[I thought of adding the topic "tropic forests" in
parentheses because it would make it easier for a new
person to this ng to find this information. By looking
at the titles of this thread for example, the new user
could figure out that the thread is about renewable
energy and possibly about global warming. By doing a
search, we could find a lot of threads with the same
topic. Searching entirely by word strings in the title
is more difficult. Also if moderators kept the list of
past topics which would be published monthly on this
ng, then new users would find it helpfull to use this
ng to find information. The moderator topic list would
be an index of this ng]
On Mon, 18 Feb 2008, Maren at google wrote:
>> "Still, he says, the results may help explain the
>> high methane emissions he and others have found over
>> tropical forests using ground and satellite
>> measurements. Other scientists recently have
>> reported increased emissions over Arctic-river flood
>> plains in eastern Siberia, invoking a variation of
>> the "rice pipeline" hypothesis to explain them."
>
> Those of us who don't ignore this know that rice
> fields are the biggest emitter of methane. It's a
> result of non-oxygenated decay of plant matter.
>
> In the relatively short term using more of our
> geothermal power here may release more toxic and/or
> greenhouse gases her, but in the log run they're
> going to come out one way or another. we might as
> well make use of the geothermal energy that's there.
However, for trees, the article states that trees
themselves can produce methane by a certain biochemical
process. I can see the "rice" explanation for the
Arctic plains in Siberia. But for tropical trees,
unless there is an abundance of other life forms as in
rain forests, it would seem that the other chemical
process also contributes greatly to the mathane in
tropical forests. Forests of cooler climates don't have
the same problems as in the tropics?
> Given the fact that a grocery store loaf of bread
> when not on sale is now $3.50, a gallon of milk when
> not at KTA and not on sale is $7-8, a (20 lb) bag of
> (white) rice is $8 when on sale (Hilo prices), I
> don't think our solution is in growing plants of of
> whatever kind to produce ethanol, but to feed
> ourselves.
>
> Case in point: the guy who maintains my weedwackers
> told me that "we had 4 days of sun and we had 300
> machines come in". Mostly due to corrosion caused by
> ethanol. I know Don. Don knows.
>
> Maren.
I remember reading in my Hawaiian history in elementary
school that it turned out that rice-- not taro or
wheat-- was the most economical to grow in Hawaii when
Hawaii was expensive to ship to. We had plenty of fresh
water because we grew taro, but we could also grow more
rice in the same area. Perhaps there are species of
algae that are rich in starch for ethanol production as
well as for oil-- more feasible because it is more like
mineral oil?
Only problem for local agriculture is that the state is
unwilling to subsidize local farm prices to keep
expensive products on shelves. For example, the last
dairy IIRC on Oahu closed. Now milk is much higher in
cost for shipping into the islands. I can see subsidies
for exportable farm products like coffee. But do only
Kona farmers get the subsidies? :) However, at some
point, when the competition gets fierce, such subsidies
do more harm to our economy than any benefit it may
bring.
Anyway, 2-cycle engines seem to not secure the fuel.
Have had a chain saw in my trunk to cut some trees. The
car reeks of gasoline until I air it out. Keep
reminding myself to take out the fuel from the chain
saw. Cars don't seem to have the same problem as the
2-cycle engines. Don't think that you can compare the
two types of engines. It's like comparing apples and
oranges.
