Comments on: Are biofuels responsible for the sharp spikes in food costs? http://www.carboncommentary.com/2008/06/03/85 A critical appraisal of issues in the move to a low-carbon economy Sun, 14 Mar 2010 13:44:40 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Robert Palgrave http://www.carboncommentary.com/2008/06/03/85/comment-page-1#comment-586 Robert Palgrave Thu, 12 Jun 2008 11:35:43 +0000 http://www.carboncommentary.com/2008/06/03/85#comment-586 The tragedy of this is the double whammy - as prosperity grows, diets move towards meat, and transport moves towards the car. Both increase pressure on the finite land available for agriculture if biofuels are being grown. The market won't solve this problem, regulation and intervention are required. Biofuels for transport will not make any material difference to climate change - if they save carbon emissions now (doubtful), all they will do is perpetuate the Internal Combustion Car Age for a few more years until the oil does really get too expensive. We'll still end up burning the same amount of mineral oil and putting that carbon into the atmosphere - delaying it momentarily certainly isn't going to solve global warming. Biofuels send the wrong message about cars - we should be designing and marketing replacements for the internal combustion engine car, not extending its life. New technologies should be used to create a situation where it is possible to leave fossil fuels in the ground, not to perpetuate the old technologies which are eventually going to become obsolete. And biofuels for transport are not the only issue. UK organisations are starting to use biofuels to generate electricity and to fuel Combined Heat and Power stations - Beckton (19MW) amd Southampton (50MW) for example. From April next year, I understand the UK government intends to give greater support, i.e. more ROCs, to ANY bioenergy use for CHP (even palm oil from peatlands) than for onshore or offshore wind energy (http://www.berr.gov.uk/files/file43545.pdf) Currently the sustainability criteria in the Renewable Transport Fuels Obligation (RTFO) only apply to biofuels sold for transport use, which is a nonsense. Robert The tragedy of this is the double whammy – as prosperity grows, diets move towards meat, and transport moves towards the car. Both increase pressure on the finite land available for agriculture if biofuels are being grown. The market won’t solve this problem, regulation and intervention are required.

Biofuels for transport will not make any material difference to climate change – if they save carbon emissions now (doubtful), all they will do is perpetuate the Internal Combustion Car Age for a few more years until the oil does really get too expensive. We’ll still end up burning the same amount of mineral oil and putting that carbon into the atmosphere – delaying it momentarily certainly isn’t going to solve global warming.

Biofuels send the wrong message about cars – we should be designing and marketing replacements for the internal combustion engine car, not extending its life. New technologies should be used to create a situation where it is possible to leave fossil fuels in the ground, not to perpetuate the old technologies which are eventually going to become obsolete.

And biofuels for transport are not the only issue. UK organisations are starting to use biofuels to generate electricity and to fuel Combined Heat and Power stations – Beckton (19MW) amd Southampton (50MW) for example.

From April next year, I understand the UK government intends to give greater support, i.e. more ROCs, to ANY bioenergy use for CHP (even palm oil from peatlands) than for onshore or offshore wind energy (http://www.berr.gov.uk/files/file43545.pdf)

Currently the sustainability criteria in the Renewable Transport Fuels Obligation (RTFO) only apply to biofuels sold for transport use, which is a nonsense.

Robert

]]>