Biofuel and aquaculture are two of many industries that extract resources from ecological systems. For both corn-based biodiesel and fish farming, the production process acquires feedstocks from energy-storing ecological systems, such as agricultural fields and oceans. In cases such as intensive salmon farming, large quantities of supplements including fishmeal and fish oil obtained from other ecological systems such as the wild ocean are applied (Naylor et al, 2000). For residue-derived biofuels and shellfish agriculture, energy input from external ecosystems, although relatively small, is still necessary to meet energy needs. These intricate interaction links determine that the impacts of resource use will spread to related systems at different scales. Some people trumpet the expansion of both sectors. They argue that both industries are socially benign such that biofuels reduce dependence on fossil fuels and aquaculture helps alleviate the problem of world hunger. Environmentally, residue-based biofuels could supposedly reduce carbon emissions and shellfish could improve water quality by removing more than necessary nitrogen. However, despite these seemingly strong arguments on a larger scale, it is also notable that local communities are paying high prices for the development of both sectors when additional energy materials are included. Problems such as reduced land productivity and eutrophication are becoming increasingly evident. Biofuel-initiated land conversion from natural forest to corn monoculture entails enormous ecological impacts and the introduction of exotic species into aquaculture threatens the genetic integrity of native wild species (GESAMP, 2008). When people try to solve this problem... the middle of the card... it's not stable at all. Once the broader economic situation experiences turbulence, as it did around 2008, and demand for biofuels collapses, the benefits are unlikely to be maintained without compromise. On the other hand, current research is not yet able to address ecological interactions specifically at each local scale (McKindsey, 2006). In bivalve aquaculture, the ability of shellfish to filter particles and purify water is subject to phytoplankton population growth and seasonal variations (Dumbauld, 2009), obscuring the accuracy of assessing this ecological benefit or cost. These realities add to uncertainties in assessment and pose risks in making decisions about particular resource extraction activities. To minimize such uncertainties, further research is needed to establish a solid scientific basis on which to conduct case-by-case analyzes of local benefits and costs...