative-fuel strategy destroys the rainforest. Too bad.

[Squid]

sneaky sneaky.

 

My edit was unintended. a thousand pardons.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

well it seems like the policy will help preserve the rain forest. But go ahead and read the piece yourself - by Andres Oppenheimer of the Miami Herald...

 

it doesn't say anything about the rainforest.

 

Ethanol comes from distilling grain. Grain is grown on fields, which, in Brazil, have likely come from cleared rainforest. Could the US even grow enough extra grain to produce the required ethanol to fuel all its cars?

[Dru]

you can make ethanol out of many types of vegetable biomass

you don't have to use grain...

be the first on your block for an absinthe-powered VW

[KaskadskyjKozak]

you can make ethanol out of many types of vegetable biomass

you don't have to use grain...

 

like rainforest biomass?

[Dru]

Sure, guarana-powered Ferraris...

 

I was thinking more of stalks and hulls and twigs and weeds and coffee husks and grounds and stuff. Even wood waste from pulp mills. Cow shit. That kinda thing. Like what the Ukranians and Russian home brewers make vodka out of.

 

Let's not forget that unlike hydrocarbons from the ground, the CO2 from biomass is already part of the atmospheric carbon cycle... burning it as ethanol isn't going to raise atmospheric carbon any higher than letting it rot would.

[j_b]

80% of on-going deforestation in the amazon (much of it illegal) is to raise beef and soy in huge holdings that are the property of multinational corps and the uber rich. Most all of the stuff produced is exported to europe and north america.

[Dru]

in huge holdings that are the property of multinational corps and the uber rich

 

but it would be OK if they were the property of peasant farmers or Chavistas, right

[j_b]

where does this come from?

 

no, it would not be ok but the poor we claim to want to save would at least see something for the degradation of their ecosystems especially if they did not grow cash crops. anyway, i do not necessarily feel we have any great moral authority to tell brazilians to preserve the forests we failed to preserve in the northern hemisphere, although it'd be great if they did because it is in their own interest as well as ours.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

I was thinking more of stalks and hulls and twigs and weeds and coffee husks and grounds and stuff. Even wood waste from pulp mills. Cow shit. That kinda thing. Like what the Ukranians and Russian home brewers make vodka out of.

 

Let's not forget that unlike hydrocarbons from the ground, the CO2 from biomass is already part of the atmospheric carbon cycle... burning it as ethanol isn't going to raise atmospheric carbon any higher than letting it rot would.

 

So what is the down side?

 

If you leave the stalks etc to rot, then nutrients are returned to the soil. If you haul them away, and process them to make ethanol, how will the soil retain its nutrients.

 

(Ukraine has the richest soil in the world, Chornozem. So that will not compare - you could grow crops there almost forever and not worry about this)

[j_b]

upon further reflection, if you are referring to my ability to feel compassion for those trying to eek out a desperate living out of slash and burn versus my total lack of empathy for joe investor making another buck out of another acre of former rainforest to raise cattle, i guess you are right i do feel there is a difference.

[Dru]

Canada and America, like Brazil, are net beef exporters

Europe and Asia are beef importers.

 

It's actually quite hard to find Brazilian beef in Canada, except as corned beef. The Argentinian corned beef is cheaper too. Must be the pampas.

[Fairweather]

My main point with respect to the third world was that adopting policies that will, in practice, increase local poverty in those countries will also result in more a rapid deterioration of the local environments in those countries.

 

classic strawman argument. nobody argued for increasing poverty in developing nations.

 

Global depletion of non-renewable resources is a related problem, but not identical to the condition of the local environment in the third-world.

 

say what? depletion of resources and destruction of ecosystems is not "a related problem" but the main topic of discussion in this thread, and despite what your tendencious discourse implies it is principally the doing of developed nations. playing the wittle-fiddle-of-eradicating-poverty-in-developping-nations to justify the continuing policy of resource extraction beyond sustainability is nothing more than demagoguery.

 

The bottom line is that mankind has yet to categorically reject any technologies that result in increased comfort and well-being so the only way to repress effective demand for the resources used to produce those things is either by limiting effective demand through poverty or imposing restrictions on their use via state power of some sort. I personally don't think that Ming Li and Motombo are going to forsake electric lighting and hot meals voluntarily, so the only hope is more efficient resource utilization. Converting all of mankind to super-efficient flourescent bulbs, well insulated homes, and recycling is a hell of a lot more realistic than fundamentally altering human nature.

 

what? you are now aguing that conservation will make the difference? this is what you wrote earlier:

 

" The other morsel of irony in the Left fringe's critique of the Right Fringe's ecological track record is that when you look at actual BTU's per household, there's not much difference. You have electric lights, modern appliances, an automobile - etc - just like they do. Hardly enough of a difference to warrant the self righteous grandstanding and condemnation issuing forth from the Left fringe"

 

so which is it going to be: is conservation key or not? you can't have it both ways.

 

your interpretation of "human nature", the supposed desire of some to change it and the means available to address the problems belong to the realm of cartoons.

 

Your comrades tried that one and the experiment went rather poorly.

 

and the demonization goes on ... weak. let's face it, under the pretense of an educated argument you debate like a rightwing thug.

 

j_b,

 

I think it is sad that you respond to JayB's well reasoned and thoughtful points with mockery, condescension, and an accusation of right-wing thuggery. It should be apparent to anyone here who possesses even a modicum of civility that you will never conduct a reasoned debate or cede even the smallest point.

 

And since it is I who is the true right-wing thug, I'll spell it out for your smug little pea-brain:

 

I enjoy my lifestyle. I consider it modest by western standards, but I certainly consume more than my fellow man in, say, Bhutan. I don't, however, buy for one second that he'd be better off without me and my fellow modern consumer around. If someone who shares beliefs like yours ever assumes power and subsequently tries to wholly take away the economic and political freedom I now enjoy, I, and probably the majority of the citizens of this country will respond with violence. Our country possesses the greatest military in the history of the planet, and it's primary purpose is to preserve my way of life. An officer corps that believes in the dream will likely protect my ideals from yours well into the future.

 

So you see, j_b, I'm not at all worried about your smug arguments here. Without the people and the power to back up your dream, you are doing nothing more than wasting keystrokes.

 

Carry on.

[catbirdseat]

I was thinking more of stalks and hulls and twigs and weeds and coffee husks and grounds and stuff. Even wood waste from pulp mills. Cow shit. That kinda thing. Like what the Ukranians and Russian home brewers make vodka out of.

 

Let's not forget that unlike hydrocarbons from the ground, the CO2 from biomass is already part of the atmospheric carbon cycle... burning it as ethanol isn't going to raise atmospheric carbon any higher than letting it rot would.

 

So what is the down side?

 

If you leave the stalks etc to rot, then nutrients are returned to the soil. If you haul them away, and process them to make ethanol, how will the soil retain its nutrients.

 

Actually, the nutrients you could be referring to, such as potassium and phosphate would be left from the process could be turned into fertilizer. Nitrates may or may not be lost depending on the process.

[Dr_Flash_Amazing]

If someone who shares beliefs like yours ever assumes power and subsequently tries to wholly take away the economic and political freedom I now enjoy, I, and probably the majority of the citizens of this country will respond with violence. Our country possesses the greatest military in the history of the planet, and it's primary purpose is to preserve my way of life. An officer corps that believes in the dream will likely protect my ideals from yours well into the future.

 

Fuck the military, fuck violence, and fuck your bullshit ideals. Fuck also the flag, and lastly, fuck you. Eat a bag of dicks, you wannabe John Wayne, bourgeois, pseudopatriotic pig.

[JayB]

Ah yes. Still raising the clenched fist of the proletariat in one hand while holding the soy-machiato in the stainless Che'-Gear logo mug in the other. Precious.

 

 

 

"So you've been to school

for a year or two

And you know you've seen it all.

In Daddy's car

thinking you'll go far

Back east your type don't crawl.

 

Playing ethnicky jazz

to parade your snazz

On your five grand stereo.

Braggin' that you know

how the niggers feel cold

And the slum's got so much soul.

 

It's time to taste what you most fear

Right Guard will not help you here.

Brace yourself, my dear...

Brace yourself, my dear...

 

For a Holiday in Cambodia

It's tough, kid, but it's life.

It's a Holiday in Cambodia

Don't forget to pack a wife.

 

You're a star-belly sneech

You suck like a leech

You want everyone to act like you.

Kiss ass while you bitch

So you can get rich

While your boss gets richer off you.

 

Well, you'll work harder

with a gun in your back

For a bowl of rice a day.

Slave for soldiers

'Til you starve

Then your head is skewered on a stake.

 

Now you can go, where the people are one.

Now you can go where they get things done.

What you need, my son...

What you need, my son...

 

Is a Holiday in Cambodia

Where people are dressed in black.

A Holiday in Cambodia

Where you'll kiss ass or crack

 

(instrumental break)

 

(chanting)

Pol Pot, Pol Pot, Pol Pot, Pol Pot, etc.,...

 

It's a Holiday in Cambodia

Where you'll do what you're told.

It's a Holiday in Cambodia

Where the slums got so much soul

Pol Pot."

 

Couldn't resist.

[Dr_Flash_Amazing]

Ah yes. Still raising the clenched fist of the proletariat in one hand while holding the soy-machiato in the stainless Che'-Gear logo mug in the other. Precious - and about as convincing as the white suburban teenage "gangstas" straight outta Mercer Island....

 

First, DFA drinks regular milk (organic, please), and you won't find any twenty-bucks-at-the-mall Cuban revolutionary tchotchkes in this house, Bub. And second, you're gonna try and call DFA a hypocrite/faker, but you're a ... right-winger Republican quoting the Dead Kennedys? Jello would no doubt be flattered to have his ideals leveraged to further your evil elephantine agenda (don't forget to send Klaus Flouride et al a royalty check!).

 

Pretty witty retort for such a straight-laced red-stater as yourself, though. One thumb up, one thumb down.

Edited April 1, 2005 by Dr_Flash_Amazing

[JayB]

Why not trade the pretend anarchist identity/gig for something more convincing and authentic like medieval-warrior-renaissance-festival-attendee or rain-forest-shaman channeler or something?

 

It's gotta be rough parking the subie with the anarchy sticker on the back in the company lot every day. Then - the ignominy of seeing the kids in the mall rolling out of the "Hot Topix" store looking just like you when you whip out the black-hooded sweater and all for those rallies on the weekends....

 

 

Rage against The Gap...

[Fairweather]

If someone who shares beliefs like yours ever assumes power and subsequently tries to wholly take away the economic and political freedom I now enjoy, I, and probably the majority of the citizens of this country will respond with violence. Our country possesses the greatest military in the history of the planet, and it's primary purpose is to preserve my way of life. An officer corps that believes in the dream will likely protect my ideals from yours well into the future.

 

Fuck the military, fuck violence, and fuck your bullshit ideals. Fuck also the flag, and lastly, fuck you. Eat a bag of dicks, you wannabe John Wayne, bourgeois, pseudopatriotic pig.

 

Brilliant. Well stated. Rise up, Dr Flash! Show us the way o' wannabe revolutionary. Surely your words will change the world.