| For over 100 years Jane's has been
analysing the latest on defence equipment and technology.
Specialist contributors report on emerging systems and appraising the
most recent industry developments, seeking out the news and analysis
behind the headlines. National and International Security: Jane's
specialist teams analyse the internal and external dynamics of every
country in the world and how their political moves and relationships
influence the diplomatic landscape. Terrorism and
Insurgency: Jane's has an unique monitoring service which records and
scales every significant terrorist or insurgent event in the world.
Transport: Specialist reference by Jane's looks across the global
airport, rail, urban transport and maritime environments. Jane's re Biofuels: Pursuit of biofuels bring new global security risks (July 16, 2007) Enough water for ethanol? By Sean Hao. Honolulu Advertiser Sunday, October 8, 2006. The state hosted a biofuels summit Aug. 22 at the Hawai'i Convention Center to coordinate efforts. Entry was by invitation only and environmental groups, such as Life of the Land, were not invited. Environmental activists ultimately could affect the debate over diverting more water to agriculture. "If we're not at the table, it could drag out for years," said Life of the Land's Curtis. "If everybody sits down at the table and starts talking, it could happen in maybe five years." Water Use and Impacts Due Ethanol Production in Brazil by Jose Roberto Moreira, National Reference Center on Biomass, Institute of Electrotechnology and Energy - CENBIO/IEE, University of Sao Paulo, Brazil Palm oil plant blamed for beach pollution Daily Express News (East Malaysia) June 14, 2007 F&C Management: Palm Oil Investment Where does your palm oil come from? From lipstick to ice cream: a survey of palm oil use and supply chain management (December 2003) Sustainable palm oil sourcing: key considerations for companies. Should investors be concerned? Sustainability Standards for Bioenergy. The study provides an overview of key ecological and social impacts of bioenergy and develops a core set of standards which could ensure the sustainability of future bioenergy supplies. World Wildlife Federation, November 2006 Biodiesel Solutions or Problems. The only way to attain energy security is by a policy of conservation, efficiency, and clean energy (wind, solar). EnergyJustice The Biofuels Myth By Eric Holt-Gimenez The International Herald Tribune (July 10, 2007) ................................................................................................................................................................................................................... |
|
|
| Peak Soil: Why
cellulosic ethanol,
biofuels are unsustainable and a threat to America
Written by Alice Friedemann Released April 10, 2007 Ethanol is an agribusiness get-rich-quick scheme that will bankrupt our topsoil. Nineteenth century western farmers converted their corn into whiskey to make a profit. Archer Daniels Midland, a large grain processor, came up with the same scheme in the 20th century. But ethanol was a product in search of a market, so ADM spent three decades relentlessly lobbying for ethanol to be used in gasoline. Today ADM makes record profits from ethanol sales and government subsidies. more |
Ethanol Booms,
Farmers Bust By Lisa M. Hamilton, AlterNet. Posted May 25, 2007. |
|
| The
Guardian (December 6, 2005).
Comment: The most destructive crop on
earth is no solution to the energy crisis. By George Monbiot By
promoting biodiesel as a substitute, we have missed the fact
that it is worse than the fossil-fuel burning it replaces. Over the
past two years I have made an uncomfortable discovery. Like most
environmentalists, I have been as blind to the constraints affecting
our energy supply as my opponents have been to climate change. I now
realise that I have entertained a belief in magic. ...
Before I go any further, I should make it clear that turning used chip
fat into motor fuel is a good thing. |
Forget
Biofuels - Burn Oil and Plant Forests Instead By Catherine Brahic NewScientist.com Thursday 16 August 2007 |
|
| Biofuel
Boom Sparks Environmental Fears Mario Osava Inter Press Service
News Agency (http://ipsnews.net/) RIO DE JANEIRO, Sep 22 (Tierramérica) - The use of biofuels is on the rise in Latin America and is feeding dreams of abundance in countries like Argentina and Colombia. But the experience of Brazil, a pioneer in this alternative energy, raises questions about their potential negative environmental consequences. With ethanol and biodiesel as a springboard, Brazil's President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva aims to turn his country into an energy superpower -- in contrast to the 1970s when the Brazilian economy was thrashed by its dependence on oil imports and its dramatic price hikes. But environmentalists warn that although biofuels reduce emissions of greenhouse gases (which lead to global climate change), they could also trigger a massive expansion of the biofuel crops, pushing the agricultural frontier deeper into the forests, destroying habitat and biodiversity. more |
Forget the Ethanol
Myth -- Avoid Biofuel Bubble: John F. Wasik By John F. Wasik July 23, 2007 (Bloomberg) Colonialism and Agroenergy Maria Luisa Mendonça and Marluce Melo Tuesday 3 April 2007 |
|
| Overlooked
impacts of
bioproducts Technology News –January 17, 2007 Bio-based
fuel and plastics could reduce global warming, but they have
other environmental impacts that should be factored into assessments of
the products' "greenness". The debate over whether plant-derived
products are better for the environment than their petroleum-based
counterparts has centered on the amount of
energy that goes into
growing the crops and making the products as well as the greenhouse
gases that result from burning fuels. New research published today on
ES&T’s Research ASAP website (DOI: 10.1021/es0606125) is the first
to quantify the environmental impacts of the fertilizers, pesticides,
and equipment that are used in soybean and corn agriculture. The work
suggests that policy makers should rethink the benefits of bio-based
fuels and plastics. more |
Biofuels: All You Need
to Know for a Bar Discussion (3 Quarks Daily) A dark side to the ethanol boom? (Christian Science Monitor, July 26, 2007) Biofuels Switch a Mistake, Say Researchers Science, Friday 17 August 2007 |
|
| Biofuels Are an
Environmental Dead End By Tom Philpott, Grist Magazine.
Posted December 13, 2006. Tom Philpott questions biofuels skeptic
extraordinaire David Pimentel
about why crop-based energy won't work. Any worthy idea can
withstand
and even be improved by naysayers; scolds and skeptics play the useful
role of pointing out obvious flaws. The biofuels industry has no more
persistent, articulate, and scathing critic than David Pimentel,
professor emeritus of
entomology at Cornell University. In 1979, with
the price of oil surging and a politically connected company called
Archer Daniels Midland investing heavily in ethanol production, the
U.S. Department of Energy invited Pimentel to chair an advisory
committee to look at ethanol as a gasoline alternative. The committee's
conclusion: ethanol requires more energy to produce than it delivers. |
Biofuels:
The Five Myths of the Agro-fuels Transition by
Eric Holt-Giménez June 30, 2007 Ethanol market riding on HECO plant Honolulu Advertiser Wednesday, March 22, 2006 |
|
| The
ecological and social tragedy of
crop-based biofuel production in the Americas (2006) Miguel A Altieri, Professor of Agroecology, University of California, Berkeley; Elizabeth Bravo, Red por una América Latina Libre de Transgenicos, Quito, Ecuador The nations of the OECD—the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, who account for 56% of the planet’s energy consumption, are desperately in need of a liquid fuel replacement for oil. Worldwide petroleum extraction rates are expected to peak this year, and global supply will likely dwindle significantly in the next fifty years. There is also a great need to find substitutes for fossil fuels, which are one of the major contributors to global climate change through the emission of CO2 and other greenhouse gases. Biofuels have been promoted as a promising alternative to petroleum. Industry, government and scientific proponents of biofuels claim that they will serve as an alternative to peaking oil, mitigate climate change by reducing greenhouse gas emissions, enhancing farmer incomes, and promoting rural development. But rigorous research and analysis conducted by respected ecologists and social scientists suggests that the large-scale industrial boom in biofuels will be disastrous for farmers, the environment, biodiversity preservation and consumers, particularly, the poor. more |
Palm oil — Fruits of
labour August 14th, 2007 We need agrofuel, not biofuel, right? The Jakarta Post (Indonesia) June 26, 2007 Indonesian govt may force palm oil producers to sell at home 13 August 2007 |
|
| The
Growing Danger of
Ethanol, Biofuels Wall
Street Journal,
December 5, 2006, Page A1 Crude Awakening: As Alternative Energy Heats Up, Environmental Concerns Grow. Crop of Renewable 'Biofuels' Could Have Drawbacks; Fires Across Indonesia. Palm-Oil Boom Ignites Debate By PATRICK BARTA and JANE SPENCER Investors are pouring billions of dollars into ''renewable'' energy sources such as ethanol, biodiesel and solar power that promise to reduce the world's reliance on petroleum. But exploiting these alternatives may produce unintended environmental and economic consequences that offset the expected benefits. Among the world's most fabled islands, Borneo -- which is divided between Indonesia and Malaysia -- is considered by environmentalists to be one of the last great tropical wildernesses. It's home to rare and unusual species, including the wild orangutan, the clouded leopard and the Sumatran rhinoceros. ... Now, the palm-oil boom threatens what's left. As fires burn deep into the dry peat soil beneath Indonesia's forests, centuries of carbon trapped in the biomass are released into the atmosphere. A study presented last month at a U.N. Climate Change Conference in Nairobi showed that Indonesia is the world's third-biggest carbon emitter behind the U.S. and China, when emissions from fires and other factors are considered. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB116501541088338547.html |
||
| Open
Forum:
Subsidies are the wrong road to
biofuels By Michael O'Hare, San Francisco Chronicle, Sunday, July 30,
2006 The first problem is
that an ethanol subsidy makes this chemical cheap, no matter how it's
made. Among the most important things my colleagues and I have found in
studying ethanol is that its benefits for the planet (reduced global
warming) and the nation (reduced dependence on imported petroleum)
depend a lot on how it is made, and what it is made of. |
||
| Sustainable
Monoculture? No, thanks! Debunking agribusiness greenwash. Against the Grain (June
2006) www.grain.org/ |
||
| False & Destructive "Solutions" to
Global Warming: Groups
Condemn Large-Scale Biofuels, Genetically Engineered Trees & Crops,
Monoculture Tree Plantations PRESS RELEASE **For Immediate Release** 16 November 2006 UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, Nairobi, Kenya UNFCCC: Nairobi, Kenya-The Gaia Foundation, Global Forest Coalition, Global Justice Ecology Project, Large Scale Biofuels Action Group, the STOP GE Trees Campaign and World Rainforest Movement held a press conference today during the 12th Conference of the Parties of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. The event addressed the socially and environmentally devastating impacts of large-scale biofuel production, genetically engineered trees and crops, and carbon sink plantations, and explained why these schemes will not solve climate change. The promotion of large-scale biofuel production as an alternative to fossil fuels, and of tree plantations to store carbon is becoming very popular at this year's UNFCCC. Genetically engineered (GE) [also called transgenic or genetically modified] crops and trees have also been promoted as a way to implement these co-called "solutions" to climate change. "Not only will large-scale use of biofuels and genetic engineering technology not help to alleviate climate change, they may in fact exacerbate the problems of global warming while also causing environmental degradation, social inequality and poverty, particularly in developing countries," stated Teresa Anderson of the London-based Gaia Foundation. Using important agricultural land and water to grow biofuels instead of food for domestic consumption will have a detrimental effect on food security, especially in poor countries. In 2006, an increase in the use of grain worldwide for conversion to biofuels led to a 60% increase in global grain prices. "Soya plantations in Latin America and palm oil plantations in Indonesia, being developed for biofuels, are driving deforestation and pushing hundreds of thousands of farmers and indigenous peoples off of their lands," stated Miguel Lovera of Global Forest Coalition. "Once again the developing countries of the South are being asked to pay the price for the unsustainable lifestyle of the North." In addition to their social and environmental impacts, the carbon-saving benefits of biofuel plantations are also being challenged. Biofuel studies, published in the U.S., found the fossil fuel energy required to produce and process biofuel crops like soya and maize is almost as much, or in some cases more than, the energy contained in the fuel produced. Activists are also condemning tree plantations used to store carbon: "This Convention needs to move away from the complicated and fraudulent carbon trading schemes" stated Ana Filippini of Uruguay-based World Rainforest Movement "It should begin to address seriously the issues of how to phase out fossil fuels and how to stop deforestation". While conventional monoculture tree plantations already have enormous documented social and ecological impacts, industry is now considering the use of genetically engineered trees in these plantations-which would greatly exacerbate these devastating impacts and also lead to new, unprecedented and unpredictable impacts. Genetically engineered trees were approved for use in carbon sinks by the UNFCCC in 2003, despite a complete lack of research on the potential risks of these trees which may be engineered to kill insects, grow faster, be more easily pulped or be resistant to toxic herbicides. "The release of GE trees in huge plantations to store carbon must be banned," stated Anne Petermann of Global Justice Ecology Project. "The escape of pollen or seeds from GE trees into native forests would cause severe and totally unpredictable ecological impacts that could impact the ability of forests to store carbon, worsening global warming". Andrew Boswell of the Large Scale Biofuels Action Group added " In the light of the precautionary decision on GE Trees made by the UN Convention on Biological Diversity in March 2006, we urge the countries of the South to stay resolutely cautious about adopting these technologies that are not in their control, nor likely to be in their best interests." In response to these ill-conceived schemes, organizations, indigenous peoples and others around the world have joined together to demand an end to false climate change "solutions" that include industrial tree plantations, genetically engineered crops or trees or large-scale and unsustainable production of biofuels. |
||
| This is not clean energy: The true cost of
our biofuels. Biofuelwatch |
||
| Agrofuels (a.k.a biofuels) GRAIN has just published a special issue of Seedling which focusses on biofuels, or as we like to call them, agrofuels* - over 30,000 words of indepth analysis from around the world. In the process of gathering material from colleagues and social movements around the world, we have discovered that the stampede into agrofuels is causing enormous environmental and social damage, much more than we realised earlier. Precious ecosystems are being destroyed and hundreds of thousands of indigenous and peasant communities are being thrown off their land. This page (www.grain.org/agrofuels/) will provide a continued resource for documents, links and updates on the issues around agrofuels. We believe that the prefix bio, which comes from the Greek word for "life", is entirely inappropriate for such anti-life devastation. So, following the lead of non-governmental organisations and social movements in Latin America, we shall not be talking about biofuels and green energy. Agrofuels is a much better term, we believe, to express what is really happening: agribusiness producing fuel from plants to sustain a wasteful, destructive and unjust global economy. http://www.grain.org/agrofuels/ |
||
| Emerging
Biofuels: Outlook of Effects on
U.S. Grain, Oilseed, and Livestock Markets By Simla Tokgoz et al Iowa State University (May 2007) Cellulosic ethanol from switchgrass and biodiesel from soybeans do not become economically viable in the Corn Belt under any of the scenarios. This is so because high energy costs that increase the prices of biodiesel and switchgrass ethanol also increase the price of corn-based ethanol. So long as producers can choose between soybeans for biodiesel, switchgrass for ethanol, and corn for ethanol, they will choose to grow corn. Cellulosic ethanol from corn stover does not enter into any scenario because of the high cost of collecting and transporting corn stover over the large distances required to supply a commercial-sized ethanol facility. |
||
| National
Biodiesel Board to aggressively
pursue legislation closing ''re-export'' tax loophole. (Biofuel
Business, June 2007) The NBB said there is
anecdotal evidence that foreign companies
may be sending tanker shipments of biodiesel into U.S. ports, adding a
small amount of diesel fuel, claiming the blenders' credit on all of
the biodiesel gallons in the shipment, and then exporting the shipments
outside of the United States. |
||
|
Biofuels makes sense but only if they are sustainable. 18 April 2007 by Dr Stephen Ladyman, UK Minister of State for Transport Over the past few months, the UK government has come in for a fair degree of criticism for moving too far, too fast, in setting targets for biofuels under the Renewable Transport Fuels Obligation (RTFO).Several commentators – including some of the same environmental groups who previously criticised us for not doing more to promote biofuels – have argued that by setting a 5% target for the amount of road transport biofuels we use in the UK by 2010, we are in danger of creating an environmental and humanitarian disaster. more |
||
| Promise
of Biofuels
Boom Is Overrated,
Report Says Jim Lobe, October 25, 2006 Inter Press Service News Agency (http://ipsnews.net/) WASHINGTON, Oct 25 (IPS) - Despite an explosion of private investment in the U.S. liquid biofuels industry, taxpayers are contributing around seven billion dollars a year in subsidies which could be better used for other energy- and environment-saving technologies, according to a major new report released here Wednesday. The 93-page report by the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) said the industry is likely to receive even more money -- from eight to 11 billion dollars annually over the next few years -- from federal, state and local authorities if present policies remain in place, despite evidence that their ability to substantially reduce U.S. dependence on Middle East oil or the emission of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere is limited. Moreover, according to "Biofuels -- At What Cost?", the unintended and potentially negative consequences of government subsidisation of the industry are not being taken sufficiently into account. more |
||
| BIODIESEL:
Palm Oil Responsible for Forest Destruction (Bill Kamanu, Letter
to the Editor, Honolulu Advertiser, February 22, 2007) The Feb. 18
article "$61M biodiesel plant outlined" reminded me of Hawai'i's early
days of colonization through deforestation and Big Sugar's monoculture
crop destruction of our once-pristine ecosystem and unique
biodiversity. Palm oil is the primary plantation crop responsible for
rainforest destruction throughout the world. It is destroying wildlife
habitat in Borneo-Sumatra and threatening the Sumatra tiger and
orangutan ape with extinction. Purchasing palm oil to produce 40
million gallons of biodiesel is a substantial amount. No matter where
it is bought, it will affect global supply and demand. Thus, this new
dependency on palm oil as an alternative fuel will only encourage more
deforestation, wholesale loss of critically endangered species' habitat
and the greedily driven destruction and stealing of poor indigenous
peoples' lands and natural resources. Hawai'i's politicians should know
better than to support and encourage this type of environmental
terrorism — maybe it's all about HEI/ASB's plan to control Hawai'i's
new emerging biofuel industry, to fatten its portfolio. Bill Kamanu,
Wai'anae |
||
| House
of Representatives Press
Release (June 20, 2007): Abercrombie
(D-Hawaii)
has joined Congressman John E. Peterson (R-Pennsylvania) as primary
cosponsors of the
National Environment and Energy Development (NEED) Act, a bill
that would allow for much needed U.S. natural gas production on the
Outer Continental Shelf (OCS). ''The allocation of royalties from the production of clean, safe, abundant and accessible natural gas will create the first dedicated funding source – projected in the billions of dollars – for environmental clean-up and restoration,'' said Abercrombie. ''Natural gas is the bridge to a future in which we rely on alternative energy and American fuels instead of imported oil.'' ... The NEED Act – H.R. 2784 – seeks to lift the congressional and presidential moratoria on of natural gas production offshore. The Peterson-Abercrombie measure would provide states the right to drill off their coasts, ultimately ensuring states’ rights. The bill ensures that states control the first 100 miles of the OCS. The first 25 miles would be off-limits, while the 100 mile mark and out would be opened for drilling effective immediately upon enactment.'' www.house.gov/apps/list/press/hi01_abercrombie/energyproduction.html |
||
| Biofuels: Neither Cheap Nor
Green Henry Curtis Executive Director Life of the Land We have a choice. We can rip apart communities and re-ignite water wars here in Hawaii. Or we can buy cheap biofuels on the world market. The problem is that biofuels, like fossil fuels, are only cheap when including financial cost and excluding environmental, social, political and planetary impacts. The article ''Crude Awakening: As Alternative Energy Heats Up, Environmental Concerns Grow'' by Patrick Barta and Jane Spencer (Wall Street Journal, December 5, 2006, page A1) should serve as a wake-up call for the world: ''In Indonesia, Malaysia, Canada and elsewhere, forests are being slashed for new energy-yielding crops or other unconventional fuels. In India, environmental activists say, water tables are dropping as farmers try to boost production of ethanol-yielding sugar. ... Among the world's most fabled islands, Borneo -- which is divided between Indonesia and Malaysia -- is considered by environmentalists to be one of the last great tropical wildernesses. It's home to rare and unusual species, including the wild orangutan, the clouded leopard and the Sumatran rhinoceros. Now, the palm-oil boom threatens what's left. ... As fires burn deep into the dry peat soil beneath Indonesia's forests, centuries of carbon trapped in the biomass are released into the atmosphere. A study presented last month at a U.N. Climate Change Conference in Nairobi showed that Indonesia is the world's third-biggest carbon emitter behind the U.S. and China, when emissions from fires and other factors are considered.'' In a contested case proceeding before the Hawaii Public Utilities Commission (December 11-13, 2006), Hawaiian Electric Company (HECO) stated that they will burn biofuels in their proposed 2009 power plant. HECO also stated they are not in agriculture and shouldn't be held responsible for where biofuels for their proposed plant would come from. Biofuels are more destructive than naphtha when all of the fossil fuel inputs are added together, and when the destruction of ecosystems to make room for energy crops is included. Why go from bad to worse. |
||
| Accounting
for
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Farming is energy intensive. Irrigation is powered by the electrical grid. Fossil Fuel based fertilizers and pesticides are used as inputs. Farm equipment is powered by diesel engines. After the biomass is created, it must be converted into ethanol. Maui Ethanol submitted an application to the Clean Air Branch of the Hawai`i Department of Health for a proposed ethanol facility on Kaua`i. According to their application, each gallon of ethanol created from biomass would require 4.18 pounds of imported Australian coal. In terms of energy content (BTUs), the coal input would account for 58-63 percent of the ethanol output. Picture two processes: (A) 1.2 gallons of oil pulled out of the ground. After shipping, refining and transporting to the retailers, 1.0 gallons are available to the end user as gasoline. The emissions would come from the extraction of 1.2 gallons of oil. (B) Ignoring the energy needed to generate biomass, assume that you need 1.2 gallons of ethanol to have the same energy content as 1.0 gallons of oil, to create the 1.2 gallons of ethanol you use 5.0 pounds of coal, to use 5.0 pounds of coal you must extract 5.5 pounds of coal from the ground. The emissions would come from the extraction of 5.5 pounds of coal and the creation of 1.2 gallons of ethanol. Which does more harm in terms of (1) Greenhouse gas emissions; (2) Environmental destruction; (3) Environmental Justice? (A) 1.2 gallons of oil; (B) 5.5 pounds of coal & 1.2 gallons of ethanol The problem is that ethanol proponents are not even considering the question. Ethanol proponents argue that: (1) Farm energy use should not count towards fossil fuel BTUs needed to make ethanol since the crop would be produced anyway; (2) Depletion of soil fertility should be ignored; (3) Total emissions should be ignored; (4) Cellulosic Ethanol is around the corner (or perhaps 10 years away). It is important to have the ethanol infrastructure in place for the time when genetically-engineered bacteria convert genetically-engineered energy crops into cheap ethanol. |
