Take Your Cob And Shove It - The Debate Is Not Over
Posted by Andy on September 24th, 2007
If you want to know why many conservatives are livid with Republican office holders, one might not have to look any farther than the green push from environmental RINOs. And well, as usual, their race to be hip, populist, or in the media spotlight, they’ve sold their souls to the environemntal lobbies.
And as many of us have been preaching for a while, the cure may be worse than the ‘addiction’.
A renewable energy source designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions is contributing more to global warming than fossil fuels, a study suggests.
Measurements of emissions from the burning of biofuels derived from rapeseed and maize [AAA: corn IE Ethanol] have been found to produce more greenhouse gas emissions than they save.
Go read the rest, then call your favorite Green Republican and ask them why the heck they are pushing mandates that will pollute the environment even worse.
Rapeseed and maize biodiesels were calculated to produce up to 70 per cent and 50 per cent more greenhouse gases respectively than fossil fuels. The concerns were raised over the levels of emissions of nitrous oxide, which is 296 times more powerful as a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide. Scientists found that the use of biofuels released twice as much as nitrous oxide as previously realised.
I guess now it is time to have Nitrous Oxide credits.
Sphere: Related Content
September 24th, 2007 at 10:43 am
300 times more Nitrous Oxide — it makes me laugh!
(Thank you, I’ll be here all week).
September 24th, 2007 at 4:07 pm
I don’t know why everybody is so excited about CO2, or about NOx. Water vapor is 95% of greenhouse gasses are water vapor, and burning any HYDROcarbon produces more water vapor than CO2. That’s just simple chemistry.
September 24th, 2007 at 4:14 pm
But I thought certain elected officials, in a bipartisan nature, were going to save us from our nasty dirty carbon emitting lifestyles, and get us on the green so we could save the planet…….
I guess they are full of hot air. I believe methane is involved though.
September 24th, 2007 at 4:31 pm
JE-
Question — my biology is very rusty. Don’t plants give off water vapor as well as CO2? I thought I’ve heard that corn, for example, throws a lot of water vapor into the air. Do some give off more water vapor than CO2? Is it possible that planting corn or even trees is adding to the greenhouse gas problem more than it is helping? If so, then shouldn’t those carbon credits be turned into carbon debits?
September 24th, 2007 at 4:33 pm
I meant O2 not CO2 in the first question and the 2nd question shoud say “than CO2 used”
September 24th, 2007 at 5:27 pm
Plants through the Krebs (Citric Acid) cycle respire by taking in CO2 and releasing O2 (oxygen). The best solution to CO2 levels is not by lowering CO2 emissions…its by planting more trees.
Anything organic contains carbon, but also contains vast amounts of nitrogen. Burning any type of alternative fuel from recently live plants would release vast amounts of nitrous oxide.
This is not about saving the planet. This is about destroying business and promoting a dangerous political agenda. What the environmentalists and the jihadists have in common is that they both want to take us back to the 7th Century.
Burn oil…save the planet!
September 24th, 2007 at 10:18 pm
Sorry, but I’m simply trying to point out how absolutely silly and non-scientific the whole Global Warming religion is. Science says that we produce more CO2 from biofuels than we do from oil. Science says (apparently) that we produce more NOx from biofuels than we do from oil. Science says that we produce as much H2O from burning biofuels as we do from burning oil, and all of them are greenhouse gasses. Water vapor is about 95% of the total, CO2 about 3%, and Nox is a small fraction of that. The man-made fraction of CO2 is about 4%, and of water vapor less than 1%. So, what are the chances that our measly 0.12% of the CO2 (the only thing politicians want to regulate) is the whole cause of global warming, IF IT EXISTS in the first place?
September 24th, 2007 at 10:21 pm
Sorry, that’s 0.12% of the total greenhouse gases. Those are about 5% of the atmosphere, by the way, so what we’re trying to regulate out of existence is 0.006% of the atmosphere. Yes, that should help immensely.