The Great Biofuel Hoax (Independent, via AlterNet)

[marmar]

The Great Biofuel Hoax

By Eric Holt-Gimenez, Indypendent. Posted June 25, 2007.



Touted by politicians and industry as "green" energy, biofuels come with a high price tag.

For an alternative viewpoint on corn-based ethanol, read "David Morris's Give Ethanol a Chance: The Case for Corn-Based Fuel."

Biofuels invoke an image of renewable abundance that allows industry, politicians, the World Bank, the United Nations and even the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to present fuel from corn, sugarcane, soy and other crops as a replacement for oil that will bring about a smooth transition to a renewablefuel economy.

Myths of abundance divert attention from powerful economic interests that benefit from this biofuels transition, avoiding discussion of the growing price that citizens of the global South are beginning to pay to maintain the consumptive oil-based lifestyle of the North. Biofuel mania obscures the profound consequences of the industrial transformation of our food and fuel systems -- the agro-fuels transition.

The Agro-fuels Boom

Industrialized countries have unleashed an "agro-fuels boom" by mandating ambitious renewable fuel targets. Renewable fuels are to provide 5.75 percent of Europe's transport fuel by 2010, and 10 percent by 2020. The U.S. goal is 35 billion gallons a year. These targets far exceed the agricultural capacities of the industrial North. Europe would need to use 70 percent of its farmland for fuel.

The United States' entire corn and soy harvest would need to be processed as ethanol and biodiesel. Northern countries expect the global South to meet their fuel needs, and southern governments appear eager to oblige. Indonesia and Malaysia are rapidly cutting down forests to expand oil-palm plantations targeted to supply up to 20 percent of the European Union biodiesel market. In Brazil -- where fuel crops already occupy an area the size of the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxemburg and Great Britain combined -- the government is planning a fivefold increase in sugar cane acreage with a goal of replacing 10 percent of the world's gasoline by 2025.

The rapid capitalization and concentration of power within the agro-fuels industry is breathtaking. From 2004 to 2007, venture capital investment in agro-fuels increased eightfold. Private investment is swamping public research institutions, as evidenced by BP's recent award of half a billion dollars to the University of California. In open defiance of national anti-trust laws, giant oil, grain, auto and genetic engineering corporations are forming powerful partnerships: ADM with Monsanto, Chevron and Volkswagen, BP with DuPont and Toyota. These corporations are consolidating research, production, processing and distribution chains of our food and fuel system under one colossal, industrial roof.

Agro-fuel champions assure us that because fuel crops are renewable, they are environmentally friendly and can reduce global warming, fostering rural development. But the tremendous market power of agro-fuel corporations, coupled with weak political will of governments to regulate their activities, is a recipe for environmental disaster and increasing hunger in the global South. It's time to examine the myths fueling this biofuel boom -- before it's too late.

Myth #1: Agro-fuels are clean and green

Because photosynthesis from fuel crops removes greenhouse gases from the atmosphere and can reduce fossil fuel consumption, we are told fuel crops are green. But when the full "life cycle" of agro-fuels is considered -- from land clearing to automotive consumption -- the moderate emission savings are undone by far greater emissions from deforestation, burning, peat drainage, cultivation and soil carbon losses. Every ton of palm oil produced results in 33 tons of carbon dioxide emissions -- 10 times more than petroleum. Clearing tropical forests for sugarcane ethanol emits 50 percent more greenhouse gases than the production and use of the same amount of gasoline. ......(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.alternet.org/environment/54218/

[luckyleftyme2]

1. OH REALLY

IN MY STATE OF MAINE WE COULD RAISE ENOUGH SUGAR BEETS IN ONE COUNTY TO PRODUCE ENOUGH ENERGY TO DO AWAY WITH ALL THE IMPORTED OIL WE USE.
AND IF WE ADD SOME OF OUR POTATO FIELDS IN USE FOR JUST FUEL WE COULD DO AWAY LOWER THE IMPORTING OF FUEL FOR AN OTHER STATE.
AS WITH ALL NEW TECHNOLOGIES IMPROVEMENTS ARE CONSTANTLY EVOLVING. FOR INSTANCE THE WASTE FROM THE SUGAR CANE USED IN THE ORIGINAL BRAZIL PROJECT CAN NOW YIELD UP TO 30% MORE ETHANOL!
TO OFTEN WE ARE QUICK TO SPIEL THE STATUS QUO DOGMA THAN TO STOP AND THINK FOR OURSELVES!
I MEAN AFTER ALL AS OUR AUTO MANUFACTURERS WERE TELLING US THEY HAD NO AUTOS THAT RAN ON BIO-FUELS THEY WERE SELLING THEM IN BRAZIL.
THINK OF HOW MANY VEHICLES ARE RUNNING ON USED MICKEY DEE'S ETC FRENCH FRY OIL!
NOT ONLY CAN WE DO IT WE WILL AND MUST DO IT!

[John Q. Citizen]

2. Using caps to make your point is an admission that you already lost your point.

So why does Maine still import hydrocarbon fuel?

Did you know that if you used all the farm land in the world to produce bio-diesel you would be able to replace about 5% of the petroleum diesel used around the world?

Both sugar cane and beets are much better sources than corn for ethanol. Of course the OP was writing about the scam of corn to ethanol.

How many gallons a week of waste fry grease do you estimate the average MacDonalds produces? Maybe 5 to 10 gallons? If you have 100 MacDonalds in Maine (I doubt it, but maybe) that means you can produce maybe 900 gallons of bio-diesel a week from that.

Look, enthusiasm is great, but unless you also actually take a look at the numbers, enthusiasm will soon turn to disappointment and disillusionment. Bio-fuels do have a place yet they aren't going to wean us overnight from the oil addiction. Please temper your enthusiasm with pragmatism and knowledge, and it will do a lot more for the sustainability movement than just enthusiasm alone.

[fazoolius_2006]

6. Your statement about eliminating all the imported oil you would use is not entirely accurate

What about all the plastics, polymers and other petroleum based products that you use. If you are talking about reducing imports of gasoline, that would be better. Unfortunately, the market won't really support this immediately, however as a solution down the road, it might work. I believe that we should look to this way and others to reduce the amount of foreign oil that we use.

[Buzz Clik]

3. This article could stand some intense scrutiny and fact checking.

I love these kind of hysterical declarations, presented with no sources:

Because photosynthesis from fuel crops removes greenhouse gases from the atmosphere and can reduce fossil fuel consumption, we are told fuel crops are green. But when the full "life cycle" of agro-fuels is considered -- from land clearing to automotive consumption -- the moderate emission savings are undone by far greater emissions from deforestation, burning, peat drainage, cultivation and soil carbon losses. Every ton of palm oil produced results in 33 tons of carbon dioxide emissions -- 10 times more than petroleum. Clearing tropical forests for sugarcane ethanol emits 50 percent more greenhouse gases than the production and use of the same amount of gasoline. ...

Fascinating and important if true, but many of these "facts" are still being debated, and some are simply baseless.

The challenges with biofuels are legion, but this article is hellbent of derailing the concept. I'm not sure why, other than it seems that biofuels won't work without corporate involvement. :shrug:

[formercia]

4. Natural Gas to make fertilizer

I think it would be simpler just to run a vehicle on Natural Gas. It saves a lot of steps in between.

make a law, make a business....

[MrPrax]

5. Oh really...

I guess The Independent didn't think that higher beer prices in Germany would make their point.

Yup...there shouldn't be any competition and no one in the 3rd world should even dare suggest alternatives.

So suddenly we are all concerned whether people have enough food...of course not.

[muriel_volestrangler]

8. This is from "The Indypendent", not "The Independent"

The original: http://www.indypendent.org/?p=1159

"Eric Holt-Giménez is the executive director of Food First/Institute for Food and Development Policy, Foodfirst.org. This article was first printed in Food First Backgrounder, Summer Issue, Volume 13 #2."

[razzleberry]

7. biofuel, better than petroleum from the Middle East .n/t