Fisheries to cut greenhouse emissions

Efficiency is the most cost effective GHG reduction. It often (almost always, really) pays back more than you put into it.

Viet Nam Research Institute for Aquaculture (RIA) prepared a plan for aquaculture farms. They proposed measures to (1) reduce the use of fossil energy fuels,(2) increase renewable energy use,(3) improve production efficiency and farm management, and (4) transform available sources including residues to create biomass for fishing and aquaculture activities.

In 2010, the aquaculture sector had an output of 2.8 million tonnes but they also produced about 4.33 million tonnes of Carbon dioxide (C02). Petroleum products (petrol, diesel oil and kerosene) are used for feeding, pumping water, aeration of ponds, and harvesting.

Phan Thi Van, RIA deputy director, said: "Greenhouse gas emission is a problem not only in Viet Nam but also other countries in the world."

CarbonTracker-Asia at
National Institute of Meteorological Research

http://www.nimr.go.kr/2/carbontracker/

CarbonTracker was originally developed by NOAA's Earth System Research Laboratory to focus on North America. Here the system is applied in Asia as CarbonTracker-Asia cooperated with ESRL/NOAA.

Earth System Research Laboratory

Global Monitoring Division
Measurement Locations

http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/dv/iadv/

Select a Sampling Location from Map

Global warming; Is it true?

http://www.youtube.com/watch...

NobodyYouKnow wrote:

Efficiency is the most cost effective GHG reduction. It often (almost always, really) pays back more than you put into it.

So... Define this nebulous term "efficiency". Is it based on your feelings? How much do we pay for this "efficiency"? Should the EPA define "efficiency"? Should they define how much people must pay for this "efficiency"? Of course, maybe it's beyond your abilities to understand that the Free Market will define "efficiency" better than you or any other central planning agency will. It really is despicable how people have absolutely no clue about free markets nowadays, and believe that the EPA and other gubment agencies kn0ow better than they do how to allocate their resources.

SpaceBlues wrote:

Global warming; Is it true?
http://www.youtube.com/watch...

No, it's not. It's a hoax perpetrated by government sponsored "scientists" who are prostitutes for the statist agenda.

HTS wrote:

<quoted text>
So... Define this nebulous term "efficiency". Is it based on your feelings? How much do we pay for this "efficiency"? Should the EPA define "efficiency"? Should they define how much people must pay for this "efficiency"? Of course, maybe it's beyond your abilities to understand that the Free Market will define "efficiency" better than you or any other central planning agency will. It really is despicable how people have absolutely no clue about free markets nowadays, and believe that the EPA and other gubment agencies kn0ow better than they do how to allocate their resources.

Efficiency is definable.

"In economics, the term economic efficiency refers to the use of resources so as to maximize the production of goods and services.[1] An economic system is said to be more efficient than another (in relative terms) if it can provide more goods and services for society without using more resources. In absolute terms, a situation can be called economically efficient if:

* No one can be made better off without making someone else worse off.
* No additional output can be obtained without increasing the amount of inputs.
* Production proceeds at the lowest possible per-unit cost.

These definitions of efficiency are not exactly equivalent, but they are all encompassed by the idea that a system is efficient if nothing more can be achieved given the resources available."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_efficie...

"In thermodynamics:

* Energy efficiency, measure of second law thermodynamic loss.
* Thermal efficiency, useful work per the higher heating value of the fuel."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Efficiency

SpaceBlues wrote:

<quoted text>Efficiency is definable.
"In economics, the term economic efficiency refers to the use of resources so as to maximize the production of goods and services.

LOL! And yeah, the effort to reduce these "eeeevil" GHGs is going to maximize the production of goods and resources. Uh, sure. Look at Spain and their failed experiment with "green" energy. Fail. Look at Solyndra. Fail. Look at any other green energy project. Fail. Is that "using your resources so as to maximize the production of goods and services"? Fail. All government intrusion into markets does is divert money from real productive enterprise into failed efforts. Just look at the so called wars on poverty and drugs. Fail. Fail. And look at how much money has gone down the rat hole funding the charlatan "scientists" trying to prove the hoax of global warming/climate change/gorebullism... Fail. To a Statist, the definition of "efficiency" is allocating resources as to maximize the power of the State over the individual. In the Statist world, that is... Success.

Efficiency!

http://www.michigancapitolconfidential.com/16...