Commission sounds note of caution on biofuel

Study admits harmful effects on land use are possible from growing energy crops

Further regulation of biofuel may be needed to ensure that its use does not inadvertently drive up greenhouse gas emissions, the European Commission has signalled.

In a report published on the Commission’s website yesterday (the last working day of the year), the Commission admitted that plant-derived fuel may sometimes be less useful in meeting the European Union’s climate policy objectives than initially thought. A final decision on whether new legislation will be needed has been delayed until July 2011, pending further study.

The latest report was an attempt to get to grips with the unintended consequences of biofuel production on patterns of land use.

In a statement issued to accompany the report, Günther Oettinger, the European commissioner for energy, said: “The potential effects of indirect land use need to be properly weighed in our biofuels policy. It is in our interest to investigate this seriously and ensure to have legislation that avoids negative side-effects.”

In the same statement, Connie Hedegaard, the commissioner for climate action, who shares responsibility for this file, said: “We must not ignore any unwanted impacts… action in the field should follow a precautionary approach.”

In 2008 national government leaders set a target for the EU that 10% of all transport energy should come from renewable sources by 2020. The immaturity of other transport technologies using renewable energy means that policymakers are looking to biofuel to contribute most to meeting this target.

But even before this target was agreed, concern was growing about the knock-on effects from producing and using biofuel, specifically when farmers shift food production into forests or grasslands, because food-growing fields have been lost to growing biofuel crops. This issue, known as indirect land-use change, has caused both agonising and dispute inside the Commission.

Click Here: kanken kids cheap

Ahead of the report, the Commission received much conflicting advice, with 145 groups weighing in to the consultation. The biofuel industry argues that the science on indirect land-use change is too uncertain to justify singling out biofuel for extra regulation. But environmentalists say there is plenty of evidence on the risks of biofuel and are calling for these fuels to carry ‘penalty points’ so that the risks of indirect land-use change are accounted for.

The Commission report strikes a very cautious tone, and refers to the range of scientific findings: bioethanol produced from maize could produce indirect emissions anywhere between 21 grams of CO2 equivalent per mejajoule to 156 g/MJ. Other crops, such as soya, could produce higher emissions.

The Commission promised to take a decision on whether further legislation is needed no later than July 2011.