13th February 2008

BIOFUELS MAY BE INCREASING GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS, NEW STUDIES SUGGEST

Discuss this itemShare your views with other visitors, and read what they have to say

The growing popularity of biofuels may actually be hurting the environment, according to two papers published last week in the journal Science.

Biofuels have long been considered ‘carbon-neutral’, as the emissions from consumption are believed to be offset by the plants from which the fuel is made. The studies argue that this conception is overly simplistic, and fails to account for the carbon costs of biofuel-related land use changes.

Both studies focus on cropland. The first study finds that converting rainforests or grasslands to produce biofuels releases much more carbon dioxide into the air than the plants are able to absorb. Similarly, using currently productive farmland to grow biofuel crops will also use more carbon then it saves, according to Princeton’s Timothy Searchinger, the lead author of the other study.

Ten prominent ecologists authored a letter to US President George W. Bush in response to these new findings, asking for new a policy “that ensures biofuels are not produced on productive forests, grassland or cropland,” according to the Los Angeles Times. Last year, legislation was passed calling for the production of ethanol, derived mostly from maize, to double over the next 10 years.

The UN announced the formation of a panel to analyse the study’s findings, saying that biofuels could still be useful in the global environmental effort. Bob Dinneen, the president of the Renewable Fuels Association, issued a statement saying that, despite the new studies, “we must all remember where we are today, how world demand for liquid fuels is growing, and what the realistic alternatives are to meet those growing demands. Biofuels like ethanol are the only tool readily available that can begin to address the challenges of energy security and environmental protection.”

Searchinger’s study says that the “extraordinary productivity” of Brasilian sugarcane means that it would need only four years to “pay back the upfront carbon emissions” when grown on tropical grazing land. However, this payback period would rise more than ten-fold if displaced ranchers then proceed to convert rainforest to grazing land.

“The Science articles underscore the great risks of unintended consequences associated with subsidising and mandating biofuels”, noted Tara Laan, Assistant Researcher of the Globbal Subsidies Initiative. “The implications of the study by Searchinger et al. are especially important — namely, that developing sustainability standards for biofuels that do NOT account for indirect GHG emissions arising from the displacement of crop production is about as effective as re-arranging deck chairs on the Titanic.”

The abstracts of the two papers can be found online at www.sciencemag.org.

ICTSD Reporting; “Biofuel crops increase carbon emissions,” LOS ANGELES TIMES, 8 February 2008. “Simplistic View of Land Use Change Excludes Consequences of Continuing Petroleum Dependence,” RFA NEWS RELEASE, 7 February 2008.