Thursday - 28 August 2008

Comment

Growing pains

Published: 08 July 2008  04:20 PM
Source: The Engineer Online

It’s hard to think of any issue whose image has changed as fast as biofuels. Barely a year ago, they were being lauded as the great green hope: a source of fuel that doesn’t depend on accidents of geology, promising cheaper, high-quality fuel which doesn’t contribute to carbon emissions. But their dependence on purpose-grown crops has led to pressures on land use which, according to no less an authority than the World Bank, is the main reason for rocketing food prices around the world. Biofuels have gone from hero to villain.

Amid worries over food shortages and the destruction of huge tracts of rain forest to grow fuel crops, governments have begun backing away from their earlier enthusiasm for biofuels. The European Union is about to vote on whether to scrap its commitment to source 10 per cent of transport fuel from biofuels by 2010. In the UK, the government is digesting a report from the Renewable Fuels Agency which predicts that current policy will push grain prices in the EU up by 15 per cent, sugar by 7 per cent and oilseed by 50 per cent; the government is now considering amending its own targets. And in global terms, World Bank president Robert Zoellick has urged the G8 leaders to rethink the tariffs, tax breaks and subsidies that are fuelling the growth of biofuel crops.

It all smacks of business and legislation running ahead of science and technology. Many of the developers of biofuel technology have insisted that first-generation biofuels — using plant oils as a raw material for a diesel-like fuel — could only ever have been a stepping-stone to wider exploitation of biofuels. Even five years ago, the message from the engineers was that the true potential lay in second-generation biofuels, derived from breaking down cellulose, which could be obtained from the by-products of food production — rice husks, wheat straw, corn stalks and sugar cane.

Further research is being carried out on using algae to produce oils that can be turned into diesel — often referred to as third-generation, but actually another form of first-generation. This, it’s claimed, would ease pressure on agricultural land even further, as the algae could be grown at high density in ponds or bioreactors. They could even be used to capture carbon dioxide, although it’s moot whether this would reduce greenhouse gas emissions. If you feed algae with CO2 from a power station, then use the algae to make fuel, which you then burn, surely you’re just delaying the emission of the gas, rather than locking it away?

These concerns aside, it seems premature to announce the death of biofuels. Clearly there’s a great deal of potential in the technology — as long as policy makers take careful note of the state of the technology and consider all its implications. But it’s important that the whole concept of biofuels doesn’t become tainted with the badge of environmental bogey-man. That could lead to funding cuts for the research that could ease concerns over land competition and food prices, and that wouldn’t be to anyone’s advantage.

Stuart Nathan

Special Projects Editor

Comments

Comments - The following comments have been posted in response to this article

"If you feed algae with CO2 from a power station, then use the algae to make fuel, which you then burn, surely you’re just delaying the emission of the gas, rather than locking it away?" Just the same as if you grow any kind of crops: you release CO2 in the end. The thing is that you would be "recycling" that CO2 and maybe you could capture it afterwards...
Al: 10 Jul 2008

Very informative article - an understanding of the whole bio-fuels issue will be of benefit to all. Shame the wider media machine doesn't trouble itself to enlighten the general public on such matters!
Claire: 10 Jul 2008

Well this is a surprise! The most basic principles of biological populations are at work and most are ignoring it. The only lasting solution is for the world population to match the ability of the eco-system to support it. It is basic science - and sense! Current estimate is about 20% of today’s world population is sustainable with an acceptable quality of life. The nice thing about this problem is that it will be resolved and the planet will survive (maybe without humans – but what the heck give the reptiles another go!). If we don’t resolve it, then nature will – there is no other alternative to increasing world population.
Brian: 10 Jul 2008

A very interesting article showing the old theory of 'less haste more speed'. Ultimately, I trust someone will pull it all together and look at the big picture rather than what appears to be happening at present with the world growing and selling biofuels to the detriment of food.
barry mallett: 10 Jul 2008



Latest Jobs
Job TitleJob LocationJob Position
Process Operations Manager ...United KingdomPermanent
Process Operations Manager ...North WestPermanent
ELECTRICAL PROJECT / PROCESS ENGINEER -...WorldWidePermanent
Food Safety Manager - Food Quality...South EastPermanent
Architect...BerkshirePermanent
Maintenance Work Supervisory Officer...United KingdomPermanent

User Account Logon Form

Quick Search Form

Advanced Search

Adverts

The Magazine
Subscribe
This Issue >
Digital Edition >
Free Copy >
Break Line

Engineering Talk

Search the world's number 1 design news source... updated daily

Break Line




Break Line
Recruiter of the Week AMECBreak Line
Break Line