It appears that consideration to land-use changes were not studied in great detail in determining the effectiveness of corn-based biofuel as a viable solution for environmental concerns. The journal Science will soon be publishing accounts from two studies conducted by independent research teams from Princeton University and from the Nature Conservancy that looked at these issues in more detail.
The growing concern is that the solution to use corn-based ethanol in the future will further increase greenhouse gas emissions. Producing ethanol = global warming? That could be the case according to the researchers which included co-authors from Iowa State University, the Woods Hole Research Center and the Agricultural Conservation Economics. It seems unfortunate that this is being reported after a push in the U.S. to increase the use of biofuels in the next decade or so; and it obviously warrants some future study into the questions raised.
The biggest concern is not that ethanol is bad but whether the road taken to get the corn-based ethanol we want as a source of renewable fuel is justifiable. Tearing down forests or replacing current grass- and croplands to produce biofuels is causing more environmental concerns worldwide than solutions.
The Renewable Fuels Association (RFA) voiced its own concern as the headlines seem to put ethanol in a poor light. The message that the RFA and the scientists in the study would both concur on is that which was put forth by a number of scientists in a letter to the President and Congress urging them to take into consideration how biofuels are produced.
The rush to judgment since the news broke is probably premature. It is not necessarily noteworthy news as there is an understanding that this is what we would come to expect of first generation biofuel technologies.
It should be noted that of the 36 billion gallons a year of renewable fuel required by the Renewable Fuels Standard (RFS) in the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, 21 billion gallons should come from advanced biofuels. This translates into what is known as second generation biofuels. With this understanding it is apparent that further studies need to be done on the amount of biofuels produced from first generation biofuels to see if continued production is feasible in the future.
To learn more, read the AP’s article from last week and visit the RFA’s website for more information on biofuel technologies.
