Bye Bye Bio?
There are 'good' biofuels and 'bad' biofuels. We need more of the former, and less of the latter, which is why Friends of the Earth, Oxfam and Greenpeace have all attacked UK and EU targets under the Renewable Transport Fuels Obligation (RTFO).
Under the RTFO, suppliers are obliged to ensure that by 2012, 5% of fuel sold at UK pumps consists of biofuels, made from crops and grasses. The Department for Transport stated that the plan will cut CO2 emissions by 2.5 million tonnes a year.
Done with the noblest of intentions, the biofuel rule overlooked the sources from which this fuel would come, hence the creation of a good-bad dichotomy.
Whilst biofuels emissions from cars are similar in their output of CO2 to normal fuels, much of their advantage comes from their cultivation whereby they act as carbon sinks, which are replenished when they are replanted.
However, 'bad' biofuels negatively affected levels of forestation and food prices as farmers rushed to cash in on the biofuel boom. Biofuels such as those made from recycled cooking oil provide climate boons without the negative impact of social conflict and biodiversity loss.
The problem lies therein. There is simply not enough good biofuel to go around. Whilst the UK has de facto delayed its 5% obligation to 2014, the eventual EU target of 10% by 2020 is not realistic at present, or in the foreseeable future.
A 2003 study suggested an 86% reduction in overall emissions from 'bad' biofuels compared with fossil fuels, which has now been dramatically superseded.
The Renewable Fuels Agency (RFA) currently uses a figure of 40%, with the EU citing 30%. Yet these figures do not include emissions caused from indirect land use change. The RFA noted that:
"The Gallagher Review found that greenhouse gas emissions from indirect land-use change driven by the use of biofuels could be very large. If left unchecked, these could potentially cause an increase in overall carbon emissions rather than a reduction."
The most recent snapshot of this is elucidated by modelling undertaking on behalf of Friends of the Earth last year. If such emissions were taken into account RFTO may actually cause an increase of 1.3 million tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions, the equivalent to an extra half a million cars on our roads.
Furthermore, in the past 3 years, food prices have increased by 83%. Oxfam suggest that the policy will further cost taxpayers 500 million pounds ($1 billion) a year, and may lead to 60 million people being forced from their land to make way for biofuel plantations. The International Food Policy Research Institute suggests that about 30 percent of recent food price inflation can be attributed to biofuel production.
There lies the rub. Whilst laudable in its aims, the RFTO and recent biofuel obsession has had a poor understanding of cause and effect which carries on even today.
Environmentalists are now demanding the scrappage of all biofuel targets and focus on substantive techniques for emissions minimisation through recycling waste, improving public transport in terms of cost and efficiency, as well as getting cars off the road.
Whilst 'good' biofuels can do their bit for Climate Change, that 'bit' is necessarily small and must not be overplayed.
Print this page