| There’s been a lot of talk lately
about using agricultural products and byproducts to generate
energy—so-called “biofuels.” They’re touted as environmentally
beneficial and even patriotic. But recent studies have exposed major
flaws in the environmental and energy independence claims made by
biofuel backers. These studies also raise serious concerns about
rising prices and shortages in world food supplies that may result
from directing grains and soy toward biofuels. What has not been
discussed much is that biofuels may also spell disaster for millions
of animals.
Stampede of support
for biofuels
Various agricultural crops or
wastes can be used for energy, in making fuel for vehicles or as
inputs in electricity generation. In the United States, corn is used
to make ethanol, a liquid fuel usable for cars. Diesel fuel from
agricultural products, referred to as “biodiesel,” sometimes
involves creating a gas from manure, then combining it with oil from
animal fat or plants (often soybeans or corn). Animal wastes are
also used to generate electricity in methane digesters and
incinerators.
Supporters claim these various
energy forms have multiple benefits. Biofuels, they say, cause less
pollution than fossil fuels—so there will be cleaner air and less
global warming. They also say biofuels are a smart use of resources
because they are made from “renewable” crops, or from agricultural
wastes like manure. Finally, biofuel backers often argue that using
agricultural products will reduce our dependence on fossil fuels
from foreign countries (especially post-September 11) and help us
achieve energy independence. (That’s where patriotism comes in.)
These myriad purported benefits have helped build broad political
support. In 2005, Congress mandated US production of 7.5 billion
gallons of biofuels by 2012. In 2007, President Bush quadrupled the
goal in calling for 35 billion gallons of biofuels by 2017. To
support a domestic industry, Congress has heavily subsidized
biofuels and imposed a 54 cent per gallon tariff on imported
ethanol.
Inefficient
energy
However, not all biofuels are wise
public investments. For one thing, they tend to be terribly
inefficient ways to produce energy. Ethanol, for example, yields 35
percent less energy per gallon than gasoline, and a full acre of
farmland produces only 375 gallons. Cornell University professor
David Pimentel has calculated that even if we committed 100 percent
of the US corn crop to ethanol, it would replace only 7 percent of
vehicle fossil fuel usage. And a 2007 analysis in the journal
Science concluded that substituting just 10 percent of the world’s
fossil fuels with ethanol and biodiesel would require 43 percent of
US croplands and 38 percent of the European Union’s croplands.
Equally inefficient are animal
manures in methane digesters, incinerators and biodiesel plants.
Manure simply does not contain enough energy to produce
cost-effective power. Research at Iowa State University and
elsewhere shows that these expensive projects are generally not
viable without large public subsidies, and are likely to remain so
in the future. |
