[Arkcon]

Originally posted by dumbluck:
The advantage to this is that we aren't digging CO2 out of the ground and throwing it up into the atmosphere. Instead, we're pulling the CO2 out of the atmosphere to make the diesel, then throwing it back up into the atmosphere when we burn it. Thus there is no increase in greenhouse gasses, we're just recycling them.

edit: for a more short term fix: there is always ethenol(sp?). It's made from corn (I think Biodiesel comes from soybeans). Auto engines can burn up to a 20%(?) ethenol mixture with gas (gas=80%, ethenol=20%). With some minor modifications to engines, that ratio can be reversed (80% ethenol, 20% gas).

That won't solve all the problems, of coarse. But it would definately make a dent in the pollution levels, huh?

As I understood it, the enery consumed in the production of those crops by Western farming methods is greater than potential yield. Producing crops by developing world methods simply produces much less total crops.

Although, I agree, it's just like Geo said, concentrating the polution producer in one spot so it can be controled is worthwhile.

But overall cost effectivness isn't there with biodiesel and ethanol fuel.