Report - U.S. Lacks Standards to Keep Biofuel Industry From Harming The Environment
A report from the Office of Biobased Technology from the University of Michigan says that the United States lacks the standards to ensure that producing biofuels from cellulose won’t cause environmental harm.
As governments the world over move to make biofuel mandates, concessions and tax breaks for corn farmers and biofuel industry leaders, a group of scientists is calling for sustainable practices in an industry that that is being driven as an alternative to fossil fuel independence.
- » See also: Congress to Vote on Cash for Clunkers Program
- » Get Gas 2.0 by RSS or sign up by email.
Phil Robertson, Michigan State University professor of Crop and Soil Sciences and lead author of the paper “Sustainable Biofuels Redux” published in the Oct. 3 issue of the journal Science summed it up:
“Environmental standards are needed now, before the industry moves out of its research and development phase. With production standards and incentive programs, cellulosic biofuel cropping systems could provide significant environmental benefits. With production standards and incentive programs, cellulosic biofuel cropping systems could provide significant environmental benefits.”
“Science has shown that almost all intensive grain-based cropping systems, as currently managed, cause environmental harm. We can soften the environmental impacts by using strategies such as no-till farming to minimize erosion and planting cover crops to sequester carbon and reduce nitrogen and phosphorus run-off. But few farmers use all of the best available practices because there are limited incentives –and many disincentives – for them to do so.”
“As the technology to make biofuels from cellulose is refined and commercialized, we believe it’s crucial that the industry and legislators adopt policies that reward environmentally sustainable production practices for cellulosic biofuels.”
There are several organizations that have started to tackle this recently, including the Sustainable Biodiesel Alliance, which we’ve covered at Gas 2.0 before. Hopefully, analysis like MSU’s will give the organizations the push they need to become successful.
Photo: Ken McCown under a Creative Commons License
Source: Office of Bio-Based Technologies, Michigan State University
I believe in the longer term, we’ll be using solar, geothermal, and wind. In the intermediate bridge to that would be cellulose. Fortunately we’ll not need grains for that, since anything with cellulose will work, though some plants are better suited than others.
So, as an intermediate bridge to cleaner fuel, maybe we won’t have to worry so much about emissions. As it stands, there are no emission standards except for larger metropolitan areas, and there are no standards at all for ships, lawn mowers, boats, leaf blowers and a number of other examples.
Scientific American put out a plan for solar energy which could take the place of oil and nuclear energy. Complementing that is wind. There is a company, Rasertech, that is a prime example of geothermal(and no, I have connection with the company.) With these, there’ll be no need for emissions at all. Clean and renewable energy for the future should be our goal, especially since energy is a national security issue. And the money we save by not buying millions of barrels of oil is a huge plus.
Scientific American solar plan:
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=a-solar-grand-plan
Rasertech:
http://www.rasertech.com/
US Department of Energy; Geothermal:
http://www1.eere.energy.gov/geothermal/
US Department of Energy; Wind and Water:
http://www1.eere.energy.gov/windandhydro/