Re: [Vo]:The evolution of good governance
Michael >You may be right, but isn't the Valcent-Vertigro (American) company fairly >advanced in this field? I really don't see why more attention isn't being >paid to this technology. Seems like a winner to me. Yes - as a matter of fact, the "lack of attention" which does appear to be strange, given the advantages -- this could be a deliberate strategy - since there are many companies: possibly the biggest players of all, who have NOT come out publicly with very much info (in recent years) on what they are actually doing now, or in the case of Shell - they have only exposed the tip of the iceberg (not a great analogy for a project in Hawaii). http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/11db0836-82d2-11dd-a019-77b07658.html Because of this hidden undercurrent of "under-published" efforts and R&D - which is likely to be out there, since there was lots more of it 5-8 years ago which seemed to disappear (but did it?) ... the algoil thing is poised to actually explode on the alternative energy scene... and possibly with special relevance to operators of coal-burning grid plants who are located next to the strip mines which supply the coal. Since these plants are already in the "earth-moving business" in a huge way - how costly is it for them to construct very cheap algae ponds in the former strip-mine site and then channel the CO2 over from the plant -- to feed the algae and increase the growth rate? That goes beyond win-win - heck it goes all the way to win-win-win-win when you consider the net effect of converting cheap but dirty coal into power, selling the power, then cleaning the operation up via the algae, instead of costly bag-houses, and then selling the oil and protein derived from the algae for much more than the coal cost to begin with, and all the while doing most of the work yourself, with paid-for equipment already on-site. Is there a greater opportunity available in the entire free-enterprise system? There are possibly 200 such plants in the USA above 500 megawatt capacity adjacent to strip mines or at least ample flat terrain. This is a gross simplification of a complex process, sure - but one can reasonably expect that once a "tipping point" in the technology-base has been reached for grid plants to do this with the normal ROI - then it will be a major societal shifting of assets - literally a paradigm-shift which could happen much more swiftly than DoE and assorted pundits suspect it will. Jones
Re: [Vo]:The evolution of good governance
It is, and I've pointed it out several times when the whole, no food for fuel arguement comes up. There is still corn being grown for no purpose but to grind up for soil conditioning. On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 7:52 AM, Jones Beene <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Terry, > > >> We could produce more if needed; but, we already have surpluses and > pay farmers not to plant crops. > > > Is this still going on despite record prices for corn? > > If so, it weakens the "no food-grain for fuel" argument. That is: if we have > land which is not being planted and is receiving subsidies instead. I would > have thought that program would have been erased by market conditions. > > That [no food-grain for fuel argument] would probably stand on moral grounds, > as well, and almost no rational person would say that we should not switch to > "non-food" inputs, such as switchgrass or especially algae -- for the carbon > needed to make the fuel. > > Which brings us back to the Dutch and what they are doing with their own > efficient Ag. base to confront the biofuel situation. > > http://canadianpress.google.com/article/ALeqM5gQ3sAwA4Lwa15Z-fIiZyWJejgRUg > > I suspect that they will probably bring this process to market before we can > do it here. > >
Re: [Vo]:The evolution of good governance
Jones wrote: > > We could produce more if needed; but, we already have > surpluses and > pay farmers not to plant crops. > > > Is this still going on despite record prices for corn? > > If so, it weakens the "no food-grain for fuel" > argument. That is: if we have land which is not being > planted and is receiving subsidies instead. I would have > thought that program would have been erased by market > conditions. > > That [no food-grain for fuel argument] would probably stand > on moral grounds, as well, and almost no rational person > would say that we should not switch to "non-food" > inputs, such as switchgrass or especially algae -- for the > carbon needed to make the fuel. > > Which brings us back to the Dutch and what they are doing > with their own efficient Ag. base to confront the biofuel > situation. > > http://canadianpress.google.com/article/ALeqM5gQ3sAwA4Lwa15Z-fIiZyWJejgRUg > > I suspect that they will probably bring this process to > market before we can do it here. You may be right, but isn't the Valcent-Vertigro (American) company fairly advanced in this field? I really don't see why more attention isn't being paid to this technology. Seems like a winner to me. M.
Re: [Vo]:The evolution of good governance
OrionWorks wrote: BTW, Tulip bulbs ARE edible. During the Tulipmania craze (1637), an "investor" found the captain of a ship frying up his tulip bulbs for lunch. The bulbs were worth as much as a house. I think that was in Mackay's book "Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds." I cannot find my copy. Everyone should read that book. It is funny that the Dutch still loved tulips, even after the craze ended disasterously. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:The evolution of good governance
A good portion of Dutch tulip bulbs are grown in US & shipped to Holland for retail sale. Ron --On Thursday, October 02, 2008 2:18 PM -0400 "Stephen A. Lawrence" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: OrionWorks wrote: It's good to know that Mr. Cornwall has informed of the fact that he has important things do. I was beginning to get worried. Jones, it truly astonishes me to realize that such a small country is capable of producing that much output. Puts us (The so-called Bread Basket?) to shame. Ahem... It is, in fact, not all that clear that the Dutch rank second in food exports. Thus spake Wiki: The Dutch rank third worldwide in value of agricultural exports, behind the United States and France, with exports earning $55 billion annually. A significant portion of Dutch agricultural exports are derived from fresh-cut plants, flowers, and bulbs, with the Netherlands exporting two-thirds of the world's total. The Netherlands also exports a quarter of all world tomatoes, and one-third of the world's exports of peppers and cucumbers.[21] Note, first, they rank third, not second, just behind France. And, second, note that this rank is based on total *value* of all *agricultural* products, which includes very high margin cut flowers and bulbs, which are shipped worldwide from Holland. These are luxury goods, not commodity foods, and are priced accordingly. In comparison, countries such as U.S., Canada, Argentina, and much of Europe export huge amounts of low-margin commodity grain. I very much doubt that Holland's net *biomass* exports would put them anywhere near third place in the world. If anyone has a source indicating where Holland falls with regard to actual commodity FOOD exports, rather than total "agricultural" exports, it would be interesting to see the numbers.
Re: [Vo]:The evolution of good governance
Terry sez: > Are wooden shoes considered agriculture? ;-) > > Terry Only if you lost the bet. BTW, Tulip bulbs ARE edible. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:The evolution of good governance
They were. Now they are no longer grain-based subsidies. Terry On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 1:54 PM, Jed Rothwell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Terry Blanton wrote: > >> however, there hasn't been a corn subsidy for some time, AFAIK. > > There is a large ethanol subsidy, which amounts to the same thing. > > This site claims there was a corn subsidy of $13 billion in 2006. It does > not have more recent information: > > http://farm.ewg.org/farm/progdetail.php?fips=0&progcode=total > > - Jed > >
Re: [Vo]:The evolution of good governance
Are wooden shoes considered agriculture? ;-) Terry On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 2:18 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > OrionWorks wrote: >> It's good to know that Mr. Cornwall has informed of the fact that he >> has important things do. I was beginning to get worried. >> >> Jones, it truly astonishes me to realize that such a small country is >> capable of producing that much output. Puts us (The so-called Bread >> Basket?) to shame. > > Ahem... > > It is, in fact, not all that clear that the Dutch rank second in food > exports. > > Thus spake Wiki: >> The Dutch rank third worldwide in value of agricultural exports, >> behind the United States and France, with exports earning $55 billion >> annually. A significant portion of Dutch agricultural exports are >> derived from fresh-cut plants, flowers, and bulbs, with the >> Netherlands exporting two-thirds of the world's total. The >> Netherlands also exports a quarter of all world tomatoes, and >> one-third of the world's exports of peppers and cucumbers.[21] > > Note, first, they rank third, not second, just behind France. > > And, second, note that this rank is based on total *value* of all > *agricultural* products, which includes very high margin cut flowers and > bulbs, which are shipped worldwide from Holland. These are luxury > goods, not commodity foods, and are priced accordingly. > > In comparison, countries such as U.S., Canada, Argentina, and much of > Europe export huge amounts of low-margin commodity grain. > > I very much doubt that Holland's net *biomass* exports would put them > anywhere near third place in the world. > > If anyone has a source indicating where Holland falls with regard to > actual commodity FOOD exports, rather than total "agricultural" exports, > it would be interesting to see the numbers. > >
Re: [Vo]:The evolution of good governance
OrionWorks wrote: > It's good to know that Mr. Cornwall has informed of the fact that he > has important things do. I was beginning to get worried. > > Jones, it truly astonishes me to realize that such a small country is > capable of producing that much output. Puts us (The so-called Bread > Basket?) to shame. Ahem... It is, in fact, not all that clear that the Dutch rank second in food exports. Thus spake Wiki: > The Dutch rank third worldwide in value of agricultural exports, > behind the United States and France, with exports earning $55 billion > annually. A significant portion of Dutch agricultural exports are > derived from fresh-cut plants, flowers, and bulbs, with the > Netherlands exporting two-thirds of the world's total. The > Netherlands also exports a quarter of all world tomatoes, and > one-third of the world's exports of peppers and cucumbers.[21] Note, first, they rank third, not second, just behind France. And, second, note that this rank is based on total *value* of all *agricultural* products, which includes very high margin cut flowers and bulbs, which are shipped worldwide from Holland. These are luxury goods, not commodity foods, and are priced accordingly. In comparison, countries such as U.S., Canada, Argentina, and much of Europe export huge amounts of low-margin commodity grain. I very much doubt that Holland's net *biomass* exports would put them anywhere near third place in the world. If anyone has a source indicating where Holland falls with regard to actual commodity FOOD exports, rather than total "agricultural" exports, it would be interesting to see the numbers.
Re: [Vo]:The evolution of good governance
Terry Blanton wrote: however, there hasn't been a corn subsidy for some time, AFAIK. There is a large ethanol subsidy, which amounts to the same thing. This site claims there was a corn subsidy of $13 billion in 2006. It does not have more recent information: http://farm.ewg.org/farm/progdetail.php?fips=0&progcode=total - Jed
Re: [Vo]:The evolution of good governance
It would appear so: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_U.S._Farm_Bill however, there hasn't been a corn subsidy for some time, AFAIK. Renewable subsidies have shifted from grains to celluose and biomass sources. Terry On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 10:52 AM, Jones Beene <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Terry, > > >> We could produce more if needed; but, we already have surpluses and > pay farmers not to plant crops. > > > Is this still going on despite record prices for corn? > > If so, it weakens the "no food-grain for fuel" argument. That is: if we have > land which is not being planted and is receiving subsidies instead. I would > have thought that program would have been erased by market conditions. > > That [no food-grain for fuel argument] would probably stand on moral grounds, > as well, and almost no rational person would say that we should not switch to > "non-food" inputs, such as switchgrass or especially algae -- for the carbon > needed to make the fuel. > > Which brings us back to the Dutch and what they are doing with their own > efficient Ag. base to confront the biofuel situation. > > http://canadianpress.google.com/article/ALeqM5gQ3sAwA4Lwa15Z-fIiZyWJejgRUg > > I suspect that they will probably bring this process to market before we can > do it here. > >
Re: [Vo]:The evolution of good governance
It would appear so: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_U.S._Farm_Bill however, there hasn't been a corn subsidy for some time, AFAIK. Renewable subsidies have shifted from grains to celluose and biomass sources. Terry On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 10:52 AM, Jones Beene <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Terry, > > >> We could produce more if needed; but, we already have surpluses and > pay farmers not to plant crops. > > > Is this still going on despite record prices for corn? > > If so, it weakens the "no food-grain for fuel" argument. That is: if we have > land which is not being planted and is receiving subsidies instead. I would > have thought that program would have been erased by market conditions. > > That [no food-grain for fuel argument] would probably stand on moral grounds, > as well, and almost no rational person would say that we should not switch to > "non-food" inputs, such as switchgrass or especially algae -- for the carbon > needed to make the fuel. > > Which brings us back to the Dutch and what they are doing with their own > efficient Ag. base to confront the biofuel situation. > > http://canadianpress.google.com/article/ALeqM5gQ3sAwA4Lwa15Z-fIiZyWJejgRUg > > I suspect that they will probably bring this process to market before we can > do it here. > >
Re: [Vo]:The evolution of good governance
OrionWorks wrote: Jones, it truly astonishes me to realize that such a small country is capable of producing that much output. Puts us (The so-called Bread Basket?) to shame. U.S. agriculture is optimized for high productivity per worker, not high productivity per hectare of land. I do not know about the Netherlands, but in Japan agriculture is more labor-intensive and yields per hectare are higher. Food costs are higher. In the U.S. we do things like sowing rice from airplanes. When I told that to Japanese farmers, they did not believe me. Not long ago they still sowed rice by hand. Nowadays they use small tractors. It is way more labor intensive than sowing by airplane. The U.S. airplanes drop seeds, whereas the Japanese tractors plant seedlings. The latter is more difficult, but the yield is higher. Here is a photo of a sophisticated seedling-planter attachment: http://kome.sobe.jp/images/taue/1b.jpg - Jed
Re: [Vo]:The evolution of good governance
Terry, > We could produce more if needed; but, we already have surpluses and pay farmers not to plant crops. Is this still going on despite record prices for corn? If so, it weakens the "no food-grain for fuel" argument. That is: if we have land which is not being planted and is receiving subsidies instead. I would have thought that program would have been erased by market conditions. That [no food-grain for fuel argument] would probably stand on moral grounds, as well, and almost no rational person would say that we should not switch to "non-food" inputs, such as switchgrass or especially algae -- for the carbon needed to make the fuel. Which brings us back to the Dutch and what they are doing with their own efficient Ag. base to confront the biofuel situation. http://canadianpress.google.com/article/ALeqM5gQ3sAwA4Lwa15Z-fIiZyWJejgRUg I suspect that they will probably bring this process to market before we can do it here.
Re: [Vo]:The evolution of good governance
Terry Sez: > We could produce more if needed; but, we already have surpluses and > pay farmers not to plant crops. > > Terry Indeed, this is true. However, with the current greed to produce more ethanol I question whether we will maintain our so-called surpluses for much longer. Besides, I'm sure the petroleum industry would be more than delighted sell our farmers as much high-energy fertilizer as they can pump out. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:The evolution of good governance
We could produce more if needed; but, we already have surpluses and pay farmers not to plant crops. Terry On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 9:40 AM, OrionWorks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It's good to know that Mr. Cornwall has informed of the fact that he > has important things do. I was beginning to get worried. > > Jones, it truly astonishes me to realize that such a small country is > capable of producing that much output. Puts us (The so-called Bread > Basket?) to shame. > > Regards > Steven Vincent Johnson > www.OrionWorks.com > www.zazzle.com/orionworks > >
Re: [Vo]:The evolution of good governance
It's good to know that Mr. Cornwall has informed of the fact that he has important things do. I was beginning to get worried. Jones, it truly astonishes me to realize that such a small country is capable of producing that much output. Puts us (The so-called Bread Basket?) to shame. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
RE: [Vo]:The evolution of good governance
Nice, nice? Ad-homs, personalised debate? What's this? Let's beat up Remi day or secret big dick envy? I've got too much work on, grants coming in (both state and private) and several projects on the go to be wrangling with a bunch of looney left slackers. When you work out the bogus 'GW' or 'CF' shama-lama-dingdong ting I'll be back. Guess that won't be soon. -Original Message- From: Nick Palmer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 02 October 2008 07:23 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:The evolution of good governance Jones Beene wrote: <> Generally speaking, the Dutch are also amongst the "nicest" people in the world too - co-incidence? I think not. Nick Palmer On the side of the Planet - and the people - because they're worth it
Re: [Vo]:The evolution of good governance
Jones Beene wrote:> Generally speaking, the Dutch are also amongst the "nicest" people in the world too - co-incidence? I think not. Nick Palmer On the side of the Planet - and the people - because they're worth it
Re: [Vo]:The evolution of good governance
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Wed, 1 Oct 2008 19:08:37 -0700 (PDT): Hi, [snip] >Quick - vorticians - name the country that is the world's second largest >exporter of food and agricultural products, after >the United States. The Netherlands is primarily a trading nation and has been for centuries, so some of the exports may also be imports. > >Hint- that country is not large and warm, like Australia or Brazil, and in >fact is *tiny* - having only twice the acreage of the state of Massachusetts. >And with about one-fourth of its land located below sea level, it is far from >ideal cropland. Actually most of it is excellent cropland, because it is silt washed down by the rivers from the rest of Europe. I think that the land that was reclaimed from the sea is washed free of its salt by rain water and pumping. That leaves good soil (silt) for growing food. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[Vo]:The evolution of good governance
Quick - vorticians - name the country that is the world's second largest exporter of food and agricultural products, after the United States. Hint- that country is not large and warm, like Australia or Brazil, and in fact is *tiny* - having only twice the acreage of the state of Massachusetts. And with about one-fourth of its land located below sea level, it is far from ideal cropland. Hint- that country is not tropical, sunny or particuarly fertile and in fact has generally cold and chilly and horrible weather. It is almost synonymous with the use of wind energy since it has no petroleum and little coal. Hint- that country has a population of 16 million very liberal, but non-communist, inhabitants The Dutch (Netherlands) have long been way ahead of the rest of the world in farming technology, due to brainpower and a general lack of other good alternatives; and having generally failed in their colonial ambitions they have stuck to farming for lack of anything better. The Dutch have a liberal but fiscally conservative government [the best of both worlds], allowing prostitution, euthanasia, marijuana and universal health care, but they have managed the world's highest crop yields and most efficient small farms, and derive a very decent standards of living - which since they have little other natural wealth is quite remarkable. Although its economy is generally so far to the left as to be called socialist by detractors in the NeoCon movement, due to its entitlements and innate humanism, it is ironically also one of the most free market and capitalist farm economies in the world - less regulated than the US or Brit farmer - which only indicates that *true liberalism can be the ideal form of capitalism.*Eat you heart out, Remi. It is also testament to the fact, which has been debated here on occasion, that land - even reclaimed and salty and marginal land - when intelligently farmed and fertilized, cannot be overused or depleted. BTW - this place has more barnyard animals than people, and it would surprise no one if they (the animals) were not someday allowed some kind of limited "voice" in government some day. Jones
