Soy, Biofuels, and Environmental Disaster in Paraguay - Utne - Cure Ignorance https://www.utne.com/environment/soy-biofuels-environmental-disaster-in-paraguay-blog-gordon/
Biofuels and climate change: the facts | Campaign against Climate Change https://www.campaigncc.org/biofuelfacts
The US biofuel mandate helps farmers, but does little for energy security and harms the environment https://theconversation.com/the-us-biofuel-mandate-helps-farmers-but-does-little-for-energy-security-and-harms-the-environment-168459
Biofuels turn out to be a climate mistake – here's why 00 John DeCicco, University of Michigan https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/theconversation.com/amp/biofuels-turn-out-to-be-a-climate-mistake-he
Some articles about biofuel::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
500+ scientists tell EU to end tree burning for energy “Regrowth takes time the world does not have to solve climate change”, they write. Over 500 scientists are writing to EU Commission President Von der Leyen, European Council President Charles Michel, US President Biden, Japanese Prime Minister Suga and South Korean President Moon, in a letter published today.
With the review of the EU CO₂ emissions standards for cars and vans scheduled for June 2021, some, notably the oil and gas industry and automotive suppliers, are advocating adding CO₂ credits for advanced biofuels and synthetic fuels into the vehicle standards. T&E’s new analysis shows why this is not credible — neither from an environmental nor from an economic point of view.
https://cleantechnica.com/2021/05/01/why-e-fuels-in-cars-make-no-economic-or-environmental-sense/ Ireland: why our Sitka planting policy needs the chop
Widespread logging & destruction of forest habitats for #biomass wood pellets needs to be revisited by EU.
Debate in Europe over green credits for producing biofuels from renewable energy. https://cleantechnica.com/2021/05/01/why-e-fuels-in-cars-make-no-economic-or-environmental-se
There is a belief that if a fuel has carbon that is already a part of the “surface cycle”, that the carbon can be considered to be a short-term addition to the atmosphere – so short term that it need not be counted as an emission.
So, the “carbon intensity” of a biofuel includes any part of the fuel, or the energy used to create the fuel that came from fossil fuel as a real emission.
Here is where I have a problem with that model. The very carbon that is being treated as a good source of fuel energy came from a process that made a decision not to use that carbon as a soil additive, which it naturally would have been without human intervention.
In a stable ecosystem where people are not adding and subtracting from a normal carbon cycle, plants (small to monstrous) grow until end of life. During their life, they increase in carbon, which can be considered sequestered, until some disturbance. Consider the following end-of-life possibilities:
The plant dies in place. Wind and water may move the leaves and other portions of the plant around, somewhat, but in a stable ecosystem, the dead plant will decompose in a way that becomes fertilizer. The life system as a whole doesn't die, and is used to reprocessing dead plants into new ones on site.
During that time, the root system usually does not die. Not all of the nearby plants die at the same time. Root systems cooperate with each other to grow whatever plants are available to grow. They actively participate in recycling that carbon into new storage systems.
Sometimes that process is aided by having the dead plants become foods to animals and fungi.
A stable ecosystem is constantly recycling carbon.
When humans intervene, to create E90 gasoline, they introduce a non-natural industrial process to grow a mono-crop and harvest it all at the same time. Generally, they will till the soil and add amendments to the soil that include carbon from fossil-fuel aided processes. The plants grow, and the fruit of the crop is removed and turned into fuel. The carbon path is to mechanize bringing carbon to the field for it to be turned into the kernels that can be turned into the mash that can be fermented into alcohol. That carbon was not a gift.
Then, someone proposes that the stalks of the corn could also be fermented instead of being turned back into the soil. True, you can do that, but only at the expense of replacing that carbon with more fossil-fuel generated carbon amendments..
And, so it goes.
You can pick other crops and go through equivalent analyses.
You can also say that there are scraps “that have no value”, and they can be harvested for turning into fuel. For example, leave or twigs or dead trees, or … On the one hand, if those “fuel” items are a fire hazard because of some forest management issues, then there may be utility in changing how they are handled. But every bit of carbon in those “fuel” items came from the ground through a growth process. Removing them removes local carbon. Turning those into some sort of compost that isn't a fire hazard, and will be accepted back into the soil directly supports the local ecosystem in performing it's natural sequestration..
Someone can clearcut a natural forest in Indonesia and grow palm trees for oil. Then someone can suggest turning that palm oil into Diesel biofuel. The carbon in that biofuel was stolen from the forest in Indonesia when the forest was turned into cropland.
It is very hard to create a scenario that produces the “fuel” source without stealing carbon from a source ecosystem.
If you watch David Attenborough's documentary “A Life on Our Planet”, you will find his witness statement. In Attenborough’s words, “Our home was not limitless. We are ultimately bound by and defined by the resources on this planet.” He points out; ” We urgently need society (and the politicians we elect) to recognize the broader destruction of our natural world by a thousand cuts, and refuse to accept this any longer.“
Why do we continue to believe we can push the ecosystem just a little bit farther?
“There was nothing to stop us, unless we stopped ourselves,” he says in the new documentary – and sadly, we have not. Vast swathes of forest have been cleared, waters polluted, species driven extinct. Even our oceans are wrought having been treated as humanity’s toilet bowl for the past millennia, 90% of fish are gone and corals are being bleached white. By 1997, only 46% of the planet’s wilderness remained. 70% of the birds on the planet are domestic – we’ve “replaced the wild with the tame” as he says.
We cannot expand cropland, forever. In order to restore balance, we must restore wildness to cropland. Biofuels is the wrong direction.
(See above for misc. news sorted by topics, and not refreshed so often.)
heat_dome_discussion_for_action_team.pdf The Engineers for a Sustainable Future asked for an update on the “Heat Dome” situation that has been a world-wide news item for the last couple of weeks. The referenced PDF is our current discussion paper based on many expert references.
Some pages to help keep track of things to follow:
==== Transportation Electrification Infrastructure Needs Analysis ====
The TEINA study will highlight gaps in electrical vehicle charging infrastructure and propose solutions to help accelerate widespread transportation electrification in Oregon.
This topic comes up regularly since the retort to trying to fix things is to say; “It costs too much.” And the answer must be; “Compared to what?”
In attempting to get Governor Brown's Executive Order to drive things to good conclusions, the main target is Decarbonization , so we will try to keep information on how to think of that here:
One aspect of decarbonization is electrification of transportation, and a subset of that is the Medium and Heavy-Duty vehicles. Here is some of that:
Here are some thoughts, I (Ed Averill), put into a slide show:
Introduced by Catherine McDonald, Chair of Oregon Global Warming Commission
Adam Schultz has been at ODOE for 4+ years; was Program Manager at UC Davis Energy Institute for 4 years after; being a Public Utilities Regulatory Analys for the California Public Utilities Commission for 2 years; after being a Law Fellow for Ron Wyden.
Sarah Edmonds position is at PGE. She held a similar position at PacifiCorp 3 years ago. She is a lawyer, graduating from Georgetown University Law Center in 2003
Shelly-Ann Maye, who is at the PUC, now, was an Energy Consultant after being a Wind Energy Transmission Regulatory Manager at Wind Energy Transmission Texas, LLC, and was Transmission & Regulatory Affairs Manager for Berkshire Hathaway Energy before that; and Analyst for NSTAR in Massachusetts
“The solutions will not only save consumers money, but also create jobs and provide energy and more international security, while substantially reducing air pollution and climate damage from energy.”
See also: Newsletter announcement
James Edward Hansen '@DrJamesEHansen' Jan 25 Draft of Chapter 46 is available for fact checking at Sophie’s Planet #35–
https://mailchi.mp/caa/sophies-planet-35-chapter-46-equal-protection-of-the-laws?e=[UNIQID]https://tracking.offshorewind.biz/2021/02/03/orsteds-operational-wind-farms-give-14-boost-to-2020-earnings/?utm_source=offshorewind&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter_2021-02-04&cctw=AQAAABAgoAhAuYGbg92BnjhTwCo Have we made clear to the Judiciary the threat that climate change poses to young people and the unborn? Whose fault is it?
Ørsted’s Operational Wind Farms Give 14% Boost to 2020 Earnings The operating profit (EBITDA) amounted to DKK 18.1 billion, a 4 % increase compared to last year and above the company’s most recent guidance of DKK 16-17 billion
“It is a hope that implores us at an uncompromising core to keep rising up for an Earth more than worth fighting for.” http://climaterealityproject.org
24 Hours of Reality: “Earthrise” by Amanda Gorman – Dec 4, 2018
For reference, her poem for Joe Biden's Inauguration:
We are in a start-up phase of bringing Governor Kate Brown's Executive Order on Climate to life. A long list of agencies, each trying to fit this into their perception of what their jobs were. Some goes really well. Some doesn't. Lots to think about. See also study_of_kate_browns_executive_order_on_climate
Making sense out of transportation as a climate issue, and as a justice issue, and as a sustainability issue is hard, and needs deep thinking before spending money on the wrong direction.
Human Impacts Inst 2/3/2021
Enjoy this beautiful poem written and performed by GiGi Buddie. What stories of frontline climate leadership need to be heard and amplified? Nominate an Indigenous climate leader today for our Climate Crossroads series at
A federal judge blocked the controversial Keystone XL oil pipeline Thursday, saying the Trump administration’s justification for approving it last year was incomplete.
In a major victory for environmentalists and indigenous rights groups, Judge Brian Morris of the District Court for the District of Montana overturned President Trump’s permit for the Canada-to-Texas pipeline, which the president signed shortly after taking office last year.