Biofuels could be environmentally damaging

  • This topic is empty.
Viewing 1 post (of 1 total)
  • Author
  • #3485
    Martin W

      News from Europe tells of greater awareness of potential environmental harm caused by biofuels – which aren't necessarily a boon to env. European Union changing its stance, which had been gung-ho re biofuels; from the Guardian:

      A European drive to run vehicles on biofuels instead of petrol and diesel to reduce greenhouse gas emissions is to be reviewed after concerns about its environmental impact. …a number of studies have raised doubts about the green credentials of many of the leading candidates, such as palm oil and ethanol made from corn. Critics say biofuels compete for land with staple food crops, and vast areas of rainforest are cleared to grow them. In a separate report, the Royal Society yesterday said the UK government needed to rethink its biofuels policy. The society warned that the renewable transport fuel obligation, which calls for 5% biofuel use within two years, would not necessarily reduce carbon emissions.

      The report comes a few weeks after an article in the journal Science, by Jörn Scharlemann and William Laurance of the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute in Panama, concluded that biofuels made from corn, sugar cane and soy could have a greater environmental impact than burning fossil fuels.

      EU reviews biofuel target as environmental doubts grow Royal Society press release:


      Latest press releases

      Government needs to drive biofuels in right direction warns Royal Society 14 Jan 2008 Biofuels risk failing to deliver significant reductions in greenhouse gas emissions from transport and could even be environmentally damaging unless the Government puts the right policies in place warns a new Royal Society(1) report today (Monday 14 January 2008). The report Sustainable Biofuels: prospects and challenges cautions that the UK's Renewable Transport Fuel Obligation (RTFO), which comes into force in April 2008, does not necessarily encourage the use of the types of biofuels with the best greenhouse gas savings.

      This is because, although the Obligation requires fuel suppliers to ensure that five per cent of all UK fuels sold are from a renewable source by 2010(2), it does not contain a target to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The RTFO is the UK's implementation of the EU Biofuels Directive, which also fails to include a greenhouse gas target. As a result, the Directive will do more for economic development and energy security than combating climate change. Professor John Pickett, who chaired the Royal Society biofuels study(3), said: "Biofuels could play an important role in cutting greenhouse gas emissions from transport both here and globally. Cars, lorries and domestic air travel are responsible for a massive 25 per cent of all the UK's greenhouse gas emissions and this figure is growing faster than for any other sector." "The Government must ensure that the RTFO promotes fuels with the lowest emissions by, for example, setting a greenhouse gas reduction target. This will help encourage the improvement of existing fuels and accelerate the development of new ones. Without a target we risk missing important opportunities to stimulate exciting innovations that will help us cut our spiralling transport emissions." The report also recommends that the RTFO be extended for 20 years in order to stimulate the kind of long term investment necessary to foster a strong UK biofuels industry.

      It warns that without the right support, including of the research and development community, there is a risk that we will miss out on developing the biofuels that could bring greater benefits and that we could become locked in to using inefficient biofuels. John Pickett said: "In designing policies and incentives to encourage investment in and the use of biofuels it is important to remember that one biofuel is not the same as another. The greenhouse gas savings of each depends on how crops are grown and converted and how the fuel is used. So, indiscriminately increasing the amount of biofuels we are using may not automatically lead to the best reductions in emissions." The report calls for biofuels to be assessed and certified for the greenhouse gas savings they will deliver, as well as their positive and negative social and environmental impacts.

      John Pickett said: "The UK is leading the way internationally by developing carbon and sustainability reporting for biofuels as part of the RTFO. This information is crucial so we can identify and promote the fuels produced in a way that is good for people and the environment. We have a particular responsibility to do so since the UK will have to rely on crops grown elsewhere in the world to meet demand. "We must not create new environmental or social problems in our efforts to deal with climate change. Indeed, while the RTFO is a reasonable start, unless certification is applied to the production of all biofuels and is a system used by all countries we will merely displace rather than remedy the potentially negative effects of these fuels."

      The report says that biofuels are not the silver bullet for meeting the rising demand for transport while tackling emissions. Delivering a sustainable transport system will require combining biofuels with other developments including the improved design of vehicles and engines, increased use of public transport and better urban and rural planning to encourage, for example, walking and the use of bicycles.

      Government needs to drive biofuels in right direction warns Royal Society

    Viewing 1 post (of 1 total)
    • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.