A lot of posts this week based on the findings of various reports on biofuels. The problem is complicated because depending on the application and the change in land use the impact can swing widely from negative to positive. Some thoughts on what a good biofuels project/policy would consist of.
1. If you can grow food, grow food. Forget the food/fuel debate the economics are better for food most places in the world . The reality is a ton of food will bring more than a ton of biomass or biofuels. Focus on marginal lands that can grow non-food energy crops. Incentivize these activities not converting corn to ethanol.
2. Close the process such that any organic waste ends up back on the land. In doing this stay clear of fertilizers and focus on increasing the soil content naturally.
3. Focus on biomass above baseline. Establish how much mass is there and focus on the additive effect of the process. If you have to burn down a forest to plant palm trees it’s probably not a great net effect.
From the NY Times:
The study concluded that whether a biofuel is climate-friendly or not depends largely on whether it is based on crops or production residues. Biofuels of the latter category were generally considered beneficial for the environment, and generating electricity locally from waste materials was found — in mast cases — to be more energy efficient than converting biomass to liquid fuels.
From Yahoo:
Burning bioenergy and fossil energy release comparable quantities of carbon dioxide.
But in a key difference, bioenergy has been seen as preferable for combating climate change because overall emissions are — in theory — reduced, because biomass results from additional plant growth.
“This is because plants grown specifically for bioenergy absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, and this offsets the emissions from the eventual burning of the biomass for energy,” said the study, adding that in contrast, burning forests releases stored carbon in the same way as burning oil.
However, both the studies note, the positive effect of biofuels on carbon emissions would necessarily be negated if land used to produce them had been cleared of forests to do so.
Melillo’s study also predicts the increased use of fertilizer in biofuels production will cause nitrous oxide emissions to become even more important than carbon losses in terms of potential for warming by the end of the century.
