It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Federal Gov't Study: Bio Fuels Worse for Environment Than Gasoline

page: 1

log in


posted on Apr, 21 2014 @ 05:26 PM
Well, that's a bit of a kick in the pants, isn't it? For years and years, the far left has been screaming at everyone that they were horrid creatures for not using hybrid vehicles and for not using biofuels. OOOOOOPS . I wonder if they'll accept these findings or fight them. I"m sure those far left politicians who are heavily invested in pushing the 'green' (like Al Gore) will ignore these findings ...

Bio Fuels Worse for Environment Than Gasoline

Biofuels made from the leftovers of harvested corn plants are worse than gasoline for global warming in the short term, a study shows, challenging the Obama administration's conclusions that they are a much cleaner oil alternative and will help combat climate change.

A $500,000 study paid for by the federal government and released Sunday in the peer-reviewed journal Nature Climate Change concludes that biofuels made with corn residue release 7 percent more greenhouse gases in the early years compared with conventional gasoline.

While biofuels are better in the long run, the study says they won't meet a standard set in a 2007 energy law to qualify as renewable fuel.

posted on Apr, 21 2014 @ 05:45 PM
a reply to: FlyersFan

Oh I can believe they burn dirtier however they are still carbon neutral because the growing process removes carbon from the atmosphere. Actually with carbon capture mufflers if everything ran off of bio fuel the result would be removing carbon from the atmosphere.

So it burns dirtier but it doesn't add carbon to the atmosphere like burning fossil fuels which is carbon that has been stored for millions of years.

You have to see the entire picture not just a small part of it when discussing these things.

posted on Apr, 21 2014 @ 05:48 PM
I think that this is probably because of the fact that the oil industry has been well alive for over 100 years concentrating efficiency of production and usage as well as the ability to produce and burn fuel with less emissions.

Although bio-fuels have been "going" for some time now, they comparatively don't have the money nor the political power that the oil industry has and therefore, for me, this isn't really unexpected.

You complain about how the left has deplored people for not using bio-fuels, but maybe if people had used bio-fuels earlier it would be significantly more efficient by now. I also have to point out that the end of your quote states that bio-fuels are better in the long run, I agree as what we are doing now simply isn't sustainable in the future.

edit on 2142014 by DodgyDawg because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 21 2014 @ 05:48 PM
"A $500,000 study"

Yet millions more were spent to prove the opposite?

Follow the money.


posted on Apr, 21 2014 @ 05:50 PM
Posted earlier here

Please add further comments to the ongoing discussion in the above linked thread.

**Thread Closed**

new topics

top topics

log in