Biofuel worse for climate than fossil fuel – study

BRUSSELS, (Reuters) – European plans to promote  biofuels will drive farmers to convert 69,000 square km of wild  land into fields and plantations, depriving the poor of food and  accelerating climate change, a report warned yesterday.
The impact equates to an area the size of the Republic of  Ireland.

As a result, the extra biofuels that Europe will use over  the next decade will generate between 81 and 167 percent more  carbon dioxide than fossil fuels, says the report.

Nine environmental groups reached the conclusion after  analysing official data on the European Union’s goal of getting  10 percent of transport fuel from renewable sources by 2020.

But the European Commission’s energy team, which originally  formulated the goal, countered that the bulk of the land needed  would be found by recultivating abandoned farmland in Europe and  Asia, minimising the impact.

New science has emerged this year casting doubt on the  sustainability of the 10 percent goal, but EU energy officials  have argued that only around two thirds of that target will be  met through biofuels, with the balance being vehicles powered by  renewable electricity.

But 23 of the EU’s 27 member states have now published their  national strategies for renewable energy, revealing that fully  9.5 percent of transport fuel will be biofuel in 2020, 90  percent of which will come from food crops, the report says.
The EU’s executive Commission is now considering whether to  tweak legislation to take account of the emerging science.

This year’s fractious quest to understand the impact of EU  biofuels policy has already led to allegations of bias, court  action against the Commission and warnings that the probes will  kill the nascent industry.

TRADE DISPUTE
The debate centres on a new concept known as “indirect  land-use change.”
In essence, that means that if you take a field of grain and  switch the crop to biofuel, somebody, somewhere, will go hungry  unless those missing tonnes of grain are grown elsewhere.

The crops to make up the shortfall could come from anywhere,  and economics often dictate that will be in tropical zones,  encouraging farmers to hack out new land from fertile forests.