"Steve Spence" wrote in message
...
JoeSixPack wrote:


We've had this argument before, and it's a specious one. Switching to
biofuels does not significantly reduce the amount of carbon being loaded
into the atmosphere, nor does it trigger the earth to assimilate carbon
faster. The dramatic rise in atmospheric CO2 since 1800 has been a
result of burning carbon-based fuels faster than the earth can assimilate
it. It makes no difference which carbon-based fuel is being burned,
rapid atmospheric CO2 loading will still occur. The only way to reverse
the trend is to reduce the burning of carbon-based fuels to a point where
the assimilation rate exceeds our emission rate. The bigger the
difference, the faster the CO2 levels in our atmosphere will decline.

It's only specious in your eyes, and it's surely no argument. It's a fact.
Burning fossil fuels releases new CO2 into the air, adding to
concentrations, burning biofuels releases co2 removed in the previous
growing season, not adding to concentrations. That's all there is to it.



You're either terribly set in your ways or very uninformed. Either way, you
just aren't getting it. When you put carbon into the air faster than the
earth can remove it, the levels rise. The carbon won't dissipate from the
atmosphere any faster just because you are burning biofuels. Growing more
plants for biofuel won't scrub the atmosphere any faster either. All the
cropland is already covered with vegetation.