SEARCH
A great gift
for crisis deniers!
Humoring the Horror of the
Converging Emergencies
94 color pages
$24.99 now $15!
Or read FREE online!
Twitter
Ping this story
in social media:
del.icio.us
Digg
Newsvine
NowPublic
Reddit
Facebook
StumbleUpon
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
Biofuels 200 times more expensive than forest conservation for global warming mitigation http://apocadocs.com/s.pl?1219932476
The British government should end subsidies for biofuels and instead use the funds to slow destruction of rainforests and tropical peatlands argues a new report issued by a U.K.-based think tank.... [The study] says that "avoided deforestation" would be a more cost-effective way to address climate change, since land use change generates more emissions than the entire global transport sector and offers ancillary benefits including important ecosystem services.... They find that the biofuel initiative will save 2.6-3 million tons of carbon dioxide per year at a cost of ($1 billion), while a similar investment in preventing deforestation and peatland destruction could result in avoided emissions of 40-200 million tons of CO2 per year or a 50 times greater amount of avoided emissions. The savings would be equivalent to 37 percent of all UK carbon dioxide emissions for 2005.
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
[Read more stories about:
forests]
This item will appear in our PANIQuiz!
|
 |
|
New!:
| |
|
No reader quips yet -- be the first! | |
|
Got a PaniQuip?
|
|
|
We reserve the
right to reuse, remove, or refuse any entry.
| |
|
|
The ApocaDocs say:
|
|
|
 |
Spending money to avoid something?
That would require long-term thinking.
|
|
|
|
|
Want to explore more?
Try the PaniCloud!
|
