If we want to save the planet, we need a five-year freeze on biofuels

Guardian UK ^ | 3/27/2007` | George Monbiot

[Uncledave]

It used to be a matter of good intentions gone awry. Now it is plain fraud. The governments using biofuel to tackle global warming know that it causes more harm than good. But they plough on regardless.

{snip}

So what's wrong with these programmes? Only that they are a formula for environmental and humanitarian disaster. In 2004 I warned, on these pages, that biofuels would set up a competition for food between cars and people. The people would necessarily lose: those who can afford to drive are richer than those who are in danger of starvation. It would also lead to the destruction of rainforests and other important habitats.

{snip}

Since the beginning of last year, the price of maize has doubled. The price of wheat has also reached a 10-year high, while global stockpiles of both grains have reached 25-year lows. Already there have been food riots in Mexico and reports that the poor are feeling the strain all over the world. The US department of agriculture warns that "if we have a drought or a very poor harvest, we could see the sort of volatility we saw in the 1970s, and if it does not happen this year, we are also forecasting lower stockpiles next year". According to the UN food and agriculture organisation, the main reason is the demand for ethanol: the alcohol used for motor fuel, which can be made from maize and wheat.

{snip}

Farmers will respond to better prices by planting more, but it is not clear that they can overtake the booming demand for biofuel. Even if they do, they will catch up only by ploughing virgin habitat.

[Uncledave]

Although I don't agree with George "Moonbat" on much or with the anthro global warming comments within the piece, I agree with the salient points made here. I think it's bizarre to burn food for fuel, and awful to plow forests for this purpose. Some of the emerging algae-based biofuels processes seem encouraging to me, but growing corn or palm oil for this purpose is a path I think we'll regret.

[Uncledave]

Renewable Energy Ping

Please Freep Mail me if you'd like on/off

[Rutles4Ever]

I guess it's lights-out for planet Earth, then. Hey, let's not all be sad. It was a good run.

[Incorrigible]

Related thread:

Use of crop not answer to foreign oil, expert says

 

[John Valentine]

Growing plants to use for fuel is somthing that would not happen in today's world, except for the intervention of busybodies in the marketplace.

And to stop it, all that needs to happen is for the busybodies to but out. Geroge Moonbat is one of the busybodies himself. And I'm sure that his solution is one that will involve more busybody tinkering to fix the problems caused by previous busybody tinkering.

[DungeonMaster]

I guess we better take care of the environment.

[the_devils_advocate_666]

We'll never "save" the planet. It'll die off eventually as the sun burns itself up.

[GunRunner]

Some of the emerging algae-based biofuels processes seem encouraging to me, but growing corn or palm oil for this purpose is a path I think we'll regret.

Is there a coherent reason for your aversion? Why is burning crops for fuel bizarre? The diesel engine was originally designed to run on peanut and corn oil, so its certainly not something new.

The only objections in this article are the usual enviro-wacko BS; killing rainforests, starving the poor, CO2 causing global warming.

Diesel engines running biodiesel is one of the only workable energy solution to reduce dependence on foreign oil, and when Honda releases their diesels in the US, I'll be first in line to get one. They're more efficient, faster, and can run on fuel that doesn't come from terrorist countries.

Honda Diesel Sets New World Records

[P-40]

The governments using biofuel to tackle global warming

What governments would those be?

[JamesP81]

Although I don't agree with George "Moonbat" on much or with the anthro global warming comments within the piece, I agree with the salient points made here. I think it's bizarre to burn food for fuel, and awful to plow forests for this purpose. Some of the emerging algae-based biofuels processes seem encouraging to me, but growing corn or palm oil for this purpose is a path I think we'll regret.

If every arable acre of land in this country was planted with corn, and every bit of that corn used to make ethanol, it still wouldn't be enough. Making ethanol from crops is a losing proposition.

[zek157]

Do you think wholesale milk prices rising 9% by next fall has anything to do with converting corn into ethanol instead of feed?

Poor Mexicans are having problems buying tortillas because of corn prices rising to unaffordable levels.

Also read a couple days ago that some farmers are having problems getting seed corn because more corn is being planted.

[JamesP81]

Diesel engines running biodiesel is one of the only workable energy solution to reduce dependence on foreign oil, and when Honda releases their diesels in the US, I'll be first in line to get one. They're more efficient, faster, and can run on fuel that doesn't come from terrorist countries.

Biodiesel has the same problems as ethanol; we don't have enough arable land to grow enough crops for it.

We're better off throwing our R&D into electric powered cars and accordingly upgrade the power grid to support that (difficult, but physically possible, whereas biomass fuel from crops isn't).

[Tenacious 1]

This is what happens when the governments try to fix "social" problems. They can't see past their own nose.

MTBE anyone? C'mon California, tell 'em about MTBE.

[P-40]

Poor Mexicans are having problems buying tortillas

That is nonsense. The two suppliers that supply the majority of tortillas got into some price fixing and speculation and got slapped for it. Crises averted.

[JimRed]

I'm surprised that the hemp folks haven't chimed in yet. The stuff grows like weeds in places where food crops don't do well and has a number of other uses (besides the the favored one of the hemp crowd).

Wasting corn on biofuel does not make sense due to the degree of care and cultivation required.

[beef]

If we are going to grow a crop for fuel, it won't be corn or soybeans. We have to be careful here not to throw the baby out with the bathwater. Enviro objection to biofuels is grounded in their desire to reverse the industrial revolution. They advocate alternative energy specifically because they think it's not feasible. When they start backpedaling, that indicates to me that they are afraid it might actually work. I don't think any one alternative energy source will cure all of our problems. But a mix of alternatives along with conservation and nuclear would make a big dent.

[tickmeister]

Hey, I just had an idea. Let the price of fuels go up as demand outstrips supply and prople will find ways to live with less fuel. And besides that, they will be forced to find practical alternatives. Where do I sign up for my Nobel prize?

[ccmay]

We're better off throwing our R&D into electric powered cars and accordingly upgrade the power grid to support that (difficult, but physically possible, whereas biomass fuel from crops isn't).

Agreed. Pebble-bed nuclear reactors powering electrics is the only long term solution.

-ccm

[from occupied ga]

Diesel engines running biodiesel is one of the only workable energy solution to reduce dependence on foreign oil, and when Honda releases their diesels in the US, I'll be first in line to get one. They're more efficient, faster, and can run on fuel that doesn't come from terrorist countries.

Just plain ain't so. It takes fossil energy to produce biofuels. Fertilizer (Haber process - natural gas) Tractors (diesel) harvesters (diesel) transportation (diesel) pressing (electricity coal 50+% rest hydro, nuc) distillation (fuel oil or natural gas). What is critical is the energy balance in these processes. If they use as much energy (on according to some studies more) fossil energy than they produce, then they INCREASE dependence on foreign oil.

They're a fraud all right, but not for the reasons given in the article. They're a fraud because they're designed to transfer wealth (mandatory ethanol usage) from the general public to the ethanol producers and farmers at an increased dependence on foreign oil.

[sportutegrl]

We will probably never know the true cost of our government's little ethanol folly. Besides heavy government subsidies, there is also the increased cost of corn and things made from corn. Ethanol not only raises the price of gas, it delivers lower fuel efficiency. If it was the answer, then why does government put a tax on imported ethanol from Brazil? Is there anyone on FR that still believes this is not a giant gift to Archer Daniels Midland and the grain lobby?