Jump to content

David Pimentel (scientist): Difference between revisions

Edit links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
→Scientific career: modify statement to make it less promotional
→Scientific career: again, modifying promotional apologism
Line 17: Line 17:
He was not a scientist who shied away from controversy or feared contradicting established views. Early in his career, he took on the biological control establishment by suggesting that native pests could be controlled by introducing new parasites and predators, based on his observations of successful control of pests in new associations and his genetic feedback model.<ref>Pimentel, D. (1963). Introducing parasites and predators to control native pests. ''Canadian Entomologist'' '''95''': 785–792.</ref> It was not an idea that was readily accepted, however, particularly by California biocontrol experts.<ref>Huffaker,C.B., Simmonds, S.J., and J.E. Laing. (1976). "The theoretical and empirical basis of biological control." Pages 41-78 in Huffaker, C.B. (ed.) ''Biological Control'', Plenum Press, NY. 511 pp.</ref> They admitted that, "Outstanding biological control successes have sometimes been achieved … by the use of natural enemies whose hosts belong to different species or genera from the pests they are needed to control,”<ref>Wilson, F., and C.B., Huffaker. (1976). Pages 5-6 in Huffaker, C.B., and PS Messenger. (eds.) ''Theory and practice of biological control''. Academic Press, New York. 788 pp.</ref> but they then rejected (pp 47-49) Pimentel’s work on genetic feedback as an explanatory mechanism involved in biocontrol by insect parasites and predators. Undaunted, Pimentel continued to support and document the use of new associations in biocontrol.<ref>Hokkanen, H.M.T., and D. Pimentel. (1989). New Associations in Biological Control: Theory and Practice. ''Canadian Entomologist'' '''121''':829-840.</ref> This practice has been called “new association biological control” as opposed to “classical biological control”.<ref>Van Driesche, R., and M. Hoddle. (2009.) Pages 4-5 in ''Control of pests and weeds by natural enemies: an introduction to biological control''. Blackwell Publishing. Malden Massachusetts. 488 pp.</ref>
He was not a scientist who shied away from controversy or feared contradicting established views. Early in his career, he took on the biological control establishment by suggesting that native pests could be controlled by introducing new parasites and predators, based on his observations of successful control of pests in new associations and his genetic feedback model.<ref>Pimentel, D. (1963). Introducing parasites and predators to control native pests. ''Canadian Entomologist'' '''95''': 785–792.</ref> It was not an idea that was readily accepted, however, particularly by California biocontrol experts.<ref>Huffaker,C.B., Simmonds, S.J., and J.E. Laing. (1976). "The theoretical and empirical basis of biological control." Pages 41-78 in Huffaker, C.B. (ed.) ''Biological Control'', Plenum Press, NY. 511 pp.</ref> They admitted that, "Outstanding biological control successes have sometimes been achieved … by the use of natural enemies whose hosts belong to different species or genera from the pests they are needed to control,”<ref>Wilson, F., and C.B., Huffaker. (1976). Pages 5-6 in Huffaker, C.B., and PS Messenger. (eds.) ''Theory and practice of biological control''. Academic Press, New York. 788 pp.</ref> but they then rejected (pp 47-49) Pimentel’s work on genetic feedback as an explanatory mechanism involved in biocontrol by insect parasites and predators. Undaunted, Pimentel continued to support and document the use of new associations in biocontrol.<ref>Hokkanen, H.M.T., and D. Pimentel. (1989). New Associations in Biological Control: Theory and Practice. ''Canadian Entomologist'' '''121''':829-840.</ref> This practice has been called “new association biological control” as opposed to “classical biological control”.<ref>Van Driesche, R., and M. Hoddle. (2009.) Pages 4-5 in ''Control of pests and weeds by natural enemies: an introduction to biological control''. Blackwell Publishing. Malden Massachusetts. 488 pp.</ref>


Pimentel was a pioneer in tabulating the energy cost, fossil fuel in particular, of food production. When his suggestion that “energy was going to be important to agricultural research in the future” was rebuffed as an area of study by a 1968 National Academy of Science Panel on which he served, Pimentel set about to put together the needed data himself by creating a graduate research course to do so using his own students.<ref>Dritschilo, W. (2019). ''Earth Days Reprised.'' (Pp 389-390.)</ref> Coming out during the 1973 energy crisis, the paper on energy inputs to corn production received much attention and helped to launch a number of studies and papers, including many by Pimentel and his colleagues. That paper then putatively initiated the controversy over the net energy and environmental impacts of gasohol crops.<ref>Ruttan, V.W. and Pimentel, D. (1975). Food Production and the Energy Crisis: A Comment. ''Science'' '''187''':560-561.</ref><ref> Pimentel, D. (1975). Food Production and the Energy Crisis: A Comment. ''Science'' '''187''':561.</ref><ref> Chambers, R.S., Herendeen, R.A., Joyce, J.J., and P.S. Penner. (1979). Gasohol: Does It or Doesn’t It Produce Positive Net Energy? ''Science'' '''206''':789-795.</ref> Pimentel took great solace in having had his work reviewed by "26 top scientists and engineers"<ref>Whitecraft, Michele, Going Against “Procedures”: A Profile of Dave Pimentel. ''Manuscript''.</ref> who found his methods to be sound.<ref>ERAB. (1980). Gasohol: Energy Research Advisory Board. U.S. Dept. Energy, Washington, DC.</ref> <ref>ERAB. (1981). Biomass energy: Energy Research Advisory Board. U.S. Dept. Energy, Washington, DC.</ref> As with the later criticism raised by Bjørn Lomborg,<ref>Lomborg, B. (2001) ''The Skeptical Environmentalist''. Cambridge University Press.</ref> any disagreement was on details, rather than conclusions.<ref>Pimentel, D. (2002). Exposition on Scepticism. ''BioScience'' '''52''':295-8.</ref> As an example, although the number used by Pimentel for the amount of soil loss per hectare of cropland was superseded by a newer study cited by Lomborg, it made little, if any, difference on Pimentel's major conclusions.
Pimentel was a pioneer in tabulating the energy cost, fossil fuel in particular, of food production. When his suggestion that “energy was going to be important to agricultural research in the future” was rebuffed as an area of study by a 1968 National Academy of Science Panel on which he served, Pimentel set about to put together the needed data himself by creating a graduate research course to do so using his own students.<ref>Dritschilo, W. (2019). ''Earth Days Reprised.'' (Pp 389-390.)</ref> Coming out during the 1973 energy crisis, the paper on energy inputs to corn production received much attention and helped to launch a number of studies and papers, including many by Pimentel and his colleagues. That paper then putatively initiated the controversy over the net energy and environmental impacts of gasohol crops.<ref>Ruttan, V.W. and Pimentel, D. (1975). Food Production and the Energy Crisis: A Comment. ''Science'' '''187''':560-561.</ref><ref> Pimentel, D. (1975). Food Production and the Energy Crisis: A Comment. ''Science'' '''187''':561.</ref><ref> Chambers, R.S., Herendeen, R.A., Joyce, J.J., and P.S. Penner. (1979). Gasohol: Does It or Doesn’t It Produce Positive Net Energy? ''Science'' '''206''':789-795.</ref> Pimentel took great solace in having had his work reviewed by "26 top scientists and engineers"<ref>Whitecraft, Michele, Going Against “Procedures”: A Profile of Dave Pimentel. ''Manuscript''.</ref> who found his methods to be sound.<ref>ERAB. (1980). Gasohol: Energy Research Advisory Board. U.S. Dept. Energy, Washington, DC.</ref><ref>ERAB. (1981). Biomass energy: Energy Research Advisory Board. U.S. Dept. Energy, Washington, DC.</ref> Pimentel claimed criticism such as that raised by Bjørn Lomborg,<ref>Lomborg, B. (2001) ''The Skeptical Environmentalist''. Cambridge University Press.</ref> was only a disagreement on details, rather than conclusions, stating he was correct anyway despite the fact that the numbers he used in his calculations later turned out to be wrong.<ref>Pimentel, D. (2002). Exposition on Scepticism. ''BioScience'' '''52''':295-8.</ref>


==Biomass Fuels==
==Biomass Fuels==

Revision as of 20:56, 1 May 2020

David Pimentel (May 24, 1925 – December 8, 2019[1][2]) was a professor of Insect Ecology & Agricultural Sciences in the Department of Entomology and Section of Ecology and Systematics at Cornell University. He made contributions in ecology, entomology, agriculture, biotechnology, conservation, and environmental policy. He was recognized as an international authority on many important interactions between humans and the environment.[3] He published over 700 scientific items, of which 37 are books, and served on many national and government committees, including the National Academy of Sciences, the President’s Science Advisory Council, the Office of Technology Assessment of the U.S. Congress, the U.S. State Department, and the Departments of Agriculture, Energy, and Health, Education and Welfare.[4]. Pimentel served on committees for many national and government organizations, including the Secretary's Commission On Pesticides And Their Relationship To Environmental Health (United States Department of Health, Education, and Welfare) which issued a report[5] in 1969 that recommended the banning of DDT and led to the creation of the EPA.

David was at heart an agronomist and entomologist, but he had a broad ecological perspective on agronomy, which usually is focused narrowly on yields and production. For example, in the early 1970s he (and independently Howard Odum) were the first to point out the energy intensiveness of modern agriculture.[6] He followed that with several important papers on soil erosion.[7][8] In 1999, Pimentel released findings[9] detailing the economic losses of invasive species. The annual economic loss reported at the time was $123 billion. In most of his studies he attempted to generate quantitative estimates, even of quite difficult and large scale issues.

Pimentel’s approach was often associated with controversy. He was seen as overly “green” and hostile to conventional farming by some, and he was sometimes criticized for some of his numbers and conclusions.[10]

Early life and education

Pimentel was born on May 24, 1925, in Fresno, California and moved with his family to a farm in North Middleboro, Massachusetts.[11] Before finishing high school, he volunteered for the Army Air Force and was trained as a pilot. He received his B.S. degree from UMASS Amherst in 1948.[12] He received his PhD in entomology from Cornell University in 1951,[12] also having a graduate fellowship at Oxford University that same year. After obtaining his graduate degree, he was recalled to military service, serving instead for 4 years with the US Public Health Service in Puerto Rico.[13] He returned to Cornell in 1955, where he remained for the rest of his life, becoming the Chairman of the Entomology Department and holding a joint appointment with Ecology and Systematics.

Scientific career

Pimentel began his career at Cornell studying pest control and DDT in house flies.[14][15] During his time in Puerto Rico, he studied the introduced mongoose.[16][17] Early work, such as on herbicides, is still cited today.[18] At the intersection of agriculture and food security, Pimentel was concerned about the effects of chemical inputs and modern farming techniques on production in agriculture.[19] Pimentel also warned that human overpopulation is a function of food availability.[20] In his later years, he took an interest in the environmental effects of global warming.[21]

In 1961, Pimentel published on several important topics in ecology, including diversity-stability,[22] spatial patterns,[23] and community structure.[24] It was also the year that he presented his model integrating population dynamics and genetics that he called genetic feed-back.[25] He later presented data for it.[26] It was one of the earliest attempts at mathematically combining genetics with population dynamics.[27] Half a century later, it was cited as a paper that presaged the currently hot field of eco-evolutionary dynamics.[28]

Pimentel's forays into the environmental field came out of his experiences on various government panels and study groups, especially his year as an ecological consultant to the Office of Science and Technology. His study of the energy inputs into the productions of corn[29] was published during the energy crisis of 1973 and became his most cited paper ever. It was followed up by a study of the energy inputs to beef production[30]. By then, he was on his way to becoming a voice that was listened to on a variety of environmental issues through the numerous studies that he led and published, the results of which always could, and were, inspected and revised.

He was not a scientist who shied away from controversy or feared contradicting established views. Early in his career, he took on the biological control establishment by suggesting that native pests could be controlled by introducing new parasites and predators, based on his observations of successful control of pests in new associations and his genetic feedback model.[31] It was not an idea that was readily accepted, however, particularly by California biocontrol experts.[32] They admitted that, "Outstanding biological control successes have sometimes been achieved … by the use of natural enemies whose hosts belong to different species or genera from the pests they are needed to control,”[33] but they then rejected (pp 47-49) Pimentel’s work on genetic feedback as an explanatory mechanism involved in biocontrol by insect parasites and predators. Undaunted, Pimentel continued to support and document the use of new associations in biocontrol.[34] This practice has been called “new association biological control” as opposed to “classical biological control”.[35]

Pimentel was a pioneer in tabulating the energy cost, fossil fuel in particular, of food production. When his suggestion that “energy was going to be important to agricultural research in the future” was rebuffed as an area of study by a 1968 National Academy of Science Panel on which he served, Pimentel set about to put together the needed data himself by creating a graduate research course to do so using his own students.[36] Coming out during the 1973 energy crisis, the paper on energy inputs to corn production received much attention and helped to launch a number of studies and papers, including many by Pimentel and his colleagues. That paper then putatively initiated the controversy over the net energy and environmental impacts of gasohol crops.[37][38][39] Pimentel took great solace in having had his work reviewed by "26 top scientists and engineers"[40] who found his methods to be sound.[41][42] Pimentel claimed criticism such as that raised by Bjørn Lomborg,[43] was only a disagreement on details, rather than conclusions, stating he was correct anyway despite the fact that the numbers he used in his calculations later turned out to be wrong.[44]

Biomass Fuels

More recent criticism and controversy over Pimentel's work on biomass energy[45][46][47] has apparently been similarly resolved. Greatly simplified, the process of net energy determination is very much like that of cost-benefit analysis, in which some items can either be added to the cost (the denominator of the benefit-to-cost ratio) or subtracted from the benefits (its numerator), yielding different results with the same numbers. Such differences are substantial and complex in net energy analysis (also known as energy return on investment, or EROI)[48]. They often result from differences in ways that energy costs and energy credits are allocated, philosophical differences over the boundaries to calculations, and differences in evaluating the quality (liquid versus solid, for example) of energy sources. In a joint paper with one of his disputants, agronomist Bruce Dale, and arbitrated by the reputable ecologist and energy scientist, Charles Hall, who was annoyed at the critiques of Pimentel’s estimates, or more accurately why there should be such large differences (about a factor of two) between two different estimates of what should be a pretty straightforward analysis, it was finally agreed that most of the energy used for each of the inputs (as, for example, for tractor fuel, fertilizer) were reasonably similar, although Pimentel tended to be more inclusive, including the energy cost to produce that fuel, and also the seeds, pesticides, steel etc. needed.[49] Hence his energy costs tended to be about a third higher. Additionally Dale reduced his energy costs by about a quarter to give credit for “co-products” such as corn mash that could be fed to chickens. In that paper, Pimentel accepted that in some situations that would be appropriate.

What was not said in that paper, or in the critiques more generally, was that the real issue was not whether the EROI for alcohol fuel was less than 0.8 to 1 versus the 1.7 to 1 estimated (with coproducts) by Dale. The issue was that what a society needed was not a marginal energy return on investment such as 1.7 to 1 but a substantially positive one, from 3 to 1 at a bare minimum to perhaps 12 to 1 for a society like we live in today.[50][51]

One agricultural scientist even wrote: “An interested reader will ask why considering [sic] only the energy used to produce the cement for the processing factory, why not the energy used for the material used to produce the cement, why not the energy used to produce the material used to produce the cement, why not …? Accounting for the energy used to produce inputs used results in an infinite accounting sequence and hence an infinite amount of energy as input being used and, hence an infinite amount of production costs"[52] [Ellipses in original]. The reader will perhaps recognize one of Zeno's Paradoxes here. In the end, the energy inputs quickly fall off to insignificance. Atalanta reaches the end of her path, Achilles races past the tortoise, and the arrow hits its target.

Public Service

Governmental Committees

  • 1964–1966 President's Science Advisory Committee[53]
  • 1969 Secretary's Commission On Pesticides And Their Relationship To Environmental Health[5]
  • National Academy of Sciences[54]
  • U.S Department of Agriculture[54]
  • U.S. Department of Energy[54]
  • U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare[54]
  • Office of Technology Assessment of the U.S. Congress[54]
  • U.S. State Department[54]

Non-governmental Committees

Awards and distinctions

Bibliography

  • The Pesticide Question: Environment, Economics and Ethics. 1993. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |editors= ignored (|editor= suggested) (help)
  • David Pimentel, ed. (2002). Biological Invasions: Economic and Environmental Costs of Alien Plant, Animal, and Microbe Species, Second Edition.
  • David Pimentel, ed. (2007). Food, Energy, and Society 3rd Edition.
  • David Pimentel, ed. (2012). Global Economic and Environmental Aspects of Biofuels (Advances in Agroecology), 1st Edition.

References

  1. ^ "Pimentel, professor emeritus and environmental scientist, dies at 94". Cornell Chronicle. 16 January 2020. Retrieved 29 March 2020.
  2. ^ "DAVID PIMENTEL". Legacy. Retrieved 2 January 2020. {{cite web}}: External link in |ref= (help)
  3. ^ https://www.umass.edu/newsoffice/article/six-honorary-degrees-be-awarded-umass-amherst-commencement-ceremonies accessed January 5, 2020.
  4. ^ Pimentel, David (2012). "Silent Spring, the 50th anniversary of Rachel Carson's book". BMC Ecology. 12: 20. doi:10.1186/1472-6785-12-20. PMC 3459743. PMID 23016519.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link)
  5. ^ a b "Report Of The Secretary's Commission On Pesticides And Their Relationship To Environmental Health. Parts I And II". United States Environmental Protection Agency. National Service Center for Environmental Publications (NSCEP). Retrieved 3 January 2020.
  6. ^ Pimentel, D., L.E. Hurd, A.C. Bellotti, M.J. Forster, I.N. Oka, O.D. Sholes, and R.J. Whitman. (1973). Food production and the energy crisis. Science 182: 443-449.
  7. ^ Pimentel, D., J. Allen, A. Beers, L. Guinand, R. Linder, P. McLaughlin, B. Meer, D. Musonda, D. Perdue, S. Poisson, S. Siebert, K. Stoner, R. Salazar, and A. Hawkins. (1987). World agriculture and soil erosion. Bioscience 37:277-283.
  8. ^ Pimentel, D., C. Harvey, P. Resosudarmo, K. Sinclair, D. Kurtz, M. McNair, S. Crist, L. Spritz, L. Fitton, R. Saffouri, and R. Blair. (1995). Environmental and Economic Costs of Soil Erosion and Conservation Benefits. Science 267: 1117-1123.
  9. ^ Hall, Alan (February 15, 1999). "Costly Interlopers". Scientific American. Retrieved 3 January 2020.
  10. ^ Is Ethanol Energy-Efficient? http://journeytoforever.org/ethanol_energy.html
  11. ^ Whitecraft, Michele, Going Against “Procedures”: A Profile of Dave Pimentel. Manuscript.
  12. ^ a b "David Pimentel". Cornell University. Retrieved 2 January 2020.
  13. ^ https://www.legacy.com/obituaries/theithacajournal/obituary.aspx?pid=194726389
  14. ^ Pimentel, D. and J.E. Dewey. (1950). Laboratory tests with house flies and house fly larvae resistant to DDT. Journal of Economic Entomology 43:105.
  15. ^ Pimentel, D., H.H. Schwardt, and J.E. Dewey. (1954). The inheritance of DDT-resistance in the house fly. Annals Entomological Society of America 47:208-213.
  16. ^ Pimentel, D. (1955). Biology of the Indian mongoose in Puerto Rico. Journal of Mammalogy 36: 62-68.
  17. ^ Pimentel, D. (1955). The control of the mongoose in Puerto Rico. American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 4:147-151.
  18. ^ http://rachelcarsonlandmarkalliance.org/rcla-reporting/a-herbicides-impact-on-bees-blooms-and-beyond/
  19. ^ D’ANTONIO, MICHAEL (29 August 1993). "Apocalypse Soon : The latest overpopulation alarm has a twist: Not only lives but lifestyles are at stake". Los Angeles Times. Retrieved 11 January 2020.
  20. ^ Hopfenberg, Russell and Pimentel, David, "Human Population Numbers as a Function of Food Supply", Environment, Development and Sustainability, vol. 3, no. 1, March 2001, pp. 1–15
  21. ^ https://rachelcarsoncouncil.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/pimentel_chapter_single_prt.pdf
  22. ^ Pimentel, D. (1961). Species diversity and insect population outbreaks. Annals Entomological Society of America 54:76-86.
  23. ^ Pimentel, D. (1961). The influence of plant spatial patterns on insect populations. Annals Entomological Society of America 54:61-69.
  24. ^ Pimentel, D. (1961). Competition and the species-per-genus structure of communities. Annals Entomological Society of America 54:323-333.
  25. ^ Pimentel, D. (1961). Animal population regulation by the genetic feed-back mechanism. The American Naturalist 95:65-79.
  26. ^ Pimentel, D. (1968). Population regulation and genetic feedback. Science 159:1432-1437.
  27. ^ Drtischilo, W. (2019). Earth Days Reprised. Available from Amazon.com.
  28. ^ Schoener, T. W. (2011). The Newest Synthesis: Understanding the Interplay of Evolutionary and Ecological Dynamics. Science 331:426-429.
  29. ^ Pimentel, D., et al. (1973).
  30. ^ Pimentel, D., W. Dritschilo, J. Krummel, and J. Kutzman. (1975). Energy and land constraints in food-protein production. Science 190:754-761.
  31. ^ Pimentel, D. (1963). Introducing parasites and predators to control native pests. Canadian Entomologist 95: 785–792.
  32. ^ Huffaker,C.B., Simmonds, S.J., and J.E. Laing. (1976). "The theoretical and empirical basis of biological control." Pages 41-78 in Huffaker, C.B. (ed.) Biological Control, Plenum Press, NY. 511 pp.
  33. ^ Wilson, F., and C.B., Huffaker. (1976). Pages 5-6 in Huffaker, C.B., and PS Messenger. (eds.) Theory and practice of biological control. Academic Press, New York. 788 pp.
  34. ^ Hokkanen, H.M.T., and D. Pimentel. (1989). New Associations in Biological Control: Theory and Practice. Canadian Entomologist 121:829-840.
  35. ^ Van Driesche, R., and M. Hoddle. (2009.) Pages 4-5 in Control of pests and weeds by natural enemies: an introduction to biological control. Blackwell Publishing. Malden Massachusetts. 488 pp.
  36. ^ Dritschilo, W. (2019). Earth Days Reprised. (Pp 389-390.)
  37. ^ Ruttan, V.W. and Pimentel, D. (1975). Food Production and the Energy Crisis: A Comment. Science 187:560-561.
  38. ^ Pimentel, D. (1975). Food Production and the Energy Crisis: A Comment. Science 187:561.
  39. ^ Chambers, R.S., Herendeen, R.A., Joyce, J.J., and P.S. Penner. (1979). Gasohol: Does It or Doesn’t It Produce Positive Net Energy? Science 206:789-795.
  40. ^ Whitecraft, Michele, Going Against “Procedures”: A Profile of Dave Pimentel. Manuscript.
  41. ^ ERAB. (1980). Gasohol: Energy Research Advisory Board. U.S. Dept. Energy, Washington, DC.
  42. ^ ERAB. (1981). Biomass energy: Energy Research Advisory Board. U.S. Dept. Energy, Washington, DC.
  43. ^ Lomborg, B. (2001) The Skeptical Environmentalist. Cambridge University Press.
  44. ^ Pimentel, D. (2002). Exposition on Scepticism. BioScience 52:295-8.
  45. ^ Pimentel, D. and T. Patzek, (2005). Ethanol production using corn, switchgrass, and wood: biodiesel production using soybean and sunflower. Natural Resources Research 14(1):65-76.
  46. ^ Farrell, A.E., Plevin, R.J., Turner, B.T., Jones, A.D,. O’Hare, M., and D.M. Kammen. (2006). Ethanol Can Contribute to Energy and Environmental Goals. Science 311:506-508.
  47. ^ Cleveland, C.J., Hall, C.A.S. and, R.A. Herenedeen; Hagens, N., Costanza, R., and K. Mulder; Lynd, L., Greene, N., Dale, B., Laser, M., Lashof, D., Wang, M., and C. Wyman, Kaufman, R.K.; Patzek, T.W. and Farrell, A.E., Plevin, R.J., Turner, B.T., Jones, A.D,. O’Hare, M., and D.M. Kammen. (2006).Energy Returns on Ethanol Production Science 312:1746-1748.
  48. ^ Lambert, J.G., Hall, C.A.S., Balogh, S., Gupta, A., and M. Arnold. (2014). Energy 64:153-167
  49. ^ Hall, C.A.S., Dale, B.E., and D. Pimentel. (2011). Seeking to Understand the Reasons for Different Energy Return on Investment (EROI) Estimates for Biofuels. Sustainability 3:2413-2432.
  50. ^ Hall, C. A. S., Balogh, S., and D. J. R. Murphy. (2009). What is the Minimum EROI that a Sustainable Society Must Have? Energies 2:25-47.
  51. ^ Lambert. et a. (2014).
  52. ^ Wesseler. J. (2007). Opportunities (‘costs) matter: A comment on Pimentel and Patzek ‘‘Ethanol production using corn, switchgrass, and wood; biodiesel production using soybean and sunflower’’ Energy Policy 35:1414-1416.
  53. ^ States, United (1965). Restoring the quality of our environment. Report. Washington: The White House. hdl:2027/uc1.b4116127.
  54. ^ a b c d e f Pimentel, David (2012-09-27). "Silent Spring, the 50th anniversary of Rachel Carson's book". BMC Ecology. 12 (12): 20. doi:10.1186/1472-6785-12-20. PMC 3459743. PMID 23016519.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link)
  55. ^ a b c Ramanujan, Krishna (16 January 2020). "Pimentel, professor emeritus and environmental scientist, dies at 94". Cornell Chronicle. Retrieved 17 January 2020.
  56. ^ "American Institute of Biological Sciences" (PDF). American Institute of Biological Sciences. Retrieved 17 January 2020.
  57. ^ "AIBS BOARD OF DIRECTORS FOR 2005". American Institute of Biological Sciences. American Institute of Biological Sciences. Retrieved 17 January 2020.
  58. ^ "ORGANIC PIONEER: DR. DAVID PIMENTEL". Rodale Institute. 2017-09-12. Retrieved 8 January 2020.
  59. ^ "UMass Amherst Announces Commencement Weekend Events". University of Massachusetts Amherst. 20 May 2008. Retrieved 8 January 2020.
  60. ^ "Entomological Society of Canada – Fellows" (PDF). Entomological Society of Canada. Retrieved 29 March 2020.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=David_Pimentel_(scientist)&oldid=954325007"