While I have been storing this recent discussion topic for a later read, I am assuming your question has not yet been answered, or else you would not have asked it. Forgive me if I end up being repetitive.
It seems that so much of our scientific research, modeling, and discussion on climate change has been focused around the assumption of man's historical ability to create that "smoking gun" technology that is going to save us all from the inevitable, detrimental effects of over consumption and energy use. The problem with this logic is that, while technological advances can no doubt contribute something to a sustainable future for all of our societies, it does little to change the dependencies on energy that got us here in the first place. Our inability to see (visually, as well as, I would argue, through price) the true effect our individual lifestyles have on this planet has led to this spiraling overuse of resources that are, globally, running out. Like any good economist will tell you, a completely inelastic demand curve (which is what we have now), will do nothing to change supply, regardless of the form that supply comes in (ethanol, or otherwise). Inevitably, every human will contribute some amount of GHGs to the atmosphere in his/her life; it is only a question of how much. Climate change research does suggest that there could be enough energy for many more centuries than are predicted now, if we were only able to reduce our use as much as possible. (As a side bar, the inelasticity of demand also tends to drive up costs. The effects of this rise in price will have a negative effect on all our economies, and will do little to bring about the supposed technological advances our climate modeling hinges on.) I suggest education is the only possible solution. So many of us are completely unaware of how our society is run, and so we have this growing inability to effect change. How can we know what to do when we have no idea how we got here? As a student of the environment, I see energy everywhere; in the food I eat, in the times I drive my car, when I turn on the faucet, when I make purchases etc. If we were constantly aware of what it ACTUALLY takes to get this society moving, I believe we might actually start to see some change, if only through the influence of our purchasing power (since most of us live in capitalist societies). Knowing the life-cycles of everyday materials and products can profoundly affect our use of them. For example, do we think about the 9,000+ liters of water it takes to produce one basic meal at McDonalds, or the fossil fuels it takes to produce just one hamburger (enough to run a small car 20 miles)? These are the energies that are hidden from us, that we must be aware of if there is going to be any discussion of climate hedging. Forgive me for being idealistic. In addition to seeing energy everywhere, I also see the energy for change. I believe it is up to us, as educators and scientists, to live as the best possible examples, and teach others to do so, so that they may know how and why to follow. Ethanol may be a potential supplement, but reduction is the smoking gun. Kristina Donnelly University of Michigan MS Candidate, Aquatic Sciences MSE Candidate, Environmental and Water Resources Engineering William Silvert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: In the recent discussion of biofuels, there seems to be a consensus that producing ethanol from corn has serious adverse consequences both ecological and economic. However I have not seen anyone address the broader question of what alternatives we have in the long run. Fossil fuels will eventually run out - oil in a century or so at most, coal in several centuries - and while there may be some wonderous new technology to fill the gap, we cannot count on that. I suspect that combustible fuels will always be with us, and I wonder what they will be. Bill Silvert --------------------------------- Now that's room service! Choose from over 150,000 hotels in 45,000 destinations on Yahoo! Travel to find your fit.
