So, again, let’s say we have an essential resource X and two players A and B who need some of it for their survival, and more of it to be productive. By being productive, they will gain more access to X.

Now, if the productivity curve is concave over the range of all the X available, what will happen is that, in the long run, the player that initially has a little bit more of X will grow faster and eventually out-starve the other player.

I take it this is “good”, because it is just a consequence of the basic beliefs of your religion of the free market?

Your problem boils down to “other people aren’t spending their money how I think they should.” For a solution to this I would suggest either spending your own money or convincing others through peaceful persuasion how they ought to spend theirs. I don’t see how it’s a topic needing agonizing intellectual pondering.

And not to defend demonstrative wastefulness, but that habit is not uniquely western or modern. History is filled with examples, only possible on a grand scale when egomaniacal tyrants get their boots on the necks of a lot of slaves, e.g. the pyramids of Egypt.

it all depends what we are talking about here. “Biofuels for essential uses” is one issue. The problem is the “Biofuels to keep our poorly designed and excessively energy-hungry present-day industrial systems going without major adjustments” idea.

Or, let me phrase it like this: there is a very real danger that the “economic value” produced as measured in GDP-$ by a highly paid company executive taking a flight exceeds the “economic value” produced by a small Indian village. Now, let us suppose that the business activity this executive is involved in is basically inessential (say, related to launching a new sports car model) and would require as much biofuel-energy as it would need to feed the villagers for a year – quite conceivable. What may easily happen here is a kind-of disproportionation reaction: those with access to energy are economically so much more productive than those without that the former out-starve the latter. If such a situation arises, should the GDP-dollar be the yardstick to determine resource allocation? Before everybody now cries out “of course not”: please keep in mind that there are many far less clear-cut situations. How much bio-energy do we want to spend on running a hospital, say?

Basically, this is a “scarce goods allocation problem” – hence, many economists would claim to be experts for questions of this type. The “free market” idea seems quite questionable, see above. But centralised bureaucratic state-directed economy does not work either. I see that quite a number of people seem to hate the latter idea so much that they would rather let villagers starve than even just consider anything that may smell even remotely like an instead-of-the-free-market idea.

This is not a problem that has an easy solution. But what we can say with some certainty is that “importance of the service provided by that energy” should be an important factor: Pretty much all cultures developed sophisticated feedback mechanisms to keep destructively wasteful habits in check – except the “modern western” one, which has been re-programmed in a kind-of upside down way to cherish demonstrative wastefulness.

The excellent magic Moringa tree from India can produce 1000 litres of oil per hectare per year, is edible and has many uses. Moringa and many other tree species, even the much hated oil palm can easily be designed into sustainable systems such as permaculture.

“An Agricultural Crime Against Humanity”, pah! Sensationalism is what it is and it only serves to befuddle people with regard to the many benefits of growing, making and using renewable fuels.

Less cut and paste from the Guardian and more solutions please!

It is possible to produce biofuels in a manner consistent with permaculture principles, provided always that production and consumption are kept local, with only a surplus fraction sold for export – if it isn’t stored up for later use first. Export of goods from country A to country B is energy-consuming, so it is generally avoided in a permaculture-based economy. Usually, if any exportation occurs, it’s usually to a customer a few dozen Kms away.

In addition, biofuel production should be an adjunct to the permaculture pattern of production & consumption, never a primary objective.

George Monbiot doesn’t own a car.

Using fossil fuels to transition society into a non-fossil fuel world is a necessary evil due to the society we’ve built over the last century. We are presently in an acute position of vulnerabity, and must prepare for a future of very high energy prices, which translates to unaffordable food. Well designed earthworks are a small initial investment in time and energy that will provide tangible energy returns (by way of biomass/food/water) for as long as the sun shines and the rain falls.

However, trying to persevere with this society as it now stands, rather than transition away from it, by planting vast monocultures in places where the people and the land are subsequently impoverished – just so a few elite can continue with the status quo, is quite another thing entirely. I trust you can see the difference.

“I find it contemptuous to preach about the harm caused by using renewable fuels whilst continuing to consume fossil fuels for your own transport needs.”

The important word in this sentence is “needs”. Permaculture is a lot about getting a good idea what one’s needs are. I don’t think, for example, Geoff or Bill “need to commute” 10 miles to work every day, by car – if they ever had to, they would re-locate.

So, the key question indeed is: what are our needs? I’d guess that, if we just started to use fossil fuels for those uses where they bring a long term benefit (e.g. earthworks that lead to productive systems which work for hundreds of years; buildings with lifetimes of hundreds of years, etc.), and not for once-and-gone jobs, there would be more than plenty of the stuff around.

Maybe the leftovers from jatropha could be pressed to cakes and dried and stored for use in hard times, both for animals and humans?

Have permaculture developed some guilds that include jatropha? I read recently that it is developed almost 3000 different mixtures of guilds, so I guess some may include jatropha. If not there must be made some. We cannot have these mono cultures shown in the picture!

I wonder what George Monbiot’s car runs on, hot air maybe? And what about PRI, what do you put in those big ole backhoes, cow farts perhaps?

I find it contemptuous to preach about the harm caused by using renewable fuels whilst continuing to consume fossil fuels for your own transport needs.