If it's farmed and makes more money than food then why grow food? That's the theory.
As a fiscal conservative, I would do more research before I made such a large commitment to become dependent on a toxic uncontrollable weed. Even if we do modify it into a friendly plant it still won't replace fossil fuel, just reduce it. I doubt we could grow and harvest enough to make the commitment you're looking for. The leaves and stems are highly toxic as well as the oil extraction process. It's easy to grow but expensive to harvest. It also absorbs CO2. What happens in 30 years when we find out we have too little CO2 in the atmosphere? Could happen. On Dec 5, 2007 5:49 AM, Gruss Gott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > RoMunn wrote: > > I will, once again, lodge my objection to burning our food. Bad idea. > > > > I think Sam was asking food *or* fuel. Jatropha is a great example of > a crop that is NOT FOOD, but a great fuel. Further it goes in the > desert - places where it is not feasible to grow food - so it creates > a massive wealth building opportunity for, say, Africa. > > And just on the surface, which sounds more difficult: > > 1.) growing fuel crops, or > 2.) exploring for and drilling for oil (not to mention refining). > Including in the ocean? > > If we were going to start from scratch today, exploring for oil and > then drilling for it would seem ridiculous compared to just planting > some fuel crops. > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Get involved in the latest ColdFusion discussions, product development sharing, and articles on the Adobe Labs wiki. http://labs/adobe.com/wiki/index.php/ColdFusion_8 Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:247676 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
