Thursday, June 22, 2017

[biofuelwatch] US study say corn for biofuel has higher environmental cost than using it for food

E&T Engineering and Technology

A comparison of the economic and environmental benefits and costs of using corn as a fuel have demonstrated that the plant may be more effectively used as food.

As the pressure mounts to find renewable alternatives to fossil fuels, biofuels such as corn and sugarcane are increasing being turned to as possible fuels of the future. Growing these biofuels, however, uses a huge amount of land and for many years questions have been asked about whether this space is best used for growing fuel.

A study by a team at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, part of a National Science Foundation project to study the environmental impact of US agriculture, has demonstrated that growing corn for fuel could have hidden economic and environmental costs.

The researchers looked at the broad economics of agricultural production, using a view of the system called "critical zone service", which can be used to analyse the impact of growing corn on the economy and environment.

The critical zone is the permeable layer at the surface of the soil; the composition of this zone is affected by agriculture. Using this view, the researchers were able to turn this impact into a tangible social cost.

"There are a lot of abstract concepts to contend with when discussing human-induced effects in the critical zone in agricultural areas," said Meredith Richardson, a graduate student involved in the project.

"We want to present it in a way that will show the equivalent dollar value of the human energy expended in agricultural production and how much we gain when corn is used as food versus biofuel."

The researchers began by creating an inventory of the resources consumed in corn production, and their economic and environmental cost in terms of energy available and expended. They then quantified the benefits and costs – such as effects on air and water quality, and societal value – of corn being used for fuel and food in terms of critical zone services.

They found that the social and economic worth of food production is $1,492 per hectare. This compares with a $10 loss per hectare when it is used for biofuel.

"Using corn as a fuel source seems to be an easy path to renewable energy," said Richard Yuretich, the National Science Foundation programme director for Critical Zone Observatories. "However, this research shows that the environmental costs are much greater, and the benefits fewer, than using corn for food."

The future of farming and how technology can enable new approaches in agriculture towards solving the world's food and biofuel crisis is a key area which engineers are addressing, with both research and practical applications.


Posted by:


My Privacy...

Tuesday, June 13, 2017

[Biofuelwatch] Biofuelwatch June Newsletter

Biofuelwatch June Newsletter

Biofuelwatch Newsletter June 2017
View this email in your browser

Dear Subscriber,

The UK's election result must be the first in many decades which nobody will be happy with (except, presumably, for the DUP). Sadly, climate and environment hardly featured during the election campaign.  We believe that everybody has a role to play in challenging this discourse, and we will continue to play our part. 

Over the next five years, major decisions about, and investments in, UK energy infrastructure will be made. The pre-election government had an energy policy which effectively tied a coal phase-out to an increase in gas (making fracking 'necessary'), big biomass and new nuclear. We believe that campaigners against all forms of dirty energy and those working for genuine low-carbon renewables, especially community renewables, must unite to oppose this disastrous approach, and to create and help build a better vision. Finally, we believe that there is a greater need than ever for anybody who cares about the environment, climate and public health to unite against the threat that existing protections could be shredded post-Brexit, rather than being strengthened as they need to be.

In this newsletter you will find:

1. Petition against commercial plantings of genetically engineered eucalyptus trees in the southern US;

2. Roundup from #AxeDrax protests in April;

3. Biofuelwatch analysis shows: Wind and solar, not biomass, have been key to reducing UK coal power by 72%;

4. International NGO campaign urges Danish Pension Fund PKA to divest from MGT Teesside's huge planned biomass power station;

5. Biofuelwatch joins Stop GE Trees Delegation to Chile;

6. Biofuelwatch's work on "Biotechnology for Biofuels" and forthcoming reports.
Donate to Biofuelwatch

1. Petition against commercial plantings of genetically engineered eucalyptus trees in the southern US 

Click here to sign the petition

After years of delay, the US Department of Agriculture has released for comment a draft environmental impact statement on genetically engineered eucalyptus. The GE eucalyptus trees were developed by the US company Arborgen, and are engineered to be freeze tolerant, with the aim of expanding their growing range across the southern US. They are also engineered for male sterility.  When Arborgen first petitioned for deregulation back in 2013 there were about 10 thousand public comments opposing deregulation for every one that was supportive.  Not only is eucalyptus not native to the US, but they are potentially invasive and need a lot of fresh water.  They are also explosively flammable.  Planting invasive, water-sucking, flammable trees in the drought-prone southern US states is a bad idea! Perhaps due to the promise of an easy path around regulations under a Trump administration, the process has, after long delay, begun to move forward again.  We need you, wherever you live, to sign on to the petition opposing commercial release of GE Eucalyptus! 
Photo: Global Justice Ecology Project

2. Roundup of #AxeDrax protests in April

On 13th April, Drax held its first ever AGM in York, rather than in London. We were left wondering whether Drax wanted to escape an annual banner protest this time. If so, it failed: attendees were greeted with lots of banners and speeches by environmental justice activists from Yorkshire. At the same time, Drax's two biggest investors, Invesco and Schroders, received a visit from London-based campaigners, with more banners and speakers, and with briefings urging them to divest from Drax. Meanwhile, Liverpool campaigners visited the Port of Liverpool with a banner, since this is where many of Drax's pellets are imported and stored. 

Thanks to everybody who supported the three protests, which were co-organised by Coal Action Network.

Please click here for a full roundup of the three protests.

3. Biofuelwatch analysis: Wind and solar, not biomass, have been key to reducing UK coal power by 72%

See here for Biofuelwatch's new report.

Between 2011 and 2016, UK electricity generated from coal declined by 72%, which is great news for the climate and for communities whose health and environment have suffered from the impacts of coal mining. We decided to find out what has compensated for this massive decline in coal burning. Has it really been mainly biomass, as bioenergy industry sources have implied? Or has it been the rightly feared "dash for gas"?

Read More

Photo: Wind turbines in Ardrossan, North Ayrshire, Vincent van Zeijst, via Wikipedia

4. International NGO campaign urges Danish Pension Fund PKA to divest from MGT Teesside's huge new biomass power station

MGT Teesside has recently started building a huge new biomass power station at Teesport. The power station will burn 1.5 million tonnes of pellets (made from around 3 million tonnes of wood). Around 1 million tonnes of those will be imported from Enviva. Enviva is already Drax's single biggest pellet supplier. The company has been shown to rely heavily on wood from clearcut highly biodiverse and carbon-rich coastal hardwood forests in the southern US - as shown in a new Dutch documentary (with English subtitles).

Read More

Protest against a new Enviva pellet mill proposed in Richmond County, Enviva: This plant is to be built specifically to supply MGT Teesside. Photo: Dogwood Alliance

5. Biofuelwatch joins Stop GE Trees Delegation to Chile

Biofuelwatch has joined a delegation by the Stop GE Trees Campaign to Chile, in support of a week of action against monoculture tree plantations and against the "Tree Biotechnology 2017" conference held by the International Union of Forest Research Organizations (IUFRO). This is the world's the premier gathering of genetically engineered (GE) tree advocates, taking place this year in ConcepciĆ³n.
ConcepciĆ³n was hit badly by this summer's record wildfires, which spread through the plantations of pine and eucalyptus and sparked a movement calling for the end of the industrial forestry model in Chile and for the defense of the land and water. Despite public opposition, the Chilean government is working closely with the plantations industry to develop GE varieties of pine and eucalyptus, which will almost certainly exacerbate the water crisis, soil erosion, and wildfire dangers affecting rural and Indigenous communities in Chile.
A Biofuelwatch campaigner is participating in public forums and protests organised by local activists and land defenders, along with the international Campaign to Stop GE Trees, drawing connections around the rush to develop GE trees as feedstocks for biomass heat and power and ligno-cellulosic ethanol. You can follow the latest on the Campaign to Stop GE Trees' Twitter and Facebook pages - @stopgetrees.
Aftermath of devastating fires fuelled by industrial tree plantations in Chile, which started in January 2017, Photo: Orin Langelle, Stop GE Trees Campaign

6.  Biofuelwatch's work on "Biotechnologgy for Biofuels" and forthcoming reports

Biofuels and the bioeconomy are heavily reliant on biotechnology to genetically engineer crops, trees, algae and microbes. Biofuelwatch has launched a new webpage intended to serve as a resource for people interested in finding out more about the role of biotechnology, what is being engineered, and what the potential risks are.  The webpage currently houses a compilation of briefings and articles, including briefings on specific companies TerraVia/Solazyme, Mascoma and Algenol. Shortly we will be launching two additional reports, on algae biofuels, and on the status of ligno-cellulosic biofuel production. Over the coming year we hope to add further, so check back!  Click here for more information meantime.

Email Marketing Powered by MailChimp

My Privacy...

Wednesday, June 7, 2017

[biofuelwatch] Fwd: Unipers wood burning in Provence power station destroys forests!

Press release from Denkhaus Bremen, SOS Foret du Sud, Rettet den Regenwald and the Association of Critical Shareholders:

Unipers wood burning in Provence power station destroys forests!

(Essen, 8 June 2017) French and German environmentalists criticize the Group's biomass strategy at the first Shareholders' Meeting of the E.ON spin-off Uniper, which takes place on Thursday (8 June 17) in Essen. Uniper is currently equipping block 4 of the Provence coal-fired power station in Gardanne, southern France, on wood burning and is now in the trial phase. From the point of view of environmental organizations, forests in France and overseas are at risk.

"Combustion of wood for electricity production on an industrial scale puts a considerable strain on the atmosphere by emissions of CO2 and increases the pressure on forests. The most stupid solution to our energy problems is the conversion of ancient coal-fired power plants to wood firing, "says Peter Gerhardt of Denkhaus Bremen. Uniper plans to burn over 800,000 tonnes of wood annually in Gardanne. "The energy giant must immediately stop this madness!"

Nicholas Bell of the French action group SOS Foret du Sud traveled to Essen to attend the Uniper annual general meeting. "There is a real danger that species rich natural forests will be degraded – with fatal consequences for the region's biodiversity". Unipers wood burning not only endangers forests in Southern France. According to Uniper, at least half of the wood needed will be imported. "A first shipment of 40,000 tonnes of eucalyptus and acacia wood from Brazil has already arrived," reports Bell.

"Europe's biomass power plants cause ecological destruction even in distant countries," says Reinhard Behrend of Rettet den Regenwald. "Eucalyptus plantations for pellet production are ecologically dead, green deserts."

With an open letter in June 2016, more than 20 international environmental organizations had approached Uniper and demanded the immediate stop of the conversion of block 4 of the Provence power plant to wood burning. Uniper responded with incomprehensible marketing announcements such as "the biomass power plant significantly improves biodiversity on the ground and contributes to landscape management". The company showed no reactions to further questions by environmentalists concerning the wood's origin, among others.

The Critical Shareholders support the protest and call in their counter-motion not to relieve the Uniper board. "The Group pursues a backward-looking business model, harms the environment and the climate and violates human rights," says Managing Director Markus Dufner.

Further information on the internet:
Denkhaus Bremen: 
SOS Foret du Sud:
Rettet den Regenwald:
Association of Critical Shareholders:


Posted by:


My Privacy...