Fuel of the future

17 May 2007

Every politician loves a win-win situation. When the European Commission proposed in January 2007 a binding biofuels target for the European Union – for plant-derived fuel to make up 10 percent of vehicle fuel by 2020 – member states swiftly and uncontroversially adopted it, writes Stephen Gardner. The biofuels promise is tantalising: greener motoring, a European innovation boost, new markets for farmers. Who could oppose that? Industry is certainly supportive – if the EU can map the path to the biofuelled future properly. Emmanuel Haton, an energy consultant with BP, says the target is "challenging. The question is: how are we going to achieve this?" Nevertheless, he adds, BP is "pretty positive" it can be done. Rob Vierhout, Secretary General of the European Bioethanol Fuel Association (eBio), is looking at potential massive expansion for his industry. Liquid biofuel currently contributes one percent of EU transport fuel. The main question, says Vierhout, is investment support. The EU funds biofuels research and development, but now the EU "needs to put its money where its mouth is" and trigger new production investment. This can be promoted using a range of tools, including EU Structural Funds, state aid, and tax incentives, says Vierhout. Farmers, who will supply the raw material – such as cereals and sugar beet – are also in favour. "Farmers are always looking for new markets," says Gail MacDonald of the British Agriculture Bureau in Brussels. "The price of cereals has been very depressed for the last ten years; farmers are looking forward to the new opportunities." After the gold rush But not everyone is equally convinced. Jorgo Riss of the Greenpeace European Unit says the Commission is guilty of a "lack of joined-up thinking" on biofuels. "The gold rush towards biofuel," if not controlled, can produce more CO2 than it saves from deforestation, as land is freed up for fuel crop production. Palm oil, for example, used for biodiesel, is controversial because peat bogs in South East Asia are being converted into palm oil-producing plantations. This process generates "between two and eight times as much CO2 emissions from damage to peat as the CO2 emissions from the mineral diesel it replaces," according to a United Kingdom based group, Biofuelwatch.   Preventing this will be essential, but nothing exists at the moment to give a green stamp to biofuel crop imports to the EU. "We need biomass in Europe without too many imports," says BP's Haton. "And for imports there will have to be proper certification to avoid biodiversity, social and greenhouse gas disbenefits." Rob Vierhout of eBio concurs. "Sustainable products should be demonstrably sustainable," he says. He points out European agriculture has already moved in the direction of sustainability following EU common agricultural policy (CAP) reform in 2003. Farming subsidies are now linked to good environmental stewardship rather than just production volumes. CAP rules "should apply whatever the end use [of crops]," says Vierhout. "Fuel crops shouldn't have additional obligations." Furthermore, because of the CAP, EU farmers have for a number of years been paid to not over-produce crops, leading to land being 'set-aside'. This land can be used for biofuel crops, says the British Agriculture Bureau's MacDonald. She adds that in the wheat-producing UK, farmers are in a good position to meet the ten percent target, and this can "definitely" be done without knock-on effects on food production. Getting ready to miss the target The technical know-how to process the crops and produce the fuel exists – at least for 'first generation' biofuels produced from feedstocks ('second generation' fuels made from the non-food parts of crops remain the holy grail for the industry). Brazilian cars have run on bioethanol for decades. The CO2 benefit of biofuel over fossil fuel – properly certified – is also demonstrable. Nevertheless, EU countries have so far been slow to act, and are already set to miss one biofuel target. Under the 2003 Biofuels Directive, member states should, on average, achieve a 5.75 biofuels level by 2010. The Commission has already acknowledged this will be missed. Although Germany is on course, every other country is lagging. In Ireland, the 2005 share was just 0.05 percent. Some countries – Belgium, Cyprus, Estonia, and Portugal – failed to even achieve that. This was down to a lack of a binding target and poor implementation, according to eBio's Vierhout. "Member states were too late in putting in place incentives to make it possible," he says. But, he adds, outlooks are changing. "Oil prices are going up; we have climate change reports that are dramatic. We need to decarbonise our society." Vierhout can cite a host of new projects. Belgium is planning a bioethanol plant that will itself be powered by biogas generated by waste elements of the input crop. Spain is working hard on second-generation biofuels. Sweden is using waste incineration to power its biofuel production. In the UK, meanwhile, Tesco is converting its fleet to run on a 50 percent biodiesel blend, supplied by biofuel company Greenergy, in which the supermarket giant has a 25 percent stake. Engines can run without problems on the blend, says Greenergy's Alex Lewis, but current legislation forbids selling blends with more than five percent biodiesel on the forecourt. "Fuel standards need to change," she says. Greenergy makes a monthly carbon declaration based on the amount of biofuel it supplies and an independent assessment of the CO2 saving this represents compared to an equivalent volume of standard fuel. In February/March 2007, for example, Greenergy supplied 15.5 million litres of biofuel, meaning a claimed saving of nearly 29,000 tonnes of CO2. "Overall the biofuel we sell has a positive carbon balance," says Lewis. "Suppliers will eventually have to achieve a certain carbon benefit from biofuels." But campaign groups say this, though worthy, does not address fuel demand. Overall emissions might continue to rise, despite the biofuel injection. More sustainable would be a general switch to decarbonised fuel, with the oil industry reinventing itself. Needless to say, there is massive entrenched resistance to this. Even BP, which Emmanuel Haton says is "in the leading pack" admits its investment so far has mainly been in research, with no industrial facility for biofuels at present. eBio's Vierhout says the oil firms have "fought" against biofuels for years but now a wind of change is blowing. Oil companies, he says, faced with climate change fears and a less friendly legislative environment, "have finally accepted the idea that they need to use biofuels." A version of this article originally appeared on Climate Change Corporation.

 

< Prev		Next >