PDA

View Full Version : WA government bans jatropha cultivation



giles
8th June 2006, 04:50 AM
I have covered a news piece about the Western Australian State governement banning the cultivation of Jatropha:

http://www.biofuelreview.com/content/view/28/2/

I'd be interested in anyone's take on it. Is this likely to be repeated by other state, or indeed the Federal, government in Australia? If so what does this mean for the biofuel market in Australia?

Any thoughts much appreciated.

Giles

Sauman
8th June 2006, 04:32 PM
Good day Folks,
I have read the post.I am baffled to say the least.:confused: :confused: :confused: Wander what the logic is of the WA govt.:eek: :eek: .This is probably a typical example of our polis being responsible to just a small lobby of power happy nitwits.Bastards.


Can anyone in this forum please athuenticate this is the real case.
As this could mean a number of implication both for Aus and for the region.
I am personally involved in developing SHG network (Self help group) comprising of atleast 12,000 women below poverty line in India to get involved in Jatropha plantation for Bio Diesel production on a coop basis in the State of Assam in India.This will empower them in two years to not only have the basics of yearly sustenance but also raise there annual income from nothing to US$900 per year.The average of the country is US$240.
Jatropha has been identified with years research on the plant as the preffered source for Bio Diesel in many countries.
Dave who is in Cambodia is also involved in a similar project.

Our govt needs to wake up.

They need to get more informed and a proper panel needs to decide this consisting of technocrats,academics and adequate Research.Wander they have spent any tax payers money in this area.

I wander what we can do in this forum to at least make the Australian public aware of the facts of Jatropha.
Bet many will be shocked to hear that this plant along with it's other properties has medicinal values too.But then our ill informed govt might be swayed by just a few hoodwinked crooks...who may have realised that to keep the farming lobby supressed economic freedom must be deprived.
As like in other countries Jatropha has the potential of developing our rural micro economy immensely.Australia could become the feedstock of Jatropha oil for the world.We have enough waste lands to boast about.
So yes.I feel very very strongly against this.Need everyone help to see what we can do to at least make sure that the decision is reversed.

Man this isn't funny.I will have guys in India (very very qualified people) who will take the Mickey outta me.In fact about 10 mins back a fellow activist from India said"oh...I get it....You are here in India propogating Jatropha cos they wont let you do it at home"...embarassing.
Or stuff like...How do you guys call yourself a developed Nation when you pass false information to your people.I just keep quiet.
I had my whinje ....back to work.....but we sure need to do something about it...

cheers
Sauman
Kolkata,India

Tony From West Oz
9th June 2006, 12:23 AM
I was aware of the 'declared plant' status, and that it was not permitted to be cultivated. I do not see any change in status from years ago. While it may be a great feedstock for biodiesel, there may be good reasons for not permitting plantations of it being set up.
Don't complain too much about a Government being cautious, look at Queensland and the cane toad.

russell
9th June 2006, 10:35 AM
Agree with Tony, noxious weeds can be very, very bad news.

Sauman
9th June 2006, 06:31 PM
Hi Tony and Russell and everyone else in this forum,
I do not disagree that the government should intervene and stop any thing that goes to harm the environment or has fall out effects.But just banning it without qualified information to the public is wrong in my oppinion.It was declared as a noxious weed long time back.Which means that controlled plantation is allowed and the responsibilty and onus lies on the farmer.Now banning it without providing qualified data I think is absurd.Tony don't read me wrong.I know about the cane toad syndrome and many other evils that our callous polis decide on to keep the vote bank happy.
What I wanted to establish is why they have done so.I felt that this forum which is radical in itself to what we committed and doing for the environment should react to finding out the reason.
As world wide there has been so much development and work done on this plant that is has been choosen as a very good source to replace fossil fuels in many countries.Did Australia engage in such research that qualifies their stand?.
I dont want to debate on the issue anymore then this.

Thanks

Sauman

giles
9th June 2006, 11:01 PM
Can anyone in this forum please athuenticate this is the real case.

Yes Sauman I can. I reported it on www.biofuelreview.com (http://www.biofuelreview.com) after following up a press release from the Department of Agriculture and Food, Western Australia.

If you want to see the original release go here:
http://www.agric.wa.gov.au/servlet/page?_pageid=449&_dad=portal30&_schema=PORTAL30&p_start_url=http://agspsrv34.agric.wa.gov.au/agency/media/index.htm

According to the Director of Invasive Species with the Department of Agriculture and Food, Damian Collopy the reason for the ban is that;
"These plants are heavily promoted on the Internet as source plants for biodiesel oil, and are being grown in developing countries. However, we regard the use of these plants to be too risky for Western Australian agriculture and the environment here," Mr Collopy said.

"There are other plants that are highly suitable for biodiesel oil production in Western Australia. These include canola and mustard," he said.

So there you go. You are always welcome to ask for sources for any article on www.biofuelreview (http://www.biofuelreview), but we don't make stories up. Any piece that is opinion, or educated interpolation of what is happening will be clearly marked as such.

Regards

Giles

Sauman
9th June 2006, 11:30 PM
Hi Giles,Thank you for info.
Mr.Collopy rightly pointed out that mustard and canola have a huge potential for WA in fact throughout Aus.
In fact clean cold pressed mustard oil has the highest omega 3 fatty acid and has been proved to reduce heart dieseas and has anti carcinogen properties.It can be mechanically harvested and is probabaly the single most virgin edible oil after virgin olive oil.
It has been described having better or almost similar properties as Virgin Olive oil.
Though it has a pungent odour which needs getting used to.Earlier I had posted my comments on the forum that mustard could not only act as BD oil source but has a potential for great export earnings.
But must tell you that I am a bit suprised by the reasons given by Mr.Collopy about banning Jatropha.The reason highlighted was that it causes seriuos problems to cattle.
By the way cattle don't touch that stuff(as they know they can get sick) also in many south east countries Jatropha is therefore used as fencing material to keep animals away.
Jatropha grows on waste lands under very harsh conditions and that is why it is preffered as a feedstock as unutilised land can be made to be productive without compromising on prime farming land.I don't think cattle like grazing in arid lands.So the logic baffles me.Anyways I guess he calls the shots.
But giles no offence mate.I understand where you are coming from.
Keep on doing the great job.

Cheers
Sauman

Tony From West Oz
14th June 2006, 01:45 AM
I have followed up on the issues with Jatropha in WA and have had the following reply:


Dear Tony

I talked to the weeds guy in DAFWA about a year ago on the subject of the weed status of Jatropha. He said it was unlikely that its status in WA would be reviewed. Apparently it is perceived to be a 'threat' to the pastoral industry. It may have potential as a woody weed, ie once allowed to grow here it may not be possible to confine it to the arid wastes. Also, it may have definite prospects as a source of fuel in places like India where labour is cheap, but I am not so sure about in Australia where labour is anything but cheap. It is possibly a very labour intensive crop, especially for the harvesting, that could put it out of economic viability as a source of oil in Australia. Harvesting could be mechanised, I am sure, but the equipment would have to be developed and may not be cost effective anyway. Nothing is ever as easy as one might like to view it.

There are a coulpe of other oilseed producing trees that could also be considered; Moringa oleifera and Pongamia pinnata. There has been some initial work done in DAFWA into these, ie a general look see. Then again, olive oil would make an excellent biodiesel and there are lots of olive trees around.

Regards

Margaret C.

Now, Jatropha may be just the "bees knees" for biodiesel in many locations, but canola and mustard are suited to low labour cost, broadacre production, which provide the maximum amount of oil per $.

peter-linking
16th June 2006, 09:53 PM
Hi everyone,
I need help - Badly!
I have tried, and am still trying, but cannot get any "qualified", and/or "guaranteed" right, answers from the Government in many of the states as to whether Jatropha Curcas is allowed to be grown. However, most states simply refer me on to another section or department. Examples:
(1) I contacted DPI&F also but have not received any response.
(2) I contacted AQIS Plant Programs and they informed me that according to "Australia's Virtual Herbarium" Jatropha curcas is grown/found in Queensland and the Northern Territory. However, they could not say whether it is allowed to be grown as a crop. They have referred me to the Department of Agriculture in those regions.
(3) I contacted the NT Government and was informed by the "Horticulture Information Service - Dept Primary Industry, Fisheries and Mines" that according to "Weeds of the Wet/Dry Tropics of Australia - A Field Guide" this species is a declared noxious weed class A, meaning "to be eradicated" and "not to be introduced to the Territory". However, they referred me to:
Parks & Wildlife NT.
Environment Centre NT.
Weeds Branch, Dept of natural Resources, Environment & the Arts.
(4) I contacted all the above but no replies from anyone.
(5) When I contacted WA they said Jatropha curcas is a "declared plant" in Western Australia - No explanations, just simply a quote from some bible of theirs, and Jatropha curcas probably has not been re investigated since the bible was written some years ago.
(6) The story goes on and on - but I still cannot get any "real" answers.
(7) Just to exemplify the many problems that many (if not all) states are facing - Below is a small section of a report in the Courier-Mail/Australia (http://tinyurl.com/kmupy),Apr 19, 2006: -
Queensland's Biodiesel Dilemma
“The future growth and sustainability of the biodiesel industry will depend on access to a diversity of feedstocks,” Premier Peter Beattie's office said. “It is likely that future initiatives will include research into alternative feedstocks such as biodiesel.” One option if there's a tallow squeeze, according to ARF's Butcher, is to import palm oil or coconut oil.
The National Party's Rosemary Menkens says biodiesel is an area which “needs to be pursued”. She highlights the rising cost of oil and establishing secure fuel supplies as reasons. The State Government is also backing some trials and is to release a “Biodiesel Action Plan”.
Hope to get some help from my friends out there.
Regards,
Peter

darren leonadas
28th June 2006, 04:17 PM
WHAT A JOKE!!!!!!!!!!!!
What the F#*k is a noxious weed anyway. Humans can be quite noxious.
A noxious weed is nothing more than a plant nobody can come up with a use for.
Is a genetically modified grain "A noxious weed" ??. I would say YES, just as a corporation is a PSYCHOPATH.
In the 60's prickly pear was considered a noxious weed, We (the CSIRO) eradicated it with a beetle. Now prickly pear fruit can be bought at the Markets and is quite favoured by southern europeans, because of its high sugar content. but NOW we cant grow it without pesticides because of those pesky beetles, introduced by CSIRO. Being a fruit that grows well in arid desert regions where NOTHING else grows, and considering we could also ferment its flesh, it would be a great provider of outback ETHANOL. In far northern NSW Camphorelaural is a noxious weed , a beautiful hardwood with antibacterial and natural pesticide characteristics, a hardwood naturally termite resistant, that grows faster than pine, has a beautiful aroma, and aesthetic, but because we don't mill it, or use it in furniture manufacturing, or housing construction Its a "Noxious weed". Would any Politician push for a legislation banning radiata pine, i dont think so, but take a walk in a Pine plantation and listen carefully for a bird, an insect, any movement giving away ANYTHING living in the forest. THATS A NOXIOUS WEED!!!!
when a plant becomes useful we cant grow enough of it, we monocultivate it in vast regions of the earths surface, and the idea of it getting out of control is preposterous.
Bamboo was once considered a noxious weed, in southern QLD, NOW you cant find any old growth clumps, because someone came up with the bright idea of making bamboo laminates and flooring for construction.
I think W.A. Politicians are a bunch of "noxious little weeds" who have sh#t for brains and have just shot themselves in the foot.

Sauman
28th June 2006, 04:32 PM
WHAT A JOKE!!!!!!!!!!!!
What the F#*k is a noxious weed anyway. Humans can be quite noxious.
A noxious weed is nothing more than a plant nobody can come up with a use for.
Is a genetically modified grain "A noxious weed" . I would say YES, just as a corporation is a PSYCHOPATH.
In the 60's prickly pear was considered a noxious weed, We (the CSIRO) eradicated it with a beetle. Now prickly pear fruit can be bought at the Markets and is quite favoured by southern europeans, because of its high sugar content. but NOW we cant grow it without pesticides because of those pesky beetles, introduced by CSIRO. Being a fruit that grows well in arid desert regions where NOTHING else grows, and considering we could also ferment its flesh, it would be a great provider of outback ETHANOL. In far northern NSW camphorelaural is a noxious weed , a beautiful hardwood with antibacterial and natural pesticide characteristics, a hardwood naturally termite resistant, that grows faster than pine, but because we don't mill it, or use it in furniture manufacturing, or housing construction Its a "Noxious weed". Would any Politician push for a legislation banning radiata pine, i dont think so, but take a walk in a Pine plantation and listen carefully for a bird, an insect, any movement giving away ANYTHING living in the forest. THATS A NOXIOUS WEED!!!!
when a plant becomes useful we cant grow enough of it, we monocultivate it in vast regions of the earths surface, and the idea of it getting out of control is preposterous.
Bamboo was once considered a noxious weed, in southern QLD, NOW you cant find any old growth clumps, because someone came up with the bright idea of making bamboo laminates and flooring for construction.
I think W.A. Politicians are a bunch of "noxious little weeds" who have sh#t for brains and have just shot themselves in the foot.

Darren,

Does the Polis in WA know what they have done.The funniest thing that the polis hAve put forward as the main reason for declaring the oil tree as a NOXIOUS WEED is that it is harmful to cattle.Do they know about the medicinal values of Jatropha.
I am toying with the idea of putting together a Scientific Dissertation and presenting it to the WA govt..I can get that done in a week.LIKE REAL HARD FACTS BACKED WITH YEARS OF RESEARCH DATA FROM WORLDWIDE WORK DONE FOR ABOUT 2 DECADES ON THE PLANT.I am a Oil Technologist by proffession, I have spent about 10 hours of my life for the last 18 years on the subject.Don't know wether they will take it chin up.
But I need some one in Aus to take initiative and put it across the polis(I am in Sweaty beautiful India at the moment).Don't know what that will achieve .But hey I think we can do our own little bit .

Cheers
Sauman

Darren>>>You so right about the Pine tress and the prickly pear.Thanks for sharing .

russell
29th June 2006, 10:32 AM
Hmm if you don't know what "noxious weed" means, I sure as hell hope you're not spouting environmental rhetoric when advocating biodiesel. Yes, "weed" means no use is known or the uses aren't economical, or the problems outweigh the benefits. But "noxious" means it poses a serious threat to the environment, livestock or humans. To try to ignore this just because you stand to lose as a result of pretty crook if you ask me. I suppose you'd be in to growing mimosa or lantana too if you thought you could make a buck?

darren leonadas
29th June 2006, 06:48 PM
Russell, If you threw a wad of cash on the ground under a sign saying "no littering" , do you think someone would charge you with the offense of littering, or do you think someone would pick it up for you.? or for themselves?
This recent ban on jatropha, and the even more recent advent of suddenly putting excise of 38c in the litre on Meth. is a conspiracy. Call me a freak, but the oil corporation is a psychopath. And state gov. and fed. gov. make a lot of money out of the work of this psychopath.

Chris
1st July 2006, 04:21 PM
Hi all
The jatropha topic has been interesting reading I have not seen anything posted here as an alternative in so far as trees/bushes are concerned
So here is a bit of info to the Chinese Tallow tree that may be of interest
At least that is an alternative I would have thought for some areas, it is not a declared plant in any state to the best of my knowledge and it is planted here as a street tree
There is a lot of iformation available on that tree, this short article gives one a very good over view Unfortunately this tree is not very drought tolerant
Cheers
Chris
Here it is
Production of Biodiesel from Lipids Extracted from Chinese Tallow Tree., S. Crymble1, B. Copeland1, M. Zappi1, R. Hernandes1, T. French1, B. Baldwin1, D. Thomas2, 1Mississippi State University, USA, 2Mississippi Chemical, USA.

Sapium sebiferum, commonly known as the Chinese Tallow tree, was introduced into the United States from its native China as early as the 1700s. Unfortunately, the tree’s nonnative characteristics allow it to overrun and easily displace native foliage. Despite its attractive appearance and valuable oil content, many regions have placed restrictions on the distribution of the tree, as it has invaded areas throughout the southeastern United States.Chinese Tallow grows quickly in a variety of soils. The fruit of the tree is a white seed that contains approximately 40% extractable lipids. This extract can be used to produce a number of products, including biodiesel. One hectare of Chinese Tallow trees can produce approximately 12,500 kg of seed, which could potentially yield 5,500 kg of oil. This amount of oil per hectare is almost 15 times that of soy oil, which is the most commonly oil for making biodiesel.The oil that is produced from the Chinese Tallow tree has been found to contain high amounts of palmitic fatty acid, along with some oleic, linoleic and linolinic fatty acids. These acids can be base transesterified to form biodiesel. Making biodiesel from Chinese Tallow oil would accomplish two major goals. The invasive Chinese Tallow tree would become a useful, commercially viable crop. Also, the biodiesel produced from Chinese Tallow would allow the United States to decrease its dependence on imported energy by displacing foreign petroleum with a domestic source of biodiesel that would not increase the necessary crop acreage.

rherber1
11th October 2006, 06:17 PM
I agree that the Chinese Tallow looks to be a promising candidate for biodiesel feedstock. The following extract (now quite dated going by the references) gives pertinent details as to its potential.
Sapium sebiferum (http://www.hort.purdue.edu/newcrop/duke_energy/Sapium_sebiferum.html)

Note that in the para pertaining to Yield MT refers to Metric Tonnes (ie, kilograms). The $ returns would also probably be much higher now.

Cliff
15th January 2007, 03:15 PM
hey,

I do not understand the reasoning behind the ban. A lot of devoted scientist have spent a great deal of time on research in the field of jatropha to eradicate its ways of behaving as a noxious weed. I have seen the statements made about the potential of jatropha and I agree with them, but it has another important benefit. due to the fact that it can grow under extreme conditions it can stop desertification and turn waste land into profitable farm land. Now the only complaints that the government has agains growing jatropha is the weed factor, which I can say with confidence has been solved. there is a hybrid that will not behave in that manner. So with that problem solved, the only issue left is the effect it could have on cattle (or so the government clams), which is rediculus since the animals know not to eat it, which has already been pointed out in a previous post. so i see no reason not to grow jatropha in australia. it will have a big economic impact and can help the australian economy immensely.

mozet_tre
12th March 2007, 05:47 PM
Thank god that some state governments can still make positive environmentally cautious decisions rather than going gun-ho into starting up industries for their economic benefit. To allow the introduction of a plant that is known to have potential for invading native communities and escaping crops is ludicrous in my opinion.

Jatropha curcas is very well adapted to the climate of north Australia, and given its drought tolerance and ability to vegetatively reproduce, it has a strong advantage in outcompeting native vegetation and forming dense impenetrable thickets. Much of Australias northern lands are relatively intact ecosystems that provide crucial services, and using overseas examples of where jatropha has been utilized for rehabilitating decrepid land is not relevant.

Australia is a developed country as you say and this means it has the advantage of being cautious in its environmental decisions. The australian economy is not in such a desperate situation that it needs to exploit the land for immediate gain or accept any industry that will alleviate rural poverty.

Sauman, i suggest you zoom out of your own agenda and consider the wider implications of allowing jatropha curcas as a biofuel feedstock for the environment. No false information is being conveyed to the public. THe fact is not a lot of information is available for the environmental effects of jatropha curcas in australia, and I am glad the government has erred on the side of caution.

thanks
rob

mozet_tre
12th March 2007, 05:49 PM
hi cliff,
can you provide any links to info on the hybrid that you mentioned, or some results from all of the work that those scientists out in the field have been doing?
thanks
rob

Cliff
15th March 2007, 11:32 PM
hi Rob,

I can see where your coming from, but the benefit that jatrpha has over other crop is that it grows in areas where pretty much nothing else can. So in other words infertile land can be turned into fertile land.
Regarding the Australian economy I believe you are right. We are not in a position where it is vital for us to look at jatropha, but I do not believe we should completely disregard the oportunity that jatropha brings.

Regarding the information about the hybrid, I am currently not in the position to disclose any information. I am sorry, but during my visit to Singapore and Malaysia I had to sign a confidentiality agreement, but I am sure that the info will be available soon.

Regards

Cliff

TroyH
12th April 2007, 11:52 AM
Your continued donations (http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Fundraising) keep Wikipedia running!
Noxious weeds

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

(Redirected from Noxious weed (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Noxious_weed&redirect=no))
Jump to: navigation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noxious_weed#column-one), Home (http://search)
Noxious weeds are designated plants (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plants) by state or national agricultural authorities as plants that are injurious to agricultural and/or horticultural crops. Most have been introduced into a foreign ecosystem (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecosystem) either by accident or mismanagement, but some are also native species. typically they are plants that are aggressive growing and/or multiply quickly and adversely effect desired plants or somehow are injurious to livestock or humans. They are a presently a large problem in the western United States (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States), greatly effecting areas of agriculture (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agriculture), forest management and other open lands.
See also invasive (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasive) species.

Generally speaking, I would consider weeds as plants that when growing in an environment where they are not native, they grow profusely, to the detriment of the native flora or fauna.


I for one am glad they are so strict with quarantine in Australia. We really did learn from our past mistakes. Not being able to cultivate jatropha isn't the end of the world. Maybe look towards native plants that can be used.

Jodi James
16th April 2009, 04:46 PM
Well what can I say....This Government has no idea what the farmers are facing here in WA... We have farmland thats barely profitable for growing crops, ideal for this commodity and for landcare. I live in the wheatbelt of WA and we need trees fast...This government is paying people to remove trees...i.e Willows...Whats this state doing? Willows are great for erosion problems in creeks and feed and shade for stock.

I think the Jatropha would be excellent here for areas of farmland needing attention. Wouldn't it be great if it grew on salt! We have plenty of that around. I think we could use it to benefit ally farming and organic matter and also shade for stock.

They need to get out of there stuffy offices and look around at the devestation of our land thats rapidly appearing and find bio diversity fast! I'm all for it what a great crop...It didn't take the idiots long to bring in GM canola...what a bunch of small minded pen pushers...Get out here and have a look we need this for our future generations sustainability.

Tony From West Oz
16th April 2009, 11:05 PM
Jodi,
I agree that Jatropha has promise as a fuel feedstock.
While I do not know of the reasons for it being on the Declared Plants list, but I do believe that it can be rampant in certain conditions and you may not be able to control it in some cases. This may be one of the reasons.
Jatropha also requires manual picking, although with Australian ingenuity, someone will surely come up with an invention to mechanise this function.

I suggest that you contact the Department of Agriculture (WA) to seek an explanation of why it is on the list and to determine what you need to do to seek an exemption, to allow you to trial this tree as a oilseed crop on your property.

You may find that there are other good reasons why it is banned (I am sure AgWest believe there are). If you manage to obtain permission, I am sure there will be a number of conditions imposed to minimise any perceived risk to the environment.

Regards,
Tony

TroyH
17th April 2009, 01:00 AM
Russell, If you threw a wad of cash on the ground under a sign saying "no littering" , do you think someone would charge you with the offense of littering, or do you think someone would pick it up for you.? or for themselves?
This recent ban on jatropha, and the even more recent advent of suddenly putting excise of 38c in the litre on Meth. is a conspiracy. Call me a freak, but the oil corporation is a psychopath. And state gov. and fed. gov. make a lot of money out of the work of this psychopath.
Darren, it is people like you that are the reason there is so much misinformation on the internet. IMHO, you're not a freak. Just an idiot with NFI what he's talking about.


Well what can I say....This Government has no idea what the farmers are facing here in WA... We have farmland thats barely profitable for growing crops, ideal for this commodity and for landcare. I live in the wheatbelt of WA and we need trees fast...This government is paying people to remove trees...i.e Willows...Whats this state doing? Willows are great for erosion problems in creeks and feed and shade for stock.

I think the Jatropha would be excellent here for areas of farmland needing attention. Wouldn't it be great if it grew on salt! We have plenty of that around. I think we could use it to benefit ally farming and organic matter and also shade for stock.

They need to get out of there stuffy offices and look around at the devestation of our land thats rapidly appearing and find bio diversity fast! I'm all for it what a great crop...It didn't take the idiots long to bring in GM canola...what a bunch of small minded pen pushers...Get out here and have a look we need this for our future generations sustainability.

Why should we plant jatropha in the wheatbelt, when we can plant Mallees? It is Mallee country after all.

There is a LOT of money spent trying to solve the problems we have in the wheatbelt. Planting a noxious weed is unlikely to be considered the solution to any of them.

Why do people insist on thinking there is only ever one, simple answer, to massively complex problems like the degradation of farming land?

Yes, Jatropha can be grown on marginal land. However there isn't much evidence, that I've seen, to suggest it can be grown in a commercially viable way in a country like Australia. Australian farmers don't have the same requirements as poor farmers in India, so you can't assume that a viable crop there will be viable here.

Why not fix the degradation, rather than just learning to live with it?

RODEONICK
17th April 2009, 08:53 PM
Im glad your here troy so i dont have to waste my breath with these people that really don't look beyond the surface of the topic of the month. Anybody thats done any real research will know that the cost of harvest for jathropa is prohibitive here and the fact that it has weed like characteristics makes me glad they haven't allowed it here. Look at parramattagrass, fireweed,blackberries, lantana etc etc do we need any more???

sabrina
27th April 2009, 07:56 PM
i totally agree. In fact we have articles re that.

Check htttp://www.biofuelshub.com

thanks.

slabster
21st December 2009, 12:54 AM
I do know that Jatropher oil is inedable and tankeridge would need to be seperate from edible oil feedstocks. You can't put jotropher into tanks meant for Canola / Sunflower oil.

Uncle Slabs

silver_fox_aus1
23rd December 2009, 05:35 AM
The problem is one of control, while yes there are many good features with some of these plants the, the prolific nature of some plants (and I am speaking universal) is such that they overwelm the native species and become uncontrolable. If you look at footage of the prickly pear you will see vast areas of land which was inundated.

I am a firm believer in Biodiesel but not at any cost, Australia canot be all things to all plants, we need to know where to draw the line and on occassions we may get it wrong, but is better to get it wrong occassionally then like now we have a problem with RATTAIL another introduced species.

There are so many other safe species for Australia that need development lets at least exhaust them first.

And if these regions like India can do it so well then let them use this and be glade for them.


Gene

MarkGelazy
5th February 2014, 06:10 PM
I agree with darren leonadas. This type of weed can not lead to a modification of the plant. I work in a science company, and we research this question 4 years ago. we then used Microwave Moisture Sensor (http://www.aquar-system.com/catalog/grain-moisture-measurement-in-flow/grain-moisture-meter-in-flow-a315/) for measuring moisture content of grain and how it affected the quality.