Why current biofuels are not the answer to climate change and sustainable development?
 Matti Liimatainen, Greenpeace Finland
Avoid deforestation would sequester more carbon on the same area of land than it would have been saved by using biofuels.
Zoom In |
The role of biofuels in tackling climate change and other objectives has been disputed by reputable scientific bodies. Current biofuels fail in all areas including:
Poor use of money
The Joint Research Centre (JRC) from the European Commission conducted a cost-benefit analysis on the use of public money to support biofuels with the stated objectives of cutting GHG emission, security of supply and employment benefit. They concluded that despite all the uncertainty around biofuels, even for the most favourable possible combination of assumptions, ‘there is virtually no chance of benefits exceeding costs’. They calculated the net cost to society of achieving the proposed EU 10% biofuel target by 2020 to be as high as 65 billion euros with only marginal benefits in terms of employment, security of supply and reduced GHG emissions.
Poor use of biomass
Biofuels for transport is not the only way to utilize energy from biomass. Modern biomass burners is nearly as efficient as fossil fuel burners, with 1MJ biomass replaces about 0.95MJ fossil fuel, compared to 1MJ biomass replaces only around 0.35-0.45MJ crude oil in the transport sector (JRC, 2008). It would be especially efficient to use biomass in combined heat and power (CHP) production, where the ‘waste’ heat generated during electricity production is captured and supplied to industry or homes or public utilities.
Poor use of land
In a time of global food crisis, the use of land to produce biofuels instead of food is morally unacceptable. In October 2007 the UN special Rapporteur on the right to food, Jean Ziegler, said that ‘It is a crime against humanity to convert agricultural productive soil into soil which produces food stuff that will be burned into biofuel’ (UN news, 26 October 2007). The impacts of biofuels have on land competition and food prices are said to have caused 30 million people into poverty in poor countries (Oxfam, 2008).
On the other hand, measures like avoiding deforestation, restoring degraded peatland and grassland habitats will be more cost-effective to capture carbon than avoid emissions by producing biofuels on the same land. A study published in Science by Righelato and Spracklen found that reforestation would sequester between two and nine times as much carbon over 30 years than would be saved by burning biofuels instead of fossil fuel (Righelato & Spracklen, 2007). Moreover, conversion of land back to secondary forest provides additional environmental services, such as prevention of desertification, provision of forest products, maintenance of biological diversity, and regional climate regulation.
In order to meet the target of substitution of 10% of liquid transportation fuels, a range from 118 to 508 million hectares of land would be required, depending on the crop type and productivity level. Currently, the area of arable land in the world is of about 1.400 hectares (SCOPE report 2009:2).
 Andy Hay/RSPB Images
|
Does not reduce transport emissions
There is a need to reduce car transport; without such policy, there will be more and more biofuels (as well as fossil fuel) needed to satisfy the ever increasing transport demand. Improving vehicle efficiency, encouraging public transport and zero-carbon transport, and better driving habits are all readily available, cheaper, and more efficient ways of tackling climate change without the huge sustainability question marks that surround many of today’s commercial biofuels.
The Cars and CO2 Regulation – a much-needed approach to reducing EU carbon emissions from transport
As the Renewable Energy Directive was adopted, so was the revised Fuel Quality Directive (Directive 2009/ 30/EC) and a new regulation (Reg. 443/2009) to reduce the carbon emissions from cars transport encouraging car manufacturers to produce smaller, more fuel efficient and less polluting cars. This Directive could play as significant role in tackling emissions reductions from transport in a safer way, without the inherent sustainability risks associated with conventional biofuels.
Substantially targeted by very heavy lobbying from the motor industry, the original target proposal of the Commission to limit new cars produced in the EU to have an average CO2 emissions lower than 120 g/km by 2012 (from a level of 161g/km in 2004), was finally set at around 137g/km by 2015. In addition it includes the use of biofuels as a mean of pursuing the target that was originally to be achieved through motor technology alone.
Even if the technologies to achieve significant improvements in vehicle efficiency are already available, the resistance from the motor industry shows how reluctant they are on playing a significant role in tackling climate change. Indeed, the King Review on low-carbon cars, conducted for the UK Government, concluded that technology to reduce CO2 emissions by 30 percent is already close to market and could be standard within 5 -10 years (King, 2008).
However, a T&E report (2009) that analyses the progress made by the car industry towards the official 130g/km target shows that despite the achievement of CO2 reductions and car efficiency in some industries, the average CO2 emissions sit currently at 153.5g/km, which represents a still 15% distance to the target for 2015.
Reference:
Joint Research Centre (2008) Biofuels in the European Context: facts and uncertainties. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/jrc/downloads/jrc_biofuels_report.pdf
King, J. (2008) The King Review of low-carbon cars. Available at: http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/media/A/7/bud08_king_1080.pdf
Oxfam (2008) Another inconvenient truth. How biofuel policies are deepening poverty and accelerating climate change. Available at: http://www.oxfam.org/en/pressroom/pressrelease/2008-06-25/another-inconvenient-truth-biofuels-are-not-answer
Righelato, R., & Spracklen, D.V. (2007) Carbon mitigation by biofuels or by saving and restoring forests? Science Vol. 317 (17 August 2007): 902.
T&E (2009) Reducing CO2 Emissions from New Cars: A Study of Major Car Manufacturers' Progress in 2008. Available at:http://www.transportenvironment.org/Downloads/view/cid:3/
Sponsored by:
 |
European Union
|
 | |