Mortgage | Advertising | Credit Card Consolidation | Power Rangers | Cell Phones
PDA

View Full Version : Where all this GREEN stuff us headed?


Brucelee
07-13-2008, 15:30
Here is the real agenda from our ecowackos! Notice in the last sentence how it is OK to lie to us meat eaters. After all, we are entophobic.



Green.view

Let them eat bugs
Jul 12th 2008
From Economist.com

A new, abundant and environmentally friendly source of protein is creating some buzz


The world is getting hungrier. After years of falling food prices, eating is suddenly getting expensive. With price-tags now rising some 75%, the World Bank estimates that the soaring cost of food will push 100m people into poverty. What with rising fertiliser prices, increasing concerns about deforestation and unreliable rains brought on by climate change, how will we find new sources of nourishment?

Scientists at the National Autonomous University of Mexico have an answer: entomophagy, or dining on insects. They claim the practice is common in some 113 countries. Better yet, bugs provide more nutrients than beef or fish, gram for gram.

AP

Nutritious, tooMeat provides just under one fifth of the energy and one third of the protein humans consume. But its production uses up a hugely disproportionate share of agricultural resources. Feed crops gobble up some 70% of agricultural land, while a quarter of the world’s land is devoted to grazing. Brazil’s burgeoning livestock industry is responsible for huge swathes of deforestation in the Amazon.

As developing countries get richer meat’s ecological footprint is set to get even bigger. The Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) at the United Nations considers livestock “one of the top two or three most significant contributors to the most serious environmental problems, at every scale from local to global.” It predicts that the world’s demand for meat will nearly double by 2050.

Eating insects does far less damage. For one thing, the habit could help to protect crops. Some 30 years ago the Thai government, struggling to contain a plague of locusts with pesticides, began encouraging its citizens to collect and eat the insects. Officials even distributed recipes for cooking them. Locusts were not commonly eaten at the time, but they have since become popular. Today some farmers plant corn just to attract them. Stir-frying other menaces could help reduce the use of pesticides.

But insect populations vary with the seasons, and it is hard to control the amount on offer at a given time. “There is very little knowledge or appreciation of the potential for managing and harvesting insects sustainably,” notes Patrick Durst, a Bangkok-based senior forestry officer at the FAO. Those looking for a reliable source of protein might prefer to farm them. Protein makes up a high proportion of most insects’ weight. That makes them much more efficient at converting feed to protein than livestock. For example, a cow yields only 10lb (4.5kg) of beef for every 100lb of feed it eats, whereas the same amount of feed would produce tens times as much cricket.

Academics at Khon Kaen University in Thailand have developed a low-cost cricket-rearing technique, and taught it to some 4,500 families. On just a few hundred square feet of land a single family can raise crickets in numbers large enough to increase their income significantly. Or they can rear them on a smaller scale inside their homes, within large containers. The insects do not require much food or water, grow fast and reproduce quickly. And if they somehow perish, the financial impact on a poor family is far less devastating than the loss of a cow or pig.

Earlier this year the FAO held a conference in Thailand to investigate the benefits of eating insects. The mood was optimistic. “In certain places with certain cultures with a certain level of acceptance”, insects could be seen as part of a solution to end hunger, Mr Durst said.


Environmentally and nutritionally, insects are more appealing than meat: you get more for less. But persuading flesh-loving, ento-phobic westerners of this is going to be tricky. “We’re not going to convince Europeans and Americans to go out in big numbers and start eating insects,” Mr Durst concedes. The trick might be to slip them into the food chain on the quiet. Supplements composed of insect protein could be added to processed food and perhaps also to animal feed. That might help to make meat a little more environmentally palatable.

Brucelee
07-13-2008, 15:34
Greener than thou
Posted by: Economist.com | NEW YORK
Categories: Climate change Germany
POLITICIANS and those who seek them out like to breakfast in the back room at Café Einstein on Unter den Linden—close to the Bundestag but out of sight of tourists. The Economist’s Germany Correspondent, neither politician nor tourist, repaired there for a conversation with Renate Künast, head of the Green Party’s delegation in the Bundestag and one of the party’s leading Realos (or “reformers”, as they like to call themselves).

All German parties are green these days, but Ms Künast made it clear that in next year’s national elections the Greens intend to be the greenest of them all. She lambasted the G8 leaders, Germany’s in particular, for not doing enough on global warming. Rich countries are going to have to cut their carbon emissions by 80-90% by 2050, ie well beyond the 50% target that the G8 promised in Hokkaido. Germany has promised a 40% cut from 1990 levels by 2020.

But then the government pursues policies that seem to ensure failure. Germany lobbied the EU to shield makers of big cars from ambitious cuts in the carbon emissions of their fleets (which would hurt BMW and Mercedes more than Renault or Fiat). Tax breaks for company cars go mainly to gas guzzlers; no one dares to impose a speed limit.

Cars are just a start. Electricity transmission has to be wrested away from the generators, so that producers of renewable power can get access to it. Intensive agriculture generates 14% of carbon emissions: the EU’s subsidies encourage that, while impoverishing farmers in poor countries.

All this, plus the high price of energy, mean that "climate and energy will be the central question in next year’s elections" Ms Künast thinks. The answer lies in changing "how we live, how we transport and how we produce". The more so since the Greens refuse to contemplate extending the life of nuclear power plants, which produce cheap, carbon-free energy. The Christian Democrats (CDU) are thinking about campaigning on a platform of delaying Germany’s planned pullout from nuclear power, but the Greens (and most Social Democrats) will have none of that.


Ms Künast denies that the Greens are preaching blood, sweat and tears, but they do seem to be prescribing some discomfort. It’s hard to know how many German voters will buy it, but the Greens do not see themselves as a mass party. They will probably poll roughly 10% of the vote, probably not enough to allow for a left-leaning coalition, given the weakness of the SPD and the SPD’s promise not to govern with the ex-communist Left party. Some sort of arrangement with the CDU would be thinkable, especially if it did not include the liberal Free Democrats (FDP). The nightmare scenario is a CDU-FDP government, which “we must avoid”, she says. Whatever the final configuration, the Greens are unlikely to be able to transform Europe’s way of life as thoroughly as they would like.

Topless
07-14-2008, 15:36
I have complete clarity on this issue. If God didn't want us to eat beef he wouldn't have made it taste so much like steak!

Brucelee
07-14-2008, 16:19
I have complete clarity on this issue. If God didn't want us to eat beef he wouldn't have made it taste so much like steak!


You are so right! Of course, it isn't as crunchy as it could be but if you could just sprinkle .........

:D

Quickurt
07-14-2008, 22:41
P-eople
E-ating
T-asty
A-nimals

:D

Quickurt
07-14-2008, 22:43
Maybe Ms Kunast (coonass?) is only eating green meat? :barf:

limoncello
07-15-2008, 12:55
So what's the problem with bugs? I've got a couple thousand head 'o locusts I'm gettin' ready to herd up to Kansas City right now...yoo haww!

Anyway, if people like bugs they should come to the south, we have lots, and they could really pig out.

Quickurt
07-15-2008, 14:35
So what's the problem with bugs? I've got a couple thousand head 'o locusts I'm gettin' ready to herd up to Kansas City right now...yoo haww!

Anyway, if people like bugs they should come to the south, we have lots, and they could really pig out.
Yeah, we're having "another one of those" Banana Spider years. I have some in my oak trees and from the oak trees to the house, the size of small Blue Crabs!
We get them so big we shoot them with air rifles! :D
They're the metric I use for wax on my DD. If I come out in the morning and there's a web between something and the car, it needs a new coat of wax.

stef
08-26-2008, 16:27
Bugs are used, without a big notice saying "THIS PRODUCT CONTAINS INSECTS" all over the place. It's a coloring agent in some icecream (one of the red food colorings) and makeup. The limits of bug parts in chocolate are hilarious. You get a ton in raw honey, too.

Yeah, some people are goofy, but the nutrition to energy for bugs is very high compared to, say, cows. Wasting beef is a travesty.

Want a good rant? How about corn subsidies and sugar taxes?

Quickurt
08-26-2008, 17:57
Want a good rant? How about corn subsidies and sugar taxes?

Hey. I love mud bugs!

No, seriously, I don't think you'll get an argument, around here, argueing against corn subsidies or sugar taxes, or milk subsidies, or farm corporate welfare schemes. I do believe I posted, in another thread, about the growth of the dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico resulting from ethanol production up the Mississippi River.
Ethanol is becoming exposed as another huge scam on the American people. It is costing a fortune and millions of lives, around the globe. Let's see, we have to subsidize it to the tune of .57 USD per gallon, it still makes the gasoline it's put in cost around .15 USD, per gallon, more and it costs, on average, 10% in fuel consumption. On top of that loss, it takes close to 80,000 BTUs of petroleum to produce 100,000 BTUs of ethanol and we're burning BOTH, or a total of 180,000 BTUs to get the usage of only 100,000 BTUs. Thank your favorite Archer-Daniels-Midland rep.
Add to all of the above the shortage of corn as feedstocks for livestock and the shortage of food for the third world and you begin to get the picture of the total cost the entire world is paying for this supposed "green" technology.

I'm not kidding; Al Gore and the environmental movement will go down in history alongside the great mass murderers.

Brucelee
09-26-2008, 15:05
reen idealists fail to make grade, says studyAll comments (131) David Adam, environment correspondent The Guardian, Wednesday September 24 2008 Article historyPeople who believe they have the greenest lifestyles can be seen as some of the main culprits behind global warming, says a team of researchers, who claim that many ideas about sustainable living are a myth.

According to the researchers, people who regularly recycle rubbish and save energy at home are also the most likely to take frequent long-haul flights abroad. The carbon emissions from such flights can swamp the green savings made at home, the researchers claim.

Stewart Barr, of Exeter University, who led the research, said: "Green living is largely something of a myth. There is this middle class environmentalism where being green is part of the desired image. But another part of the desired image is to fly off skiing twice a year. And the carbon savings they make by not driving their kids to school will be obliterated by the pollution from their flights."

Some people even said they deserved such flights as a reward for their green efforts, he added.

Only a very small number of citizens matched their eco-friendly behaviour at home by refusing to fly abroad, Barr told a climate change conference at Exeter University yesterday.

The research team questioned 200 people on their environmental attitudes and split them into three groups, based on a commitment to green living.

They found the longest and the most frequent flights were taken by those who were most aware of environmental issues, including the threat posed by climate change.

Questioned on their heavy use of flying, one respondent said: "I recycle 100% of what I can, there's not one piece of paper goes in my bin, so that makes me feel less guilty about flying as much as I do."

Barr said "green" lifestyles at home and frequent flying were linked to income, with wealthier people more likely to be engaged in both activities.

He said: "The findings indicate that even those people who appear to be very committed to environmental action find it difficult to transfer these behaviours into more problematic contexts."

The team says the research is one of the first attempts to analyse how green intentions alter depending on context. It says the results reveal the scale of the challenge faced by policymakers who are trying to alter public behaviour to help tackle global warming.

The study concludes: "The notion that we can treat what we do in the home differently from what we do on holiday denies the existence of clearly related and complex lifestyle choices and practices. Yet even a focus on lifestyle groups who may be most likely to change their views will require both time and political will. The addiction to cheap flights and holidays will be very difficult to break."

The frequent flyers said they expected new technology to make aviation greener, echoing comments made by Tony Blair last year, who said it was "impractical" to expect people to take holidays closer to home. He said the solution was "to look at how you make air travel more energy-efficient, how you develop the new fuels that will allow us to burn less energy and emit less."

Brucelee
09-26-2008, 15:06
Nobel Peace Prize winner and environmental crusader Al Gore urged young people on Wednesday to engage in civil disobedience to stop the construction of coal plants without the ability to store carbon.
The former U.S. vice president, whose climate change documentary "An Inconvenient Truth" won an Academy Award, told a philanthropic meeting in New York City that "the world has lost ground to the climate crisis."
"If you're a young person looking at the future of this planet and looking at what is being done right now, and not done, I believe we have reached the stage where it is time for civil disobedience to prevent the construction of new coal plants that do not have carbon capture and sequestration," Gore told the Clinton Global Initiative gathering to loud applause.