OPINIONS Everyone’s talking about global warming. It’s the phrase that’s on the tip of everybody’s tongue, and as Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth has shown us, it’s a problem we can solve. Like anything though, global warming has its naysayers, and aside from their stance that the prob- lem simply doesn’t exist, their argument against switching to alternate fuels from greenhouse- gas-emitting fossil fuels has been that it would be far too expensive and convoluted to revamp our global fuel delivery system. But we can make it better. And yes, we have the technology. Amidst skyrocketing fuel costs in the last few years, a few people began customizing their diesel cars to run off of used deep- fryer oil (or waste vegetable oil as it’s officially known). Yes, the steel barrels full of spent shortening behind the McDonald’s dumpster can top off a diesel car. It’s an excellent method of recycling something that’s commonly produced and trucked away for disposal. Of course, old oil from the deep fryer isn’t the only source of usable vegetable oil as fuel. There’s a lot of research circling around biodiesel, which is vegetable oil made for use in unmodified diesel vehicles. It can be produced by plenty of common crops, including soy- beans, flax seed, safflower, peanuts afid even the much-maligned oil palm. In fact, some cars already come readily equipped to run on 100% bio-diesel fuel. By using, biodiesel, we move the The Greasy Revolution Saving the planet is easier than we think Alex King, OP Contributor oil rig to the farmer’s field and plant trees instead of drill. But wait—if the world uses biodiesel, we’re still burning oil, right? What effect does that have on the environment? Very little, surprisingly. Because it’s a vegetable by-product, bio- diesel is biodegradable and environmentally friendly. And as for emissions, biodiesel reduces carbon monoxide levels by 50% and carbon dioxide levels by 78%, making it an excellent ste ping stone before hydrogen fuel is manageable and readily available to the public. Despite all this positive news, biodiesel isn’t without its detractors. Because fuel sources have to be grown, some argue that it would take too much acreage to keep up with the globa demand for fuel. However, scientists are working on a method to extract.oil from algae, whid -would result in 15 times the oil per hectare production of oil palms, the most productive lan crop. There’s no doubt that biodiesel is a step in the right direction and, if used in place of fog fuels, will reduce greenhouse emissions by a huge margin. It just goes to show that saving th planet doesn’t mean reinventing the wheel. We'll still drive around in fuel-burning cars and fi up at a gas station—it’ll just be courtesy of algae, palm trees and peanuts instead of dead dinosaurs. lain vs. Bureaucrac lain W. Reeve, OP Assistant Editor VERSUS $58 EALERTS Rpt, am 6 THE OTHER PRESS JANUARY 22 2007 I have always been a firm supporter of government agencies. I think that it is dangerous trust the delivery of important goods and services to the private sector when the govern- ment can do so directly, ensuring quality, equity and consistency. However, one thing I ha very little tolerance for (that these agencies sometimes exhibit) is bureaucratic stupidity. It’s the type of thing that ring-wing privatization nuts always use as ammunition. The claim is always that the private sector should take over services because they can increase efficiency. Personally, I have always been able to excuse a certain amount of inefficiency ir exchange for the quality government can deliver in things like healthcare. However, I alwa come across things that are so obviously stupid that anyone not caught up in the silly littl esoteric world of regulations and procedures can see it. What is even better is that the stuffy employees who tend to populate government offices have a built in pretentiousness, making it impossible for them to consider anyone else’s ideas as valid.. Thus even if you tell them, you did X?” are doing something wrong, which to them is unacceptable. “Don’t you.think it would easier and faste they will never listen to you. Listening to you would mean admitting that they I have dueled with non-government bureaucracies, here at Douglas, at SFU, customer service lineups at all manner of stores. However, they all pale in comparison to my epic b tles against student the BC student loan department. Late loans, lost documents, irrelevan security procedures, they’ve done it all. One battle, however, I was actually able to win. Traditionally, every semester it was necessary to send in a “student loan agreement” to! both the federal and provincial government in order to get your funding. This meant, aftel already having applied, you needed to get two additional forms filled out with your bank information and signature then take them to specific post offices and send them off. I always wondered why it was necessary to send in the same damn information every single semester when, like most people on earth, I do not change banks every four months nece sitating a new form each semester. I told them this every:semester, talking to a different vapid supervisor every time who, in their typical idiom, told me they'd consider my sugges tion. I never expected to actually see changes. So imagine my surprise when I was told thi semester that for the BC portion it is no long necessary to send in a new agreement every semester! I’m not conceded enough to assume it was my constant nagging that caused them to alter their position, but I’d like to think that I may have been a straw on the camel’s.back. guess the message here is that it will make the world better for everyone if you speak up when you see stupidity in bureaucracies and businesses. Think of yourself as a crusader fq what is right. Those who benefit may not be able to thank you, but you can know in som¢ little way you’ve made it better for people.