<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.2.2" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Biofuel Backlash</title>
	<link>http://www.dianaswednesday.com/2008/06/the-biofuel-backlash/</link>
	<description>Where the world comes together</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 16:44:35 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.2</generator>

	<item>
		<title>By: Steve Savage</title>
		<link>http://www.dianaswednesday.com/2008/06/the-biofuel-backlash/#comment-2496</link>
		<author>Steve Savage</author>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 May 2008 06:22:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.dianaswednesday.com/2008/06/the-biofuel-backlash/#comment-2496</guid>
		<description>This blog has a great deal of good information - just a couple of comments.  While I'm not a big proponent of corn-based ethanol, it is difficult to generalize about its carbon footprint advantage.  If the corn is grown optimally (e.g. no-till with cover crops, nitrification inhibitors...) the foot print is respectable.  Still, sugar cane is the clear winner today and it is ridiculous to have tarrifs against it.  We should be encouraging well done (from an environmental and social point of view) sugar cane everywhere it makes sense (e.g. Cuba, Brazil, some parts of Africa...) &lt;strong&gt;Steven Savage, Ph.D.&lt;/strong&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This blog has a great deal of good information - just a couple of comments.  While I&#8217;m not a big proponent of corn-based ethanol, it is difficult to generalize about its carbon footprint advantage.  If the corn is grown optimally (e.g. no-till with cover crops, nitrification inhibitors&#8230;) the foot print is respectable.  Still, sugar cane is the clear winner today and it is ridiculous to have tarrifs against it.  We should be encouraging well done (from an environmental and social point of view) sugar cane everywhere it makes sense (e.g. Cuba, Brazil, some parts of Africa&#8230;) <strong>Steven Savage, Ph.D.</strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Wednesday-Night - &#187; Canada: Environment &#38; Energy Policy</title>
		<link>http://www.dianaswednesday.com/2008/06/the-biofuel-backlash/#comment-2486</link>
		<author>Wednesday-Night - &#187; Canada: Environment &#38; Energy Policy</author>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 May 2008 18:52:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.dianaswednesday.com/2008/06/the-biofuel-backlash/#comment-2486</guid>
		<description>[...] also The Biofuel Backlash and   Toxic chemicals and Environment on [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] also The Biofuel Backlash and   Toxic chemicals and Environment on [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Wednesday-Night - &#187; Wednesday Night #1346</title>
		<link>http://www.dianaswednesday.com/2008/06/the-biofuel-backlash/#comment-1014</link>
		<author>Wednesday-Night - &#187; Wednesday Night #1346</author>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Dec 2007 20:02:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.dianaswednesday.com/2008/06/the-biofuel-backlash/#comment-1014</guid>
		<description>[...] as it applies to biofuels has been discussed frequently here  and elsewhere  including a recent OECD report,  using grain for fuel or arable land for non-edible crops for fuel merely solves fuel problems by [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] as it applies to biofuels has been discussed frequently here  and elsewhere  including a recent OECD report,  using grain for fuel or arable land for non-edible crops for fuel merely solves fuel problems by [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
