Don't Bet on Biofuels
by Jeremy Elton Jacquot, Los Angeles on 07. 5.07
It turns out the main obstacle to our switching over to a biofuel-based economy may not be its environmental impact or effect on global food prices: it may actually be our own greed and appetite for destruction. A recent global analysis of agricultural production has revealed that almost a quarter of the energy processed by plants is either harvested or lost due to anthropogenic activities. In addition, our actions have reduced the amount of energy available to the millions of other species by close to 10%.
In a bit of an understatement, Snow Barlow, an agriculture professor at the University of Melbourne, wrily remarked: "Here we are, just one species on the earth, and we're grabbing a quarter of the renewable resources … we're probably being a bit greedy." Given these new findings, scientists are cautioning against the increased use of biofuels due to the likely potential for further pressure on species and ecosystems.
The hardest hit areas were mostly found in south Asia, where scientists estimate almost 63% of plant production is used or destroyed by humans. Not surprisingly, the analysis also emphasized the limited potential for a long-term, sustainable biofuel industry, citing projected energy consumption figures and the potential impact on the planet's remaining biodiversity.
Christopher Field, an ecologist at the Carnegie Institution in Stanford, California, remarked that the findings were deeply disturbing and a rebuke to those hoping for the near-term establishment of a viable biofuel industry. "... one species is appropriating about a quarter of the productive activity of all the world's lands. With millions of species sharing the leftovers, it is hard to know how many will be squeezed out of the game. There simply isn't enough [biomass production] for us to solve the energy challenge of the 21st century with biofuels."
Via ::Guardian Unlimited: Humans use or abuse quarter of all energy from plants (newspaper), ::The Sydney Morning Herald: Human greed takes lion's share of solar energy (newspaper), ::ScienceNOW: Charting Greed for All Things Green (news website)
See also: ::Biofuel Plants Causing Air, Water and Soil Problems in Iowa, ::Which BioFuel Produces the Least NOx?
With America all hyped up on the morality and religion fad, maybe there will be more discussion in the media of the ethical dimensions of burning food for fuel.
This story seems to me totally a non-sequitur. How does the fact that we appropriate 25% of the world biological productivity for our own uses have anything to do with biofuels?
How much energy does that productivity use represent, how large is it compared to fuel demands, and how can we expect the research into more efficient biofuel production to effect our productivity needs?
This issue is way too complicated for how over-simplistically it is dealt with in this story, and in many others on this site. While I'm not an advocate of biofuels, I'm very much interested in seeing their potential. I haven't delved deeply enough into the issue to assess the feasibility of cellulosic production, but I've heard many are optimistic about that.
If you want to oppose a biofuel, perhaps you should limit yourself to opposing corn-starch ethanol. That seems like it would have the negative impacts you describe. But biofuels as a whole seem to have a lot more promise, so throwing them out as being not-green may be doing a disservice for the entire green movement.
I agree 100%. Biofuels are really a fake solution.We're totally wasting our time and reasearch dollars there. It would be much better spend on nanosolar thin film cells and efficient electric vehicles.
anthonares, you write sounding like someone who cannot imagine anything but business as usual, albeit from a different feedstock.
We currently get most of our energy from under the ground, using past solar income, generated over millions of years. Our appetites have grown accordingly, and now people talk about using arable land to make our fuels. But if this report is right we already use 25% of ALL the land, so where will the biofuels be grown? They will be an addition.
There's a good argument for biofuels on a small scale, perhaps powering small bicycles, used infrequently. But to magically replace all the oil we currently use for 2-3 ton vehicles, travelling at 70 mph, going 100 miles in a day?? It's a fantasy.
When you're addicted to crack, an occasional glass of red wine would seem like a pretty weak replacement. But of course the problem really was getting addicted to crack in the first place.
Why can't biofuels save us? Too many people. Why is petroleum so bad? Too many people. Why is landfill such a problem? Too many people. Why is there so much polution? Too many people. Why do we cut down forests? Too many people.
It's called over population. And it's running like a freight train.
It's called over population. And it's running like a freight train.
Are you married? Have any kids?