BioDiesel Fuels ...Nov. 27‚ 2007To the Editor -- It was very disappointing that Eric Brooks is so poorly informed about bio-diesel ("Guest Editorial: The Terrible Illusion of Biodiesel.") There are plenty of legitimate arguments to make regarding biofuels. It would have been nice if he had chosen to focus on those and actually educate the reader. It would also be nice in the future to know what Mr. Brooks recommends as a replacement for petroleum diesel. An argument that criticizes, but does not offer a better solution is only so useful. As E. "Doc" Smith so aptly put it in his piece, there is no silver bullet. Eric Bowen President of the SF Biofuels Co-op, Chair of the SF Biodiesel Task Force and President of Tellurian Biodiesel To the Editor: Eric Brooks' guest editorial, like many lately that take renewable fuels to task, fails to offer a simple remedy to the problem that brought biofuels to the forefront, namely cheap food. When farmers overproduce basic commodities used in the production of food, sometimes the problem is one of what to do with the surplus. Agricultural programs that pay farmers during times of low prices are currently under fire, and, as most of us know, when our stomachs are full we have little use for more food until we are hungry again. Biofuels offered a solution to the burgeoning surpluses in the US, while helping to offset the high fuel prices that are the result of rising crude oil prices. Biofuel is a great way to use the surplus, otherwise farmers who labor under the constant threat of economic failure may not grow enough of what it takes to feed America. While grain production solely for the purpose of fuel may be a futile approach to energy self reliance, conservation of all energy sources, combined with biofuels made from surplus grain and oil seeds, is a wise approach to curing both our energy as well as our farm requirements over the long term. Richard R. Oswald Langdon, MO Eric Brooks' editorial - "the Terrible Illusion of Biodiesel," really needs to be entitled "the terrible illusion of providing Half the Story on biodiesel" at best, with a little ignorance sprinkled in. While biofuels are not the "silver bullet" to fix all the greenhouse effect woes, it is the right fix to help us become energy independent in a more environmentally responsible manner. This is the part of the commentary that was unfortunately left out. It would also be more useful to direct our energies to properly managing feed stock production, rather than stopping it. Brooks does not mention the new biodiesel feed stocks that are becoming available like camelina and jatropha seed, as well as algae technology - all of which can be grown in arid areas that are not sutable for food type crops. And all of this is not considering our taxpayer dollars that go to pay for good land currently laying fallow on government subsidises. I would like to see some of this "fallow land" start being put to good use, and remove the government subsidises, or channel those funds to the greater good. Developing countries could benefit greatly from biofuel feedstock industries as well. So please, let's not give a terrible editorial illusion on biofuels that does not tell the whole story. Sincerely, Chet McBroom Vice President of Marketing SeaPort Petroleum / SeaPort Biofuels Seattle, WA You can submit letters to the editor by clicking on this link: rshaw@beyondchron.org or by writing to: Beyond Chron 126 Hyde Street San Francisco, CA 94102 415-771-9850 (phone) |