Fuel, food or fraud: New study on the ethics of biofuel
Can a new generation of biofuels ensure we don’t increase greenhouse gas emissions and take food from the poor to fuel our cars?
–Guardian
The issues surrounding biofuels are complicated and confusing. While all biodiesel or ethanol burns cleaner than fossil fuels, some biofuel production creates as many or more greenhouse gas emissions than regular gasoline or petrol. Biodiesel from palm oil, for example, turned out to be environmentally hazardous due to the utilization of slash and burn agriculture and clearing of rainforests in Indonesia and Malaysia. In some cases, crops which are traditionally food sources are used to make biofuel, resulting in an ethical quandary commonly known as the ‘food vs. fuel’ debate.
Among ‘first generation’ biofuels, sugarcane seemed to come out looking pretty good, while corn, soy and palm are generally seen as being on the bad side. Second generation biofuels sourced from algae and biomass show promise as they do not use food sources or traditional agricultural means. As technology progresses within the industry, hopefully biodiesel producers and innovators will learn from the mistakes of the past.
Read more about the new ethics of biofuel in this blog from the Guardian.
by Graham Land
Additional resources:
Switchgrass – America’s own biofuel. But is it any good?
The biofuels controversy continues: should we get off the bandwagon?
Palm oil = bogus ‘biodiesel’ – Indonesia now world’s 3rd highest emitter of greenhouse gasses
Tags: biodiesel, biofuel, emissions, ethic, food, fuel, greenhouse, Guardian, Indonesia, oil, palm









You can also log in to post a comment.