I quit the AAAS when they hired Alan Leshner as their CEO.

Back in the nineties he took the position that there was no need for scientific research into the medical uses of marijuana, because federal law already told us it was medically useless.

What a scientist, eh!!!!! Proof by federal law!!!

He was the head of NIDA when he said that.

It shows you how clueless and naive the American science establishment is about the relationship between science and the War on Drugs when they'll let a man with his track record take an important science leadership position like the one they gave him.

From a scientific perspective, the man is absolutely contemptible.

Federal law does not determine material reality.

It's sick even to have to say that, but this is what it's come to in this country.

There is enough marginal, unused agricultural land in the United States to generate the biomass necessary

How much petroleum will it take to make this land productive? How much more erosion will we cause? Running a few cars around town on used french-fry oil is a cute stunt, but biofuels are basically a scam. In a world where people go hungry, how can we in good conscience "grow" fuel for our Ford Extinctions to haul our fat asses to McDonalds? Noticed corn prices in Mexico lately?

This all sounds lovely. Let's solve the world's energy problems by using every last bit of open space to produce biofuels. Except that there are already animals and plants using a lot of that open space to ... live. I'm not against progress, I'd just like to be sure that people are considering the repercussions of their actions before they act, not 20 years down the road. I was just reading an article about how much damage was done to oceans due to attempts to use old tires as artificial reefs. The tires break apart and scrape the bottom of the ocean clean, release toxins into the ocean, and they don't even provide a suitable substrate for reef creatures. Now, we are spending millions digging up old tires from the ocean floor. The message is that we should start small and test ideas for a while before jumping into new technology, no matter how good the ideas seem to be.

I think it's important to clarify that "marginal land" refers to the land's suitability for food-based agriculture, i.e. annual crops. These lands might be better suited to perennial crops that can be used for biofuels -- e.g. perennial grasses and poplar trees. While I think it is essential to view the plans of "big science" with some skepticism and caution, it is also essential to know what it is they are suggesting.

As someone who works at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory -- the place where Dr. Chu is the lab director -- I've given up being dismayed when someone confuses us with Livermore. I try to be amused instead.

There are two different national laboratories that start with "Lawrence", in honor of Ernest Orlando Lawrence: (1) Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory is located in Berkeley, California, and conducts unclassified research mostly related to basic science, applied materials science, energy efficiency, and energy technologies; (2) Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory is located in Livermore, California, and performs mostly classified research, much of it related to nuclear weapons and other weapons technologies.

There is no "Lawrence Berkeley Livermore Laboratory."

and no one is willing to look at the elephant in the driveway. I'm guilty, I have two.

We cannot, simply cannot, sustain the car-centered American way of life. Not with biofuels, not with electric cars, not in a box, not with a fox, not in a house, not with a mouse. Just the production of the cars themselves, let alone what goes in the tank, is using up the earth's resources at an alarming rate.

To use a word that is overused, we must look to a serious paradigm shift away from the private car.

I'd like to see a whole lot less hot air spent on biofuels, and a whole lot more time spent analyzing architecture, neighborhood design, car-centered zoning laws, and public transit. The biofuels discussion gives the impression that scientists will come up with a magic bullet that will let us continue to drive our Hummers and our Priuses and our minivans and our motorcycles forever. Ain't so.

If my neighbors and I had to walk a mile to our nearest grocery store pulling our little fold-up aluminum carts with the day's groceries, there'd be a whole lot more outcry about the lack of sidewalks, crosswalks, and regular bus service. Someone would start to wonder why there are no corner markets in the suburbs. Someone else might wonder why the nearest playground is a car ride away. Yet another someone might ask why there are no bike lanes.

Biofuels are not going to solve anything, not on a large enough scale to be useful, and not without environmental ramifications that are beyond what we're willing to live with. As another poster pointed out, getting a car to drive around on used french fry oil is a neat trick, but not something to recommend to the public at large.

What bothers me about the discussions of post-oil technology is that every technology is discussed and usually dismissed as though it'll be the only technology used to replace oil. Can't get enough solar from panels, geothermal isn't practical enough yet, biofuel is "wasting food", doesn't have enough land space, doesn't convert easily, coal is too dirty, nuclear is also a limited resource, etc...

It won't happen like that. All these technologies will be used in concert. Some power will come from wind farms, some from hydro and tidal. Some power will be solar produced locally and some from solar cell farms. Some power will be from cleaner coal, some from various types of biofuel, some from organically released hydrogen, some from improving geothermal. Savings will be made in off-peak use, improved grids, more efficient appliances, cars, etc...

I'm really pleased this conference was so positive 'cause I'm really sick of the doomsayers. We're an adaptive species with a knack for technology and science, we'll do fine. There'll likely be some pain, but we'll do fine.