Why is BirdLife concerned about biofuels?
 Adrian Long/BirdLife
BirdLife urges for fresh thinking on how to really tackle climate change while preserving natural habitats
Zoom In |
Biofuels currently placed on the market are often referred to as first generation biofuels. These are made from conventional agricultural crops. Most first generation biofuels are unsustainable because:
· They often fail to deliver greenhouse gas savings – some biofuels deliver relatively high greenhouse gas savings, others deliver very poor savings, or are even more polluting than fossil fuels.
· The crops are land hungry and are in many cases being grown at the expense of priceless wildlife habitats and the endangered species that depend on them; even when crops do not directly encroach on natural habitats, the diversion of commodities from the food to the biofuels market means that prices increase, stimulating agricultural expansion elsewhere.
The nature of industrial biofuels production means that most feedstocks are likely to be grown on large scale industrial plantations. The current and past experience with the expansion of soy, palm oil, sugar cane and other such plantations in the developing world suggests that it will be accompanied by widespread environmental destruction and social injustice or violations of land use rights such as the forced eviction of native peoples and subsistence farmers off their land.
|
Why is BirdLife opposed to the 10% target for biofuels in the Renewables Directive?
The Renewables Directive sets a mandatory target that 10% of transport energy consumption should be delivered through ‘renewable sources’. This is replacing previous targets set in 2003 when the EU set a non-mandatory target of replacing 5.75% (by energy content) of fossil fuel-based transport fuels with biofuels by 2010.In practical terms, this is targeted largely at biofuels. BirdLife is calling for this target to be dropped until it can be demonstrated that it is possible for it to be met sustainably, without damaging wildlife and ecosystems and providing meaningful greenhouse gas savings.
There is convincing evidence – from amongst others the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre and the OECD – that this target will lead to unsustainable production of biofuels causing ecosystem damage, massive biodiversity loss, increased food costs, and social impacts.
Furthermore, under realistic worst case scenarios, this target risks causing an overall increase of greenhouse gas emissions through the destruction of critical carbon stores (e.g. tropical forests and permanent grasslands) to make way for biofuel crops (or crops replacing production diverted to biofuels), but also through carbon-intensive production processes. We do not believe that the European Council’s strict condition can be met that the 10% target should be set “subject to production being sustainable".