[Nano]

I don't know as anything can be done to help them but we need to pay attention to our own affairs so we don't join them on the road side.

Well I *do* know what has to be done. It's obvious. It's time to send in our armed forces. Liberate those poor Zimbabweans and reinstate a new government. Things can only get better.

Since about year now I have seen the light, the solution to the peak-oil induced world dpression. We have to mobilise and recolonise Africa. Inrease it's productivity so that the world can maintain it's course of eocnomic growth in a sustainable way. Could be good for Africa as well as the rest of the world.

In fact, the different european power all were well on their way to colonising Africa before the 1st world war. We need to pick up where we left off.

[mos6507]

Good point. It's a good thing that so many on here weren't duped by a man who pledged more food to fuel programs. Oh wait...He was elected.

Thanks, Eastbay.

[mos6507]

Africa's biggest asset is its sunlight. The only "colonizing" that should take place is massive capital infusion to turn the entire sahara into a freaking big solar panel.

[Ludi]

Africa's biggest asset is its sunlight. The only "colonizing" that should take place is massive capital infusion to turn the entire sahara into a freaking big solar panel.

Turning it back into forest might be a better idea.

[wisconsin_cur]

Africa's biggest asset is its sunlight. The only "colonizing" that should take place is massive capital infusion to turn the entire sahara into a freaking big solar panel.

Managed by whom? With what kind of oversight? And what kind of punishment for those who are found guilty of graft?

[3aidlillahi]

Africa's biggest asset is its sunlight. The only "colonizing" that should take place is massive capital infusion to turn the entire sahara into a freaking big solar panel.

Turning it back into forest might be a better idea.

Sure. But let's be realistic. It'd cost trillions of dollars to turn the world's largest desert into a forest.

Thanks, Eastbay.

So you support Obama's ethanol policies? The ones that have to take away food for a family of 5 to feed an SUV for a year? Speaking of African children starving to death...

Thanks for the ad hom btw. Thought you were above that. Instead, you're just another 3aidlillahi.

[kpeavey]

Just a few years ago in Zimbabwe they were saying "famine will never hit us again"

It is cheaper and easier to turn forest into desert.

If Zimbabwe had big enough oil reserves, I have no doubts that the US would move to liberate [s]it[/s] the people.

[Narz]

If Monte were king trucks would be more careful so as not to risk allowing the masses to reach reproductive age.

Er, wait, nevermind I think Monte said he'd like to see more dead in car accidents (by raising the speed limit)... maybe he'd just lower the speed limit for food trucks. And make them drive in the fast line causing road rage & even more accidents.

[davep]

Be careful about the ethanol thing. Prior to using corn for ethanol, most (over 80%) of US corn was used to feed cattle, not poor foreign children. This is massively inefficient and not too good for the cattle.

And the distillers grains can still be fed to livestock anyway. It still contains all the nutrients except the carbohydrates.

If done in a local setup, it can be an efficient part of a bigger farm. But obviously, this is not how the US does things.

[gollum]

Didn't this country expel all of their white farmers from their farms a couple of years ago? Fuck em, let them eat cake.

[3aidlillahi]

Be careful about the ethanol thing. Prior to using corn for ethanol, most (over 80%) of US corn was used to feed cattle, not poor foreign children. This is massively inefficient and not too good for the cattle.

And the distillers grains can still be fed to livestock anyway. It still contains all the nutrients except the carbohydrates.

If done in a local setup, it can be an efficient part of a bigger farm. But obviously, this is not how the US does things.

Point is the same. There's no such thing as a free lunch. That ethanol from corn had to come from somewhere. If it's taken out of the mouths of children, they die. If it's taken out of the mouths of cattle, then the cattle either die or need other food. That other food will be then taken out of the mouths of someone. Even with increased yields and acreage, there's still a loss somewhere.

Not to mention, corn is horribly wasteful with regards to water in comparison to other foodstuffs. That will result in large portions of the Mid West losing groundwater and thus having difficulty getting water to their citizens.

No free lunch.

[davep]

Be careful about the ethanol thing. Prior to using corn for ethanol, most (over 80%) of US corn was used to feed cattle, not poor foreign children. This is massively inefficient and not too good for the cattle.

And the distillers grains can still be fed to livestock anyway. It still contains all the nutrients except the carbohydrates.

If done in a local setup, it can be an efficient part of a bigger farm. But obviously, this is not how the US does things.

Point is the same. There's no such thing as a free lunch. That ethanol from corn had to come from somewhere. If it's taken out of the mouths of children, they die. If it's taken out of the mouths of cattle, then the cattle either die or need other food. That other food will be then taken out of the mouths of someone. Even with increased yields and acreage, there's still a loss somewhere.

The point is that we are using corn very inefficiently, to feed cattle. Stop hand-wringing about the poor. The majority of the US exports go to feed other cattle, inefficiently (as far as human-ingested protein is concerned).

Not to mention, corn is horribly wasteful with regards to water in comparison to other foodstuffs. That will result in large portions of the Mid West losing groundwater and thus having difficulty getting water to their citizens.

No free lunch.

I agree that corn is wasteful. Not just in terms of water, but in terms of acreage per unit alcohol. Beet is a far better crop, but I guess their lobby isn't as strong.

[vtsnowedin]

Didn't this country expel all of their white farmers from their farms a couple of years ago? Fark em, let them eat cake.

There you have hit on the truth of the matter. The people starving in Zimbabwe are black and they control no oil. Like the people in Darfor the majority whites in the western world care not a wit if they live or die and will not raise a finger to save them. As good a place as any to start the die off. Do you suppose if little white girls were being starved and abused in these hell holes the NATO countries would have sat back and done nothing?

[mos6507]

OK, let's get one thing out of the way. The United States and any other country for that matter is under no obligation to "save" any other country. If we do, we're doing that country a favor, not fulfilling some kind of obligation as savior of the universe. Nobody should take that for granted.

This also goes for trade. If there are a lot of countries hopelessly dependent on grain staying cheap because we export so much of it from the US, that's just as much their problem as our dependence on foreign oil.

Export land model will apply to food just as much as fossil fuels. It's the way it's going to go down sooner or later, ethanol or no ethanol, and regardless how much or how little we care about "brown people".

[3aidlillahi]

The majority of the US exports go to feed other cattle, inefficiently (as far as human-ingested protein is concerned).

Yes but then what do those cattle eat since their food has been taken away to burn in SUV's? They either have to eat somebody's food or starve (or not be birthed). If they are not in existence, then somebody isn't fed.

No matter which way you put it, if you take A from B, then in order for B to have sufficient food, it must take from C. It doesn't matter if C is chicken, goats or people. Someone is missing out. Eventually, the chain always works its way back to people since the end result of every human process is human enjoyment or survival.

I have no idea why this concept is so hard. We aren't getting free food. That food at the grocery store has to come from somewhere.

[gollum]

"OK, let's get one thing out of the way. The United States and any other country for that matter is under no obligation to "save" any other country."

I agree, the merits of ethanol aside the resources are ours to do with as we please. If we choose to use our corn for whatever purpose that is our business we are under no obligation to save Africa or any other place for that matter. Zimbabwe sits especially sour in my mind because they expelled their productive farmers in a blatantly racist way and now we are supposed to send our grain? Maybe they should make restitution to the farmers they murdered and stole from first. again, fark em!

[3aidlillahi]

"OK, let's get one thing out of the way. The United States and any other country for that matter is under no obligation to "save" any other country."

I agree, the merits of ethanol aside the resources are ours to do with as we please. If we choose to use our corn for whatever purpose that is our business we are under no obligation to save Africa or any other place for that matter. Zimbabwe sits especially sour in my mind because they expelled their productive farmers in a blatantly racist way and now we are supposed to send our grain? Maybe they should make restitution to the farmers they murdered and stole from first. again, fark em!

We'll send grain to Zimbabwe. But only white Zimbabweans. See if they like racism thrown back at them.

[davep]

The majority of the US exports go to feed other cattle, inefficiently (as far as human-ingested protein is concerned).

Yes but then what do those cattle eat since their food has been taken away to burn in SUV's? They either have to eat somebody's food or starve (or not be birthed). If they are not in existence, then somebody isn't fed.

No matter which way you put it, if you take A from B, then in order for B to have sufficient food, it must take from C. It doesn't matter if C is chicken, goats or people. Someone is missing out. Eventually, the chain always works its way back to people since the end result of every human process is human enjoyment or survival.

I have no idea why this concept is so hard. We aren't getting free food. That food at the grocery store has to come from somewhere.

That's a very simplistic take on things. If we feed the corn to, say, chickens, we get far more protein per unit input than if we fed it to cows. If we ate the stuff directly (or grew other stuff that is less damaging) we would have far more available.

There's no point in saying that we would have less food due to conversion to alcohol, when you don't address other ways of increasing the inherent efficiency.

Blume's book on the subject shows how making alcohol in an integrated farm can be beneficial. The CO2 given off (from fermentation or anaerobic digestion of the distillers grains - also producing methane) can be fed to algae in a pond and the algae fed to fish. The conversion ratio is 2:1. The distillers grains can be used to produce mushrooms with a ratio approaching 1:1. If you rethink the processes holistically, you can get far better use of the resources.

[VMarcHart]

No need to go so far to find misery.

Tent Cities

[smallpoxgirl]

"OK, let's get one thing out of the way. The United States and any other country for that matter is under no obligation to "save" any other country."

You've obviously never heard of the Carter doctrine.