On 8 Apr 2007 07:17:27 -0700, "GrtArtiste" > wrote:

>On Apr 4, 11:38 am, dh@. wrote:
><snip>
>> But there's already a surplus of food. So would it be a waste
>> of time? Even if we could dry, sanitize and package millions
>> of pounds of nutrition from our food waste every day, would
>> it be of no real value? Are people who are starving just going
>> to have to continue to starve, regardless of how much extra
>> food more fortunate people have to deal with?
>
>Please cite the study/reference which leads you to somehow make the
>statement that the waste products of approx 300 millions can be
>salvaged to feed the larger masses of the hungry.

Maybe not. It could sure feed millions of them though.

>That sounds like a
>negative supply equation if ever I heard one. You obviously don't have
>any real idea of the size/scope of the problem.

How many people are starving?

>You want to "sanitize"
>it? Process something that is presently unsuitable for human
>consumption

Only because someone may have licked it or something.

>into something that is? Furthermore, you want to incur a
>massive energy debt to produce this product and then deliver it to its
>destination? More greenhouse gases that the planet does not need.
>
>See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soylent_Green
>
>a fictional story (probably before your time). An interesting tale on
>a somewhat related topic.
>
>The law of supply and demand will reign supreme.

The supply is being thrown away, doing no good at all.

>Food in sufficient
>quantity has to be produced in near proximity to where the consumers
>live. If it cannot be, famine is the unpreventable result which will
>bring supply and demand back into balance.
>
>GrtArtiste

So are you saying never help starving people? Or only
do it so rarely that it doesn't matter what we do with our
garbage. Well, that's what we're doing now, so maybe
everything is as it should be.