Re: [biofuels-biz] Re: [biofuel] FW: Earth Can't Meet Human Demand for Resources, Says Study
Dear friends, It is interesting not only to get the reference of good article but also to see that the tempers lost also bring better analysis of the same subject with so many additional references. Look forward for more serious reading like this from this group Karanth from India [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~--> Free $5 Love Reading Risk Free! http://us.click.yahoo.com/3PCXaC/PfREAA/Ey.GAA/9bTolB/TM -~-> Biofuels at Journey to Forever http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel at WebConX http://www.webconx.com/2000/biofuel/biofuel.htm List messages are archived at the Info-Archive at NNYTech: http://archive.nnytech.net/ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [biofuels-biz] Re: [biofuel] FW: Earth Can't Meet Human Demand for Resources, Says Study
Excellent post, Ed. I would add two things. First, and i say this not having actually read the study by Wackernagel, that in addition to the concept of ecological footprint, it is also describing a shadow ecology. Shadow ecology is a term coined I believe in the book "Beyond Interdependence" by MacNeill, Winsemius, and Yakushiji. But it was really fleshed out in "Shadows in the Forest" by Peter Dauvergne. Basically, the notion is that economic interdependence leads to ecological interdependence, because consumers in one area cast the ecological "shadow" of their consumption to the regions whither come the resources (or where pollution is dumped). So that demand for rainforest timber in Japan casts an ecological shadow over say, Indonesia, or when Europe ships off toxic waste to be "stored" in Africa. In response to Dave Edmondson of Ferndale Washington, who asserted that this was "crap," I am curious what he means by this? I also live in the Puget Sound, in Seattle. Dave, I would think the massive depletion of resources in your immediate "neighborhood" would provide ample evidence of the type of ecosystem stresses referred to in the report. We have an ongoing crisis with Salmonid species, due to overuse and poor management of both rivers and fisheries. We had a crisis in forest management come to a head less than a decade ago. Orcas are likely to be listed as a threatened species. Transportation gridlock is out of control, and more people move to the region and we simply don't have the infrastructure or political will to address the problem. We're losing prime farmland to suburban sprawl daily, in spite of the Growth Management Act. And those are just some of the headliners. What kind of evidence are you looking for? That said, I would love to talk with you about the BD you're making. I want to get the Tribe involved in this, but am still trying to make it work. Best regards, Thor Skov --- "Neoteric Biofuels Inc." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Look, folks, I would not have posted the article if > I did not think it > worthy of this group and of potential interest. I > was trained in environment > and management at the master's level, and > sustainability and the concepts > mentioned here are well-established and known, as is > the author of the > study. My present work in this field is a direct > result of the thesis > project undertaken for that degree, and that > interest in biodiesel and SVO > came directly from my interest in renewable > resources, recycling, > agriculture, economics, air quality, rural economic > development, and > sustainability. Many people on this list share those > interests and in fact > are inspired and motivated by them to engage in > production and use of > biofuels. > > The fact that it was published where it was, and the > other people on the > team (if you take the time to look it up), should > tell you something about > the credibility of this work. Like any news > article, there is more detail > behind the scenes and that is easily found by a > visit to the web site > mentioned. > > The report mentioned here is part of a body of work > and a concept (the > "ecological footprint" concept, pioneered by Dr. > Bill Rees at the University > of British Columbia) > > There are certain facts of life that you cannot > ignore - public policy is > made by people in all levels of government, around > the world. They are > making decisions and setting policy, subsidies, > grants, taxes and laws that > we will all be living with in the future. They > should be educated in the > concepts related to this study, and thank goodness > they are, through the > hard work of people like Wackernagel, Rees and many > other well-respected > researchers. > > Biofuels interest is one small piece of this lager > puzzle of how we can > improve the quality of life for the projected > soon-to-be-10 billion human > inhabitants of the planet, at the same time we > reduce resource demands so > that carrying capacity (an ecological concept, also > well established) is not > exceeded to the point of collapse. > > Ecosystems can and do collapse. > > We tend, as humans, to think it cannot happen to us, > and a lot of that > thinking stems from an economic system that was born > in a time of such vast > resources that the creators could not and did not > include natural systems > and resources in the calculations of how it was all > to work - they were > assumed to be limitless. History tells us they are > not, we are rapidly > running out of new frontiers to run to, and > large-scale mega project > technological "fixes" may not be able to bail us out > often enough - many > have already proven to be catastrophic failures. > > > > Suggest some might want to get a little more > informed, it might change your > views. If you have a scientific, well researched > counter-argument, by all > means publish it in a peer-reviewed and respected > scientific journal and > then maybe
[biofuels-biz] Re: [biofuel] FW: Earth Can't Meet Human Demand for Resources, Says Study
Look, folks, I would not have posted the article if I did not think it worthy of this group and of potential interest. I was trained in environment and management at the master's level, and sustainability and the concepts mentioned here are well-established and known, as is the author of the study. My present work in this field is a direct result of the thesis project undertaken for that degree, and that interest in biodiesel and SVO came directly from my interest in renewable resources, recycling, agriculture, economics, air quality, rural economic development, and sustainability. Many people on this list share those interests and in fact are inspired and motivated by them to engage in production and use of biofuels. The fact that it was published where it was, and the other people on the team (if you take the time to look it up), should tell you something about the credibility of this work. Like any news article, there is more detail behind the scenes and that is easily found by a visit to the web site mentioned. The report mentioned here is part of a body of work and a concept (the "ecological footprint" concept, pioneered by Dr. Bill Rees at the University of British Columbia) There are certain facts of life that you cannot ignore - public policy is made by people in all levels of government, around the world. They are making decisions and setting policy, subsidies, grants, taxes and laws that we will all be living with in the future. They should be educated in the concepts related to this study, and thank goodness they are, through the hard work of people like Wackernagel, Rees and many other well-respected researchers. Biofuels interest is one small piece of this lager puzzle of how we can improve the quality of life for the projected soon-to-be-10 billion human inhabitants of the planet, at the same time we reduce resource demands so that carrying capacity (an ecological concept, also well established) is not exceeded to the point of collapse. Ecosystems can and do collapse. We tend, as humans, to think it cannot happen to us, and a lot of that thinking stems from an economic system that was born in a time of such vast resources that the creators could not and did not include natural systems and resources in the calculations of how it was all to work - they were assumed to be limitless. History tells us they are not, we are rapidly running out of new frontiers to run to, and large-scale mega project technological "fixes" may not be able to bail us out often enough - many have already proven to be catastrophic failures. Suggest some might want to get a little more informed, it might change your views. If you have a scientific, well researched counter-argument, by all means publish it in a peer-reviewed and respected scientific journal and then maybe Reuters will print a small article that others can use tobase attacks upon you without really taking the time to study what they comment on. As they say, there is opinion, and there is informed opinion. Regards, Edward Beggs, BES, MSc http://www.biofuels.ca Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~--> Free $5 Love Reading Risk Free! http://us.click.yahoo.com/3PCXaC/PfREAA/Ey.GAA/9bTolB/TM -~-> Biofuels at Journey to Forever http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel at WebConX http://www.webconx.com/2000/biofuel/biofuel.htm List messages are archived at the Info-Archive at NNYTech: http://archive.nnytech.net/ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[biofuels-biz] Re: [biofuel] FW: Earth Can't Meet Human Demand for Resources, Says Study
>Apologies for cross posting. NNTBSP, Ed. Very interesting study, thanks. More about it here: http://www.rprogress.org/programs/sustainability/ef/pnas_0602.html Redefining Progress: Programs: Sustainability: Ecological Footprint Accounts: PNAS Article June 2002 >-- Forwarded Message >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 20:06:03 + >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Earth Can't Meet Human Demand for Resources, Says Study > >Earth can't meet human demand for resources, says study Well, all us eggs may be in the same basket, but some of them eggs are dogs in the manger in eggs' clothing. (Mix metaphors? Me?) This is the bit that matters: >For example, Wackernagel and his team found that in 1999, each person >consumed an average of 5.7 acres. The global average was significantly lower >than industrialized countries such as the United States and the United >Kingdom, where 24 acres and 13.3 acres, respectively, were consumed per >person. The US being twice as greedy as all the other greedy ones, as usual. Same with energy use, same with CO2 emissions, same with waste, same with everything. How many of those 24 acres are actually in the US? Not very many, the damage is caused elsewhere, at other people's expense. There are 59.6 million Brits, each accounting for 13.3 acres, which comes to a total area of 3,210,445 sq km, 13.1 times the area of Britain. So the Brits have room for a footprint of 1 acre each, the other 12 acres are in other people's countries. There are 278 million Americans, accounting for 24 acres each, which comes to a total area of 27,006,435 sq km, 2.8 times the area of the US. There's room in the US for each American to have a footprint of 8.6 acres, but that means they'd have to use the mountains, deserts, lakes, everything. Even if they were doing that, which they're not, and can't, they'd still be using 15 acres each of other people's land. Actually it's a lot more than that. So let's narrow it down a bit. Read: "Industrialized countries, and especially their cities..." Thor Skov's excellent post today on "global warming b.s. etc.etc." is most pertinent. These people talk of "mumbo-jumbo science" being used as an excuse to demand forced redistribution of wealth and a "wholesale restructuring of the socio-political order", of envy and covetousness, of resentment of others' economic advantages. Thus speak the robbers and those who benefit from the robbery. Waste junkies, while others starve to death because of it. "Guilt manipulation"? Damned right!! > "If we don't live within the budget > of nature, sustainability becomes futile," Wackernagel said. The current inequitable economic system is clearly unsustainable, for everyone, rich and poor alike, but particularly for the victims. Keith Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~--> Free $5 Love Reading Risk Free! http://us.click.yahoo.com/3PCXaC/PfREAA/Ey.GAA/9bTolB/TM -~-> Biofuels at Journey to Forever http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel at WebConX http://www.webconx.com/2000/biofuel/biofuel.htm List messages are archived at the Info-Archive at NNYTech: http://archive.nnytech.net/ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/