[threadbear]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ludi', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('threadbear', 'W')hat about desertification? The supply of arable farm land is shrinking while populations increase. Most of the political hotspots in Africa are in areas where decreasing fresh water supplies are bringing tribes into conflict with one another. It's not ALL a problem of coporations/commodification. If nature is allowed to achieve 'perfect balance', millions will simply die of starvation, without the developed world's interferance. Mother Nature isn't benign and Utopian visions spun off romantic models of her are actually devoid of compassion. The best thing for overpopulation is urbanization and strict child labour laws. If you live in a tiny apartment, you are physically unable to have that many kids , and they are a net drain, if they aren't allowed to work.

[jimk]

Part of how folks seem to differ here... everyone will acknowledge, I think, that there are basic laws of the universe, how things work. This is not something that we can change. The smart thing is to understand how the universe works and then to align ourselves with those principles. It is futile to ignore or fight against the way things work.

In contrast with that, much of our world is just historical accident. For example, there are lots of confused and mistaken ideas in people's heads. These are things that can be fixed, and ought to be fixed.

I would like to use the words natural and artificial to capture this distinction. The problem is that EnergySpin uses "natural" to mean something more like "medieval". I.e. when people say "back to nature". Why not "forward to nature"! Maybe the medieval approach was very artificial!

What seems funny to me is that EnergySpin and Ludi both have a "forward to nature" perspective. The difference is just in how they view the laws of nature.

Here is a fundamental question: is biology natural?

If we fight against biology, if we try to bend and control biology and force it to obey the rules we prefer, is this stupid and futile, or is this a fulfillment of human destiny and free will. Is biology something that needs to be fixed?

Somehow I get the idea that EnergySpin has a distaste for manure. If one accepts that biology is natural, then manure becomes natural, and the way to build utopia is to work very wisely and efficiently with manure. The utopian system we will build will use manure in very clever ways, respecting the laws of manure. This would be part of the vision of permaculture and biointensive agriculture that Ludi advocates.

EnergySpin sees, on the other hand, uranium and plutonium fission as being fundamental properties of the universe, i.e. totally natural. It is silly and futile to fight against the laws of nature. What makes good sense is to work in alignment with nature to build utopia. Thus EnergySpin advocates fission as the foundation of the utopian we should work toward. Whereas manure is some freakish accident, some utterly random experiment in the grand lottery drawing of biology. Manure is purely artificial, and the sooner we humans can clean it up the better.

Threadbear, on the other hand, seems to view humans as artificial. Maybe we shouldn't clean ourselves up quite to the level of utterly spotless, but pruned back severely would be best. EnergySpin and Ludi both seem to agree that humans are natural and have an integral role to play in the world.

Funny to see biology as artificial but humans as natural. This is really Cartesian duality. So I would say that EnergySpin is a Cartesian dualist. Our essential humanity is not biological, but probably rational or something like that. Whereas in Ludi's biointensive permaculture we have more like a deep ecology vision, humans as thoroughly biological and thoroughly natural, i.e. biology is natural.

No doubt I have missed a lot with this perspective, but perhaps it sheds some useful light despite that.

[smallpoxgirl]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('threadbear', 'D')ense urbanization curtails population.

[Caoimhan]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')hey are disapearing though because young males from the Mogadishu, who no longer identify with the land or with a subsistance group are forming armed gangs and going around and cutting down all the Acacias and making them into charcoal to sell to Egypt and Saudi Arabia.

[smallpoxgirl]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Caoimhan', 'D')on't kid yourself. It may be the young males going out armed to do this activity, but it's being done with the full endorsement of young females back in the city, who use the money to feed themselves and their children.

[highlander]

It seems to me when biofuels are mentioned, conversations devolve into arguments about cutting down rain forests vs tribal lifestyles.
Here in the good ol USA, we have the gov't paying farmers crop support or even CRP payments to take land out of cultivation.

I believe that biofuels will not make much of an impact for most people without a substantial change of lifestyle. I also believe that importing oilseed crops from other countries is the worst way to "reduce dependance on OPEC"

What most farmers can do, with little change in farming practices, is to grow enough oilseed crop to fuel their own farms. A 2000 acre dryland wheat farm typically has 400-800 acres out of production each year. 80 of those acres will grow enough oilseed to fuel the farm for a year. It will also supply enough high quality feed to operate a small feedlot.

Right now, most people talking about biofuels are blubbering on about infrastructure, multimillion GPD/TPD facilities, how much money will be pumped into the economy etc.
At a recent event, after several hours of that nonsense, I mentioned that if farmers can't survive with $3/gal diesel, they won't with $3/gal biodiesel.

The best answer we have to peak oil is conservation, then comes local sustainable agriculture, including biofuels. Of course, I'm fortunate to live in an area with plentiful hydropower.

I am looking at peak oil as only a transportation fuel issue. Those areas of the world that use fossil fuels for generating electricity are SOL

[threadbear]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('smallpoxgirl', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('threadbear', 'D')ense urbanization curtails population.

[smallpoxgirl]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('threadbear', 'Y')ou have a very romantic view of subsistence farming. The Mayans subsistence farmed themselves right out of civilization.

[highlander]

pstarr:
I'm not talking about increasing tax base or adding X number or jobs. It costs about a dollar a gallon to raise canola. Add another 70 cents to convert it to biodiesel and your average farmer is paying just a little less than what he can get off road diesel for right now. But our socialist government is giving him back a buck a gallon for renewable biofuel production. So the farmer fuel costs less than a buck a gallon. The same can apply to a few who make biodiesel from waste vegetable oil, but quantities are limited.
The economy of scale/division of labor thing only aids big business. Adam Smith really screwed things up for a hundred years of obscene wealth for a very small portion of western civilization.

[Ludi]

There are very few farmers in the US and many go out of business every year. This situation will bite us in the ass whether we expect the farmers to grow our food or grow our fuel. The only reason they do as well as they do with so few of them is because of cheap oil.

[highlander]

Actually, it is easier to produce biodiesel from virgin oilseed than from used vegetable oil. The farmers I have talked to are pretty savvy. They have pleanty of room for storage, filtration, etc. They certainly are not afraid to use chemicals

[EnergySpin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('jimk', '
')
Here is a fundamental question: is biology natural?

If we fight against biology, if we try to bend and control biology and force it to obey the rules we prefer, is this stupid and futile, or is this a fulfillment of human destiny and free will. Is biology something that needs to be fixed?

[smallpoxgirl]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('EnergySpin', 'I') have to point out though, that if tissue engineering proceeds with the same pace that nano-structured materials have, then burgers from slain animals will be a thing of the past

[EnergySpin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('smallpoxgirl', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('EnergySpin', 'I') have to point out though, that if tissue engineering proceeds with the same pace that nano-structured materials have, then burgers from slain animals will be a thing of the past

[EnergySpin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', 'E')nergyspin your link is bad. I just hope it is not pointing to nano-foods because that shit has got to be poisonous