Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

Another publicity stunt

Discussion in 'The Pub' at netrider.net.au started by pro-pilot, Feb 25, 2008.

  1. As always the machine of ‘green’ is gathering its usual flock of initiates. Whilst this is only a brief article. It highlights a few of the misconceptions that are well documented regarding alternate fuel sources.
    The comments made are quite funny.

    The last paragraph is the best bit. Don't dare criticise the efforts else be branded a heretic.

    http://au.news.yahoo.com/080224/2/15xom.html

    Virgin flies biofuel-powered jumbo jet



     
     Top
  2. Everything Branson does is a publicity stunt, he's a smart businessman.
     
     Top
  3. Yes it's a publicity stunt.
    Yes he has his own agenda to push.
    If you note his "plea" is Urging environmentalists not to criticize, And it is not a demand it is a plea.

    PP Once again you are pushing your own little barrow and sticking the boot into people who are trying to look at alternative ways to do things. Just recently I saw an article identifying that over the next 5 years Australia’s Oil reserves are going to be pretty much screwed... So looking at alternative fuel sources is going to be necessary for us or our economy is going to have some real balance of trade issues.

    So lets put this in language you understand (Money) We (That being Australia) will need to look into alternative fuel sources (Irrespective of the greenhouse or other environmental debates) from a purely economic perspective. A “Publicity Stunt†like this may get people looking at some of these alternatives and thinking of ways to make them viable.

    Yes it can be described as a publicity stunt, or a proof of concept (Or really a bit of both)
    PP You are a blind fool. You are blinded by your bigoted Anti environment view so much that things that are an economic benefit you would push aside if they are at all dressed in an environmental guise.
     
     Top
  4. the papers i've read which have attempted a lifecycle emissions analysis of ethanol using cellulosic feedstocks have estimated lifecycle emissions as low as 5% of diesel (e.g. switchgrass vs LS diesel) . i don't understand the recent reports which suggest that biofuels increase emissions over the lifecycle; i doubt that the earlier studies missed anything so fundamental as to skew the results as badly as is suggested.

    this is one of the ones i've read:

    http://pubs.acs.org/cgi-bin/abstract.cgi/bipret/2006/22/i04/abs/bp050371p.html

    i'll post full text if anyone is interested.

    aviation is not, at any rate, a substantial contributor to total transport emissions. from memory, the sub-sector emits about 8 per cent of total transport emissions; the vast majority of emissions are from cars and light trucks.

    as for the economics of biofuels: falconlord is right. the production cost of ethanol is well below the terminal gate price of petroleum. there is incentive to use them without recourse to environmental benefits.
     
     Top
  5. Richard Branson goes out of his way to seek attention.
    Sounds like someone on NR only much wealthier and with bigger balls :LOL:
     
     Top