The Most Extra New Super Global Warming Thread

[bkelly]

Originally Posted by GhostintheShell

Biofuels are also responsible for the economically driven food shortages in the second and third world right now as well.

*sigh* Yet another broad, damning, unsupported assertion from GhostintheShell.

All right, I'll ask. Do you have any support this time, oh great ethereal one?

bkelly

[Kerostasis]

We've been seeing stories about the meteoric rise in grain prices non-stop for two or three years now -- Ghost just linked to a few of them right here. Around half of these stories explicitly mention Biofuels as a contributing factor, while others don't bother to mention it. But if you can come up with a mechanism where the government can pay vast sums of money for the privilege of burning millions of bushels of corn without driving up the price of corn in the process, I'd love to hear your support for that one. In fact, the story you yourself posted just one post back says the same thing! I quote:

Originally Posted by BKelly's news article

An explosion in demand for farm-grown fuels has raised global crop prices to record highs, which is spurring a dramatic expansion of Brazilian agriculture, which is invading the Amazon at an increasingly alarming rate.
...
Meanwhile, by diverting grain and oilseed crops from dinner plates to fuel tanks, biofuels are jacking up world food prices and endangering the hungry. The grain it takes to fill an SUV tank with ethanol could feed a person for a year. Harvests are being plucked to fuel our cars instead of ourselves. The U.N.'s World Food Program says it needs $500 million in additional funding and supplies, calling the rising costs for food nothing less than a global emergency. Soaring corn prices have sparked tortilla riots in Mexico City, and skyrocketing flour prices have destabilized Pakistan, which wasn't exactly tranquil when flour was affordable.

[bkelly]

Originally Posted by Kerostasis

But if you can come up with a mechanism where the government can pay vast sums of money for the privilege of burning millions of bushels of corn without driving up the price of corn in the process, I'd love to hear your support for that one.

I do not argue that biofuels have not contributed to the recent rise in prices of agricultural commodities here in the Americas, but that is not all that GhostintheShell claimed. He said (emphasis mine):

Originally Posted by GhostintheShell

Biofuels are also responsible for the economically driven food shortages in the second and third world right now as well.

That means 'no biofuels' equals 'no economically driven food shortages in the second and third world' which is yet another load of bull-patties freshly delivered by GhostintheShell. I am, yet again, asking for one scrap of evidence for this and his other way-out assertions.

bkelly

[Kerostasis]

Again, I quote your own article at you. It says exactly that.

Suppose for the sake of argument that biofuels bear a mere 50% of the responsibility for these shortages. Does that make it wrong to use the word "responsible" because they do not account for 100% of the cause? I don't think any of us would assert that biofuels are the sole and only cause of food shortages, but they are definately a very strong contributing factor.

[bkelly]

Originally Posted by Kerostasis

Again, I quote your own article at you. It says exactly that.

Bull-patties. Show me the line where it says that biofuels are responsible or at least "a very strong contributing factor" to food shortages in the second and third world.

bkelly

[Kerostasis]

Originally Posted by BKelly's news article

Meanwhile, by diverting grain and oilseed crops from dinner plates to fuel tanks, biofuels are jacking up world food prices and endangering the hungry. The grain it takes to fill an SUV tank with ethanol could feed a person for a year. Harvests are being plucked to fuel our cars instead of ourselves. The U.N.'s World Food Program says it needs $500 million in additional funding and supplies, calling the rising costs for food nothing less than a global emergency. Soaring corn prices have sparked tortilla riots in Mexico City, and skyrocketing flour prices have destabilized Pakistan, which wasn't exactly tranquil when flour was affordable.

What exactly are you objecting to in this characterization?

[ScratchMonkey]

A call for an end to ethanol subsidies, with links to various supporting articles:

http://www.downsizedc.org/blog/2008/...e_ethanol_scam

[bkelly]

Originally Posted by Kerostasis

What exactly are you objecting to in this characterization?

1) It gives no information about how much of the recent price increases in agricultural products are due to biofuels. The cost of fuel is up and with it the cost of growing. Also GhostintheShell's article said, "This week's record corn price follows release of the U.S. Department of Agriculture's report on planting intentions that showed American farmers will cut corn acreage in favour of more soybeans and wheat."

2) The article says nothing about hunger across the second and third world. It mentions destabilization in Mexico City and Pakistan, yes, but it doesn't indicate if this is common around the globe or if there were other factors that caused/contributed to the problems in these areas. For example, after NAFTA, many of Mexico's corn farmers had had difficulty competing with US federally subsidized imports and stopped growing the stuff.

3) It does not say that the increased prices are "responsible" or even "a very strong contributing factor" to starvation. The closest the article says comes is when it says, "biofuels are jacking up world food prices and endangering the hungry." Endanger, verb - to create a dangerous situation. In other words, the higher prices are creating more peril for hungry people, which does not mean it is creating hungry people or that even one person has yet starved due to the higher prices.

4) As for the U.N.'s World Food Program labeling the rising costs as "a global emergency", does that mean that they are less able to handle the existing hunger, that there is potential that they may not or is it just propaganda? We don't know from this article.

bkelly

[leejo]

bkelly, I suppose most of us would be willing to grant that biofuels may only be partly responsible for the rise in ag products if you in turn were willing to grant that you are willing for people to starve to death in order to promote your vision. We can stipulate for debate that biofuels only cause X starvation deaths annually and proceed.

[GhostintheShell]

http://www.google.ca/search?q=food+s...ient=firefox-a
There are probably 100 articles there for you to peruse, have fun, I read some of them months ago.

Summary:
People in the third world people spend 60-80% of their wage on staples such as corn, soybeans...if the price doubles, even if you spend 100% of your wage on food you can't afford the same amount of food. Less food = hungry family.

Technically I'll admit there is no less food being produced in the world so "food shortage" is a misnomer. (In fact there is probably more corn being produced no than ever.) This is why I called it an "economic food shortage". The third world has to compete with oil companies that have much bigger pockets. Even in Mexico they have had the "tortilla riots" in the past year due to the rising price of corn. I don't consider Mexico exactly a third world country, maybe second world...

In any case it's not the 1st world that immediately suffers, because guess what? We can afford corn even if the price goes up ten times it value. I only spend around 3% of my wages on food for example. We will be affected when beef, pork and chicken skyrocket in price. I think we have already seen chicken shooting up in price. At least we have around here.

All that the environmentalists did was offset oil coming from the ground with oil coming from somewhere else. It made sense when the demand was low and they could recycle much of the demand for these oils, not so much sense when the insatiable world demand for oil turned towards our food source. Biofuel is not necessarily any more "carbon neutral" or "sustainable" either so we incur an even bigger net loss in the whole biofuel equation.

Very dumb...but that's what happens when we make hasty decisions and changes that are based more on passion than fact. I firmly believe we are destined for many more of these mistakes.

[bkelly]

Originally Posted by GhostintheShell

http://www.google.ca/search?q=food+s...ient=firefox-a
There are probably 100 articles there for you to peruse, have fun, I read some of them months ago.

A google search? Your support of your position is a link to a google seach?

When you said my graph of glaciers were wasn't significant I gave you links to glacier data and the centers that provide them, a link to and quotes of the study in question, information on the data contained in that study, information about melt rates, information on statistics and graphical results of the study containing that information, explanations of what the statistical terms mean, details about significant figures and a means to quantify the accuracy of the data.

You return the favor with... a google search.

How incredibly insulting. You obviously have no respect for my research abilities or opinion and no interest in finding truth on this issue.

I'm done with you GhostintheShell. You are not worth my time.

bkelly

[leejo]

bkelly, I don't know why you're so upset. I watch CNBC everyday and for about a year it has been widely reported that the biofuel boom is driving AG commodities higher. Economics is a highly untidy science and you simply may not be able to get data that says that biofuels are resposible for 7.285% of the increases we've seen in pork belly futures. What are you asking for? A seminal document written under the auspices of a UN commission with 100 nobel prize for economics winners attesting to its veracity? What do you want?

[bkelly]

Originally Posted by leejo

Economics is a highly untidy science and you simply may not be able to get data that says that biofuels are resposible for 7.285% of the increases we've seen in pork belly futures.

I completely agree. In fact, this is part of my point.

Originally Posted by leejo

What do you want?

I want to communicate that GhostintheShell's assertion that biofuels are mainly responsible for current food shortages in the second and third world countries is nonsense.

GhostintheShell has been critical of global warming activists for overstating their case. He is now overstating his.

bkelly

[GhostintheShell]

Yes, in case you were wondering the google link was intended as some small insult. I'm surprised you took it so personally and with such a strong magnitude...for that I apologize. I do respect your thoughts on the issues we discuss even if we do not always see eye to eye.

As far as the biofuel "bungle" goes...it's simply an unexpected side effect to this anti-carbon/oil movement. I guess no one expected so much biofuel would be made from food grade material, and they assumed it would all come from cellulose fibers and recycled material(?).

The price of all of our food is rising as a result of demand outstripping supply. When we look at this particular situation and whether or not there is a "net benefit" or "net loss" to mankind and our overall quality of life I don't think there is any question that it is a resounding loss.

[GhostintheShell]

"Tens of thousands of people have marched through Mexico City in a protest against the rising price of tortillas.

The price of the flat corn bread, the main source of calories for many poor Mexicans, recently rose by over 400%." - 2007

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6319093.stm

Forget oil, the new global crisis is food - 2008
http://www.financialpost.com/story.html?id=213343

Rush for biofuels threatens starvation on a global scale - 2008
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle3500954.ece

World food stocks dwindling rapidly, UN warns
http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/12/17/europe/food.php

Over 1 million Afghans face food shortage due to rising prices – UN agency
http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.as...Cr=afghan&Cr1=

Surge in food prices could lead to increased unrest, warns senior UN aid official
http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.as...ood&Cr1=prices