Petition Closed
Petitioning U.S. House of Representatives and 2 others

No Subsidies 4 Costly Biofuel Production Petition of Epic Proportions

I.  What we take from the biosphere must be given back to it (recycled) or NATURE will TAKE it back so as to maintain the miraculous BALANCE AND ORDER OF CHAOS which underpins all physical existence and supercedes all "laws" of "Man" that do not take it into account.
        - College Ecological Science 101 combined with "Chaos Theory" -
        - High School General Chemistry 101 - 
III. Why develop more technology which requires that an impoverished public BUY energy from corporations when we could develop tech that can run off of FREELY AVAILABLE ENERGY POTENTIALS like wind and solar?
        - COMMON SENSE -

While it MAY be true that cultivating algaes and developing fuels from bio-wastes MAY not cause deforestation, LIFE needs its biomass wastes and water in and on our soils to restore and keep them fertile, not burned up and circulating in the air we breath, Climate Disruption or not.
In addition to the biosphere cost described above as well as other costs not mentioned till later in this document, there is also a human and industrial expenditure for growing (in the case of algae), "harvesting" (in the case of biomass wastes), processing and distributing fuels on a large scale.

Nonetheless, using LOCALLY produced algae derived fuels (IFF they do not rob other LIFE of vital WATER) and/or biomass waste fuels (IFF they are our own human and farm animal wastes) MAY be a good TEMPORARY stopgap measure during a transition from fossil fuels to solar/wind/non-combustion energy sources ...
and it MAY be a good way to RECYCLE mass human and animal excrement, tho toilets that compost it and spreading manure on farm lands instead of costly chemical and other mined and/or refined fertilizers to grow food would be more ecologically SUSTAINABLE and would recycle it CLEANER.  
However, this complex statement is qualified with intense skepticism based on all the available info included here, partly because this "solution" STILL requires BURNING something. Burning ANYTHING is DIRTY.

the Rush to Biofuels, ETHANOL IS NOT THE SOLUTION TO OUR PRESSING ENERGY CRISIS - Not All Biofuels Are Created Equal
--- "Currently, the process of producing cellulosic ethanol on a commercial scale remains at the research and development stage due to technological and cost barriers."
--- "The most favorable estimates, which already include cellulosic feedstocks, point out that fuel made from biomass can replace only a fourth to a third of transport-related oil consumption.6"
--- "Ethanol production is often tied to factory farming of livestock. ...  Livestock production and ethanol production are both water intensive."
--- "Ethanol can reduce some greenhouse gases, but can also increase emission of others. When fossil fuels are used to power ethanol refineries, the end result will be more global warming pollution than is generated by the dirty fuels ethanol is replacing. ... Overall, research shows that ethanol’s ability to reduce global warming pollution is quite limited."
--- "A recent study shows that pollution from ethanol can increase the number of deaths resulting from ozone-related respiratory problems.23 Ethanol can also increase the emissions of other toxics associated with severe health problems. 24"
--- "Coal and natural gas are commonly burned to run biofuel refineries,"
"A third of energy-related U.S. emissions are produced by the transportation sector.31"
"Even cellulosic ethanol, a considerably better alternative than corn ethanol, is limited by the impacts that large-scale production of feedstocks and fuel would have on the environment."
"Sustainable production of ethanol must account for the environmental impacts of production processes and facilities, including water consumption, refining methods, and the type of fuel used."

Based on this article alone, it is apparent that it would be very wise to invest MORE public funding for NON-COMBUSTION ENERGY sources than for these CRUTCHES 
Otherwise, we may never be able to walk again without them, lacking the resources to convert to what we REALLY need for true transpo and energy sustainability as a result of using our resources up for our CRUTCHES.
Future generations will pay for all of this because we are operating on BORROWED time and BORROWED funds now.

--- Algae Biofuel Companies Private and Gov't Funding Boosts Algae's Profit Potential. New Rpt.
--- Make Algae BioDiesel The world's leading guide to making Algae Biodiesel at Home!
--- How to make electricity A shocking new homeowner's kit the electric co's hope u will never own

A great electric car design was bought and DEMOs JUNKED by corporate entities years ago.
The only reason we are stuck with the cars we have now is because Big Oil and other corporate entities have continually sabotaged efforts to evolve our technologies along truly clean and sustainable lines.
Further, all attempts to do so NOW are also being sabotaged by corporate driven "special interests".

"I am looking at a kit to convert small truck to electric and recharge on the grid 100%"
~ Cherokee Fred Jesus 

Why develop more technology which requires that an impoverished public BUY energy from corporations when we could develop tech that can run off of FREELY AVAILABLE ENERGY POTENTIALS like wind and solar?
All that is then necessary is to HARNESS, TRANSFORM and STORE it.
We do not have to GROW it nor do we need to cut down LIFE or remove it from the land where it belongs and is desperately needed to heal our ravaged planet and its forests, which are the "lungs of the earth".
With the money and resources we could save on not needing FUEL to burn, we could fund a full conversion to electric transpo.
As it stands now, we don't even OWN our country anymore because we have borrowed so much for wars and military spending and bail outs and porko "Free Lunches" for corporate welfare. 

WE SAY NO TO H.R.1476/S.835: The OPEN FUEL STANDARD ACT of 2009, (aka OFS Act)



There are over 71,000 Google Search Results for "biofuels and deforestation". 
Here are a few for starters.

1. ENVIRONMENT: Biofuels Boom Spurring Deforestation - IPS  - 57k - Similar pages
t r u t h o u t | Biofuels Boom Spurring Deforestation  - 41k -

Nearly 40,000 hectares of forest vanish every day, driven by the world's growing hunger for timber, pulp and paper, and ironically, new biofuels and carbon ...
"Biofuels are rapidly becoming the main cause of deforestation in countries like Indonesia, Malaysia and Brazil," said Simone Lovera, managing coordinator ...
"Governments are beginning to realise that their natural forests have enormous value left standing," Lovera said. "A moratorium or ban on deforestation is the only way to stop this."

Biofuels boom could fuel rainforest destruction, Stanford ...  - 13k -

Feb 14, 2009 ... The symposium is titled "Biofuels, Tropical Deforestation, and Climate Policy: Key Challenges and Opportunities."
"Indeed, tropical forests are the world's most efficient storehouses for carbon, harboring more than 340 billion tons, according to Gibbs' research. This is equivalent to more than 40 years worth of global carbon dioxide emissions from burning fossil fuels."

Stop deforestation for biofuels - incorporating Stop palm oil in ...  - 121k -

However the government has refused to disqualify palm oil from EU-driven government targets for biofuels as a proportion of motor fuels, ...
"The Biofuelwatch website contains periodic action alerts and links to other campaigns on this issue."

4. U.S. biofuels policy drives deforestation in Indonesia, the Amazon - 49k -
23/09/2009 EU biofuels policy drives deforestation in Indonesia ...

Jan 17, 2008 ... US incentives for biofuel production are promoting deforestation in southeast Asia and the Amazon by driving up crop prices and displacing ...
"American taxpayers are spending $11 billion a year to subsidize corn producers—and this is having some surprising global consequences,"
"Clay Ogg, an agricultural economist with the U.S. government, finds the current biofuel boom has lifted palm oil prices by nearly half, leading to oil palm plantation expansion in Indonesia and Malaysia at the expense of carbon-rich peat swamps and species-rich tropical rainforests. "

Climate Change Blog: VICTORY! California Leads in Saying No to ...   - 34k -


Apr 24, 2009 ... VICTORY! California Leads in Saying No to Deforestation Biofuels. Corn is food, not fuel, and comes at great energy and ecosystem expense ...

Biofuels' Deforestation Could Do More Harm than Good | Biodiesel ... - 36k -


Feb 27, 2009 ... Biodiesel stocks, ethanol stocks, biodiesel and ethanol plants, trends, and industry news.

« Biofuel from Corn Ethanol Is Not Renewable, Does Not Address Climate Change

ALERT! Forest and Crop Biomass Can Never Ecologically Sustainably Power Industrial Society »

7. ***** Biofuels: Biodevastation, Hunger & False Carbon Credits - 43k -


Europe's thirst for biofuels is fuelling deforestation and food price hikes, exacerbated by a false accounting system that awards carbon credits to the ...
"Biofuels not necessarily carbon neutral nor sustainable"
"Biofuels are fuels derived from crop plants, and include biomass directly burnt, and especially biodiesel from plant seed-oil, and bioethanol from fermenting grain, sap, grass, straw or wood [1] (Biofuels for Oil Addicts, SiS 30). Biofuels have been promoted and mistakenly perceived to be ‘carbon neutral’, that they do not add any greenhouse gas to the atmosphere; burning them simply returns to the atmosphere the carbon dioxide that the plants take out when they were growing in the field. This ignores the costs in carbon emissions and energy of the fertiliser and pesticides used for growing the crops, of farming implements, processing and refining, refinery plants, transport, and infrastructure for transport and distribution. The extra costs in energy and carbon emissions can be quite substantial particularly if the biofuels are made in one country and exported to another, or worse, if the raw materials, such as seed oils, are produced in one country to be refined for use in another. Both are very likely if current trends continue."

8. Tropical Rainforest Deforestation for Biofuels Causes Global Warming  - 27k -

A new study from from Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and the Dept. of Global Ecology at Stanford University, entitled "Combined climate and ...
"It is easy to say common sense is of no use when trying to determine what might be causing global warming. But climate models, like economic models, are trying to make sense out of systems of nearly infinite complexity. When confronting chaos, common sense is a useful rudder. And to state the problem in plain terms, tropical deforestation is increasing, the justification for this is to combat global warming by growing biofuel, and the result is more global warming. It is an absolute disaster. And also don’t forget that droughts and extreme weather are often caused by tropical deforestation, not global warming."

Demand for food, wood, biofuels driving tropical deforestation ...  - 28k -

Jul 14, 2008 ... Demand for food, wood, and biofuels will likely contribute to massive deforestation in developing countries around the world by 2030, ...

Biofuels Boom Spurring Deforestation (20000 to 40000 hectares ...  - 43k -

GOOD SUMMARY ... "{snips}"

"Biofuels are rapidly becoming the main cause of deforestation in .... Sugar coating deforestation for biofuels or "carbon credits" is wrong ...
"... deforestation puts far more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere than the entire world's fleet of cars, trucks, planes, trains and ships combined."

UN Warns Biofuels Could Fuel Deforestation, Land Disputes  - 31k -


Jan 24, 2008 ... The world's rush to embrace biofuels is causing a spike in the price of corn and other crops and could worsen water shortages and force poor ...

Top scientists warn against rush to biofuel | Environment | The ... - 103k -

Mar 25, 2008 ... But scientists have increasingly questioned the sustainability of biofuels, warning that by increasing deforestation the energy source may ...
A senior government source said last night: "There is a growing feeling that we need to get all the facts. Some biofuels are OK but there are serious questions about others. More work needs to be done." ...'
'... John Beddington, the government's current chief scientific adviser, has already expressed scepticism about biofuels. At a speech in Westminster this month he said demand for biofuels from the US had delivered a "major shock" to world agriculture, which was raising food prices globally. "There are real problems with the unsustainability of biofuels," he said, adding that cutting down rainforest to grow the crops was "profoundly stupid". ...'

News - Massive subsidies for biofuels 'disastrous' - The Ecologist - 31k -

Aug 17, 2009 ... Biofuels are not only causing deforestation but also fuelling poverty, according to a report from Christian Aid. ...
"Instead of providing billions of dollars to industry, the report says governments should support small-scale biofuel production that would help provide clean energy off-grid to people in poorer countries."

[The phrase ... "provide clean energy off-grid" ... seems to be an oxymoron.]


14. S. 835: OFS Act, The OPEN FUEL STANDARD ACT of 2009 ( - 33k -


These locations sometimes get changed in which case you will have to start on the link 14. or may even have to do another search. 

There are more than 3,600 Google Search Results for this legislation, some linked to the full text and some with only commentary on it. Here are a few:

S.835: Open Fuel Standard Act of 2009 - U.S. Congress - OpenCongress

Apr 20, 2009 ... Official government data, breaking news and blog coverage, public comments and user community for S.835 Open Fuel Standard Act of 2009.
"Recent News Coverage  Hmmmm, no news coverage found for this bill at this time. This means that this this bill has not yet been mentioned on a publicly-searchable news website ..."

Related Bills (1) & Issues (9)

18. H.R.1476 Open Fuel Standard Act of 2009

19. Energy Victory by bestselling author Robert Zubrin


Download a Summary of the Open Fuel Standard Act ... OPEN FUEL STANDARD ACT
which was recently introduced in both the House (HR1476) and the Senate (S.835). ...

20. Mandated Flex-fuel Technology: Throwing Bad Regulation After Bad ... 


"Thanks to this Soviet-style production quota system, which Congress created in 2005 and expanded in 2007, daily corn ethanol production in February increased by about 17,000 barrels to 647,000 barrels per day, despite weak motor-fuel demand and poor to negative profit margins for ethanol producers. "
"The ethanol industry enjoys a multitude of market-rigging privileges
including the RFS, tariffs to keep out cheaper Brazilian ethanol made from sugar cane, and a 45-cents-per-gallon blenders tax credit for each gallon of ethanol sold in motor fuel. Take away those policy stilts, and practically no ethanol would be produced or sold as motor fuel."
"EPA and DOE compare the average cost of using regular gasoline and E-85 for scores of different flex-fuel vehicles. In every case, regardless of make or model, fueling the vehicle with E-85 costs more–lots more.  Consider a few examples based on fuel prices as of May 1, 2009: ..."
[emphasis added by petition author]

"Here are my predictions, if the flex-fuel mandatists get their way:
--- Most people will continue to fill their tanks with gasoline, because gasoline will still be a better buy.
--- Mandatists will then demand new mandates requiring gas stations to install E-85 pumps, call for penalties and rewards aimed directly at consumers (such as feebates
and excise taxes), and lobby for a bigger RFS.
--- All of this will do nothing to defeat al-Qaeda or save the planet.
--- These multiple interventions will, however, make it harder for U.S. automakers to produce cars people want to buy. By diverting resources, the interventions will also impede market-driven innovation in automotive technology and design." 


"EPA and DOE compare the average cost of using regular gasoline and E-85 for scores of different flex-fuel vehicles. In every case, regardless of make or model, fueling the vehicle with E-85 costs more–lots more. "

Anything that costs more will create more poverty and endanger our ability to convert to cleaner energies and to heal, preserve and protect our planet.
Why develop more technology which requires that people BUY energy from corporations when we could develop tech that can run off of FREELY AVAILABLE ENERGY POTENTIALS like wind and solar?



                                The Photo: Loading Trucks w/ Sugar Cane 4 Biofuel Production, Brazil.



Ani L. Schwartz started this petition with a single signature, and now has 340 supporters. Start a petition today to change something you care about.

Today: Ani L. is counting on you

Ani L. Schwartz needs your help with “No Subsidies 4 Costly Biofuel Production Petition of Epic Proportions”. Join Ani L. and 339 supporters today.