Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Residential Real Estate Crash Index -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Les H who wrote (105124)	2/14/2008 4:31:26 PM
From: coug	Respond to of 306849

Thanks, I would've too.. Qualifier: Based upon what I know of him now..

To: Les H who wrote (105124)	2/15/2008 11:29:01 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

Yeah.. while he's absolutely correct on Ethanol, he's also the same guy that essentially asserted that the Global Warming is just like the war on terror that threatens the existence of mankind, an inane statement. Because fighting terrorism is taking actions to seek out and kill those who would perpetrate it.. I certainly hope he doesn't seek to exterminate all of us who emit CO2 and Methane.. Because that would result in the extermination of all life on this planet as well; a seeming contradiction to what he claims to be trying to preserve. Global warming is a challenge to restore a somewhat stable balance to the planet's environment. And given the paleo-climatic history of the planet, the environment is ANYTHING BUT STABLE.. There have been periods of extreme warming and cooling long before the advent of mankind and industrialization. Thus, what we REALLY are trying to do is thwart the planet's natural cycles to maintain the climatic "status quo". That's also known as "geo-engineering"... (and I'm not particularly opposed to it). And the best means of accomplishing that is by facilitating the planet's natural means of sequestering CO2 by the cultivation of oceanic phytoplankton blooms via natural/organic nutrient fertilization. The oceans, not the rain forest, are the true "lungs" of this planet. And by increasing the ocean's ability (via phytoplanktonic fertilization) to absorb CO2, we will be able to offset most increases in CO2 levels (whether natural or man-made). One of the "dirty little secrets" in the debate over increasing CO2 levels is that phytoplankton levels in the oceans have been diminishing for decades. Thus, even IF we manage to decrease CO2 emissions, it will have to outpace the decreasing ability of the oceans to absorb it. In sum, every year phytoplankton levels decrease in the oceans due to lack of micronutrients, the "balance" we're seeking to restore becomes harder to achieve. Decreasing man-made CO2 emissions is all well and good, but without increasing levels of oceanic phytoplankton, we may find our efforts in vain. And one more beneficial consequence of increasing phytoplankton levels is that it augments the foundation of the marine food chain. And scientific evidence has clearly shown that our fisheries are quickly being depleted as well. Yet, any efforts at advancing research of oceanic fertilization is ostracized by the global warming scientific community. It's called "geo-engineering".. the very thing we're trying to do by aiming at climatic "stability" in an historically unstable paleo-climatic record. As a final note, I might add that Bloomberg failed to discuss an already existing technlogy that is woefully underfunded, the creation of alternative fuels via Algae farming. No one seems to want to mention it, despite the fact than acre of algae could produce upwards of 5,000 gallons of bio-diesel per year (compared to 300 gallons of ethanol from an acre of corn, or 60 barrels of bio-diesel from an acre of soybeans). And the one advantage of producing fuel from algae is that it does not compete with human food consumables. ngm.nationalgeographic.com ngm.nationalgeographic.com Hawk

To: Les H who wrote (105124)	2/17/2008 11:20:13 AM
From: Les H	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 306849

How corn is quickly becoming the new crude Scores of ethanol plants are under construction and as a result, Mr. Klein predicts that the United States will produce 52 billion litres of the fuel in 2008. When all the plants are running, the United States could produce twice as much corn for ethanol as Canada's total crop production -- wheat, barley, canola? everything. This has huge implications for global food supplies. The amount of corn it takes to produce 75 litres of ethanol-- roughly a tank of fuel-- is enough corn to feed one person on a 2,000-calorie-a-day diet for a year, Mr. Klein said. canada.com The Current State of the Solar Energy Sector seekingalpha.com