I'm Not Convinced

This article isn't badly written. In fact its almost persuasive. Almost. I agree with many points but as you can see in this paragraph:

For the urban poor, rising food prices are disastrous, but for the developing world's rural poor (about 67 percent of those who live on less than a dollar a day), food price increases can boost incomes as subsistence farms become more economic. That's why developing countries such as India and Brazil have pressed to reduce Western food subsidies and increase food prices -- so their farmers can generate income. Cellulosic biofuels, because of biomass's potential for raising rural incomes, may be among the most valuable poverty alleviation tools we have for Africa.

there are many glaring gaps. It sounds great but is it true? Doesn't seem viable to me. But then again, I feel the urban poor are also pretty important and deserve to afford to eat. I'm not delighted by "solutions" that sacrifice one community for another's benefit. But thats progress for ya. Or at least for Vinod Khosla.

See, Mr. Khosla is in this for profit and just because he is going "green", doesn't make him a saint. Like many profiteers, he's after his money. This "editorial" for the Washington Post is as much a deflecting PR fluff piece as any celebrity mouthpiece ever spouted.

Read it here...