|
mikkymax (August 7, 2008 at 7:20 pm)
Some of the viewers above have used profane language. When some serious topic is going on. Please AVOID PROFANITY . It is of no use.
i0null (March 29, 2008 at 10:51 pm)
Another insightful presentation!
Definitely worth the watch.
Thanks google!
Google++;
salvadoraceves (March 3, 2008 at 8:52 am)
i applaud khosla for his concern of the environment and the global economy, but not without considering his own personal financial incentives. good idea in the sense that it can reduce dependency of fossil fuel, but it is no replacement; one is a heterogeneous solution that can provide great efficiency when partnered with hybrid technology, while the other is a volatile compound whose impact is not yet clear.
salvadoraceves (March 3, 2008 at 8:46 am)
i applaud khosla for his concern of the environment and the global economy, but not without considering his own personal financial incentives. it is a good idea in terms of reducing dependency on fossil fuel, but it is no replacement; one is a heterogeneous solution that can provide great energy output when partnered with hybrid technology, while the other is a volatile compound whose impact is not yet clear.
greyflcn (December 19, 2007 at 4:18 pm)
Yeap.
Khosla is pretty well known for putting fake information about biofuels on the loudspeaker.
Without even watching this, I can know that he's gonna say
1. It takes less energy to produce ethanol than oil
2. Brazil gets almost all of their fuel from ethanol.
Just sad that Google is sitting by allowing that to happen.
greyfalcon. net/ brazil
greyfalcon. net/ brazil2
greyfalcon. net/ khosla
trakkaton (November 24, 2007 at 10:32 pm)
You are right that the energy is only 150% higher.
trakkaton (November 24, 2007 at 10:31 pm)
Hunger is a problem of rights, that's accurate, but I was talking about the future.
Up to now we have overproduction of food, but soon the demand will be higher than the production. Then a different kind of famine will appear.
It's fine that prarie grasses demand little water, but Brazil is burning the rainforest to get farmland for biofuel. As long as the demand exists.
And I'm against cattle. Going vegetarian will be the last bumper we have when food and water gets scarce.
soylentgreenb (November 24, 2007 at 2:11 pm)
That's assinine.
Hunger is mostly caused by people's inabillity to entitle themselves to that food; not because of some shortage.
In the US alone there are 50 million acres of land that farmers are paid NOT to grow things on.
Mischantus and assorted prarie grasses demand very little water, fertilizer and sequester carbon.
You'll want to stop growing corn, it's ruinous for the environment and land it is grown on and it's not for food. It's cattle feed.
soylentgreenb (November 24, 2007 at 2:05 pm)
"For example: Petroleum has TWICE the energy ethanol has. He talks about 25%."
Ethanol contains 23.5 MJ/l and regular gasoline contains 35 MJ/l. That's a 33% less energy.
Like diesel fuel, ethanol is significantly more efficient than gasoline because you can compress it significantly more. That's likely how he arrives at that number.
trakkaton (November 22, 2007 at 8:05 pm)
Cheaper fuel: Wrong, because the calculation is wrong. If cheaper fuels matter, why is everyone buying 20 liter-SUVs? Where's the 1-liter-car? It's being how many decades now?
Energy security: BS. You can have oil. But you must be willing to pay for it, not loot it.
Farm incomes: For great land owners only.
Enviroment: Check out what REAL enviromentalists (not GoreCo) are saying about the CO2 bottom line. |
