Biofuels – let’s dump them

Mark 12 Comments

By Harry Wood (http://www.flickr.com/photos/harrywood/7115247755/) [CC BY-SA 2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons
Photo: Harry Wood, via Wikimedia Commons
The idea that up to 7% of the fuel you put in your vehicle could come from food crops – not waste but actual food crops – is obscene in a world where people are starving. It’s even more obscene where the calculations show that (for various reasons which I won’t go into now) this policy results in minimal greenhouse gas reductions and probably often leads to increases.

We won’t have to do that any more after Brexit.  So – let’s not do it! we can call this a bit of EU red-tape and green crap if that helps to get rid of it. It’s actually one of the most important examples I know of a well-meaning environmental policy intention leading to an awful result.

See pages 253-56 of Fighting for Birds for more on this subject.

OK, so there’s agricultural reform (which might not happen) and stepping back from damaging biofuels (which might not happen) – now I’m running out of silver environmental linings to Brexit.

[registration_form]

12 Replies to “Biofuels – let’s dump them”

  1. One marker for the future: within the NFU’s ‘Food Security’ campaign it is interesting that it only extends as far as things that don’t make farmers money – like Nature Conservation. Did you hear a single peep from NFU about the food lost to biofuels ? Or the acres and acres covered in solar farms which presumably must make decent money ? Whilst I don’t agree with the ‘Food Security’ argument as presented by NFU, these stealth landuse changes are unacceptable when there are far stronger arguments for sacrificing (a little) food production for biodiversity, flood management and green space for people.

  2. Hear hear to that one.
    Can we please add to that all the stuff that is grown to burn in power plants!

  4. Did you know in my hgv to make it compliant to the EURO 6 emissions level we add an additive called adblue apparently it’s pig urine, useful fact lol

  5. Silver linings …. politicians beginning to evaluate their own performance might see them put their hands up & agree to radical reform of the farce that masquerades as parliamentary democracy?

    Shame on them, but guess who always come out well? Only one has had the grace to fall on his sword, the others well …. they look like they need a boat load of mega expensive civil servants to try to get to the bottom of the mess, what’s an estimate on that? Blank cheque for the next five to ten years? Bet they’re based in London not the north ….

    OK, go on …. you can try to persuade me that we need 650 and the unelected 850. I’m an agnostic if offered facts or evidence &c.

    Reform, mmmh – discuss?

    1. I hear that Liz Truss is backing Boris Johnson. If she works as hard for him as she did for the environment, we might be saved from his premiership.

  6. AdBlue is in fact urea solution. Urea is present in urine but AdBlue is not urine. AdBlue has to be of high purity to avoid poisoning the catalyst it works with, so urine would not be of use.

  7. Pingback: Biofuels – let's dump them | Energy Traders

  8. “obscene in a world where people are starving”

    It is obscene that there are starving people in a world where there is ample food for everyone – but for many reasons they can’t all get hold of it. If there was no wasted food it would be equivalent to increasing yields by ~50% while plant breeders dream of 3%.

    Diversion of resources into biofuel production is but one issue – I find it obscene that it was an issue manufactured by policy.

Comments are closed.