Boeing, Boeing..

Timeframes can be problematic.

Biofuel flying will take off in three years, says Boeing

When these guys, and celeb supporters like Richard Branson, though biofuels were the answer, few would have argued.

Now it is a new ball game.

ps: note 'Will' turns to 'Could'

CATEGORY - BIOFUELS

Time to break this out as a separate category.

And also to note that when discussed before (as it is, often), the archiving separates singular from plurals, so you need to check 'BIOFUEL' and 'BIOFUELS' (see links at end) to get the full collection.

I will... one day... try to bring them all under here, but this is where it will all go from now on.

Sunday Times - Biofuels: Fields of dreams - a fair summary to kick off

BBC - Call for delay to biofuels policy

Guardian - Top scientists warn against rush to biofuel

Guardian - Biofuels: a solution that became part of the problem

Food&Drink.com - Nestle chief warns biofuels threaten food supplies - another take... from a surprising source

The Register - Dave of Solarventi has flagged this up in comments: I think it worthy of a main link: Pork and politics energise the biofuel delusion - I really like their contributors' writing style (erring on the very witty, with a touch of sarky), but the sheer logic that their science base makes for compelling argument and opinion. Plus, even if they may not see it in such terms, they are very much in the vanguard of genuine enviROI+ advocacy. I might also have to lob this in the Compost and FWD categories, too.... assuming he's right.

Had to drop a note:

'And the prize for GW claptrap reporting goes, once again to, the BBC.'

To this statement, at the very least... Amen.

Whatever else one might think about the various issues surrounding 'Probably man-worsened climate change', I am still trying to get around our national broadcaster's total lack of irony.

Around the ice shelf story they had no problem advocating moon burials and a crew flying to Midway Island to go beachcombing for plastic to show how a bag ban will solve the various e-crises.

ps: Back on-topic, kudos for a most worthwhile story for those simply keen to avoid waste and reduce unnecessary greenhouse nasties going up - no matter what - 'in the name of green'.

Beverage Daily - Biofuels policy requires focus on sustainability, says CIAA

Guardian CiF - NEW - Fuelling the debate - no post as yet, oddly

Edie - Biofuel demand 'will increase GHGs'

The Register - Boffinry bigwig puts another boot into biofuels - Obviously not a 'pro' piece. Worth reading for some interesting (and funny) science-savvy comments.

Guardian - Demands for crackdown on biofuels scam - (links in piece to other info, some objective facts) The negatives just keep on piling up, which is a pity, as I am sure that in amongst it all there could be a positive angle to tell.. and embrace. I feel for all those who are trying to make businesses out of doing the right thing, in the right way, but will get tarred by a rather broad brush.

Guardian - Germany drops 'roadmap to biofuels' for cars

Guardian - Poor go hungry while rich fill their tanks - Lumme.. the negatives are piling up. I have to wonder if we are getting the true picture or as extreme a swing away as we had to that got the industry in this pickle.

Observer - Darling calls for urgent review of biofuel policies - That'll crack it, a 'review' is 'called for'.

Telegraph - Biofuel potential for commercially grown grass - rare good news?

Guardian - Biofuels: a blueprint for the future? - Not sure I'd call it a 'debate' as billed, but some views from a couple of bods who should know a thing or two. Trouble is, they are pols.

Newsnight & Indy - via Junkk -

Guardian - Fuelling the food crisis

Indy - Why biofuels could actually mean more CO2 emissions - That's a no form the UK's chemists (well CEO of their society), then.

gas2org - Twenty-Two Biodiesel Myths Dispelled -

Guardian - Brazil rejects biofuels criticism - And how. I have popped the Prez' comment as Quote of the Day

The Register - Royal Navy warships could run on sunflower oil - if fresh - 'Make smoke...d herrings, Number One' Actually, some interesting facts!

SAAB - Fuelling the BioPower argument - Bear in mind that this is from a company who makes a car that runs on the stuff.

Times - Biofuel: a tankful of weed juice

Guardian - The biofuel solution - Were it as simple as inferred

Guardian - Secret report: biofuel caused food crisis - Oh, dear. But shush, it's a secret. And soon there will be another report that says teh exact opposite, I'm sure.

The Grocer - Biofuels to blame for food price rises

Observer - Exclusive: we publish the biofuels report they didn't want you to read - I crank an eyebrow at anyything billed thus, mind.

Guardian - UK biofuel 'not up to standard' - That's alsmost 1 in 5! Whe do I suspect getting it to 38% might get billed by some as 100% improved!

BBC - EU in crop biofuel goal rethink

Times - NEW - Pumping the biofuels, from Rio to the Humber

INFORMATION

BBC Green - Sixty-second-guide-to-biofuels

Guardian - Q&A: Biofuels

Renewable Fuels Agency -
Renewable Transport Fuel Obligation (RTFO)

NEWS/Commercial PR - Renewable energy from the back end of a pig?

I just had to post this, not because of the porcine (omnivore) twist on a usually bovine (me)theme, but any PR with that as a headline gets my vote.

Plus the promise is nifty, too.

As received, E&OE:

Energy company redefines what waste is [ed - ok, that bit is boring]

green energy uk’s innovative electricity generators are creating renewable energy from a variety of waste materials, including vegetable matter, unwanted wood, landfill gas and even pig waste. These materials traditionally would sit in landfill, or as with pig waste, manure on fields, decomposing and giving off greenhouse gasses, but they are now being given extended life and purpose.

green energy uk’s generators, based from Cornwall up to Caithness in Scotland, treat the waste to remove and use the harmful greenhouse gasses to produce green electricity. At a pig farm in Aberdeenshire, pig waste is treated through an anaerobic digester where microorganisms inside break down the biodegradable material to create a green biogas. The biogas is burnt to power a turbine that makes green electricity.

Since 2003, Hereford-based electricity generator Longma [ed - hey... neighbours!] has provided a free waste vegetable oil collection service to schools, colleges, universities, pubs and restaurants in the region. Longma recycles the oil into environmentally friendly biofuels for generating electricity in Combined Heat and Power units (CHP). The electricity made is consumed locally, and the heat generated by the CHP units is used to heat the Longma factory and neighbouring industrial buildings. For every 100 litres of waste oil Longma collects, 90 less litres of fossil fuels is burnt.

green energy uk’s electricity generators using CHP units are utilising the heat they create by directing it locally to warm buildings and keep greenhouses at temperatures that allow for foods traditionally grown and imported from overseas to be grown in the UK. Old-fashioned power stations that use fossil fuel to make electricity also create heat, but this heat is not harnessed as it is with CHP units and is lost into the atmosphere as steam up cooling towers, making them terribly inefficient.

According to Greenpeace reports, “On average, our large, centralised power stations throw away two thirds of the energy they generate…. CHP is the most efficient way possible to burn both fossil fuels (usually natural gas) and renewable fuels (including biomass and biogas). Pretty much any organic matter can be used to produce biogas; we could be reaping energy from farm waste, and from all of the organic waste - like uneaten food - that makes up about half of our landfill.”

green energy uk does not use fossil fuels to make its electricity. The energy company is instead making the most out of what we throw away. Co-founder and chief executive for green energy uk, Doug Stewart, explains "By recycling organic waste into energy, utilising biomass and clean CHP methods, alongside our solar, hydro and wind power projects, we are trying to establish what we think is a stable, sensible, long-lasting energy solution that will maintain the modern quality of life and benefit future generations... In theory the UK has resources to run itself entirely from renewable energy.”

green energy uk has two tariffs. Dark Green is made from 100% renewable sources and has zero carbon emissions. Pale Green is a mixture of renewable electricity, Biomass from waste and green electricity from Ofgem-accredited clean Combined Heat and Power (CHP) generators whose carbon emissions are 65% less than the national average for producing electricity. green energy uk facilitates investment in a wide range of technologies to produce renewable and green electricity. By the end of 2008, 95% of the electricity green energy uk supplies will come from generators only commissioned since green energy uk began in 2001.

green energy uk is the first and only energy company in the UK to offer customers the choice of 100% renewable or 100% green electricity.

green energy uk does not buy or sell any brown energy or energy created by Biomass from food crops.

green energy uk buys from 30 commercial generation sites, broken down as eight green CHP, nine hydro, four wind and nine biomass from waste.

Bio-ethanol - good or bad as a fuel?

Of late there has been a lot of criticism of bio-ethanol as a fuel, especially that derived from what would otherwise be used as food crops. But this article from Business Week questions a few of the criticisms, and points out that the rush, at least in the USA, to produce ethanol from corn (we still call it maize on our side of the pond), has not contributed as much to the increasing cost of corn than is assumed.

A thought provoking article that is well worth a perusal.

Of Food Prices, Population Growth, Climate Change, Biofuels and even Malthus!

A very interesting article from FinFacts covering, well, just about everything you could care to mention! And some fascinating facts........

"we now consume about fifty thousand times as much energy as our ancestors once did" Wow!

And have you heard of Norman Borlaug? They reckon that he has "saved more lives than any other person who has ever lived." Gosh! And I've never even heard of him before!

"US stocks of wheat are at a 60-year low and world rice stocks are at a 25-year low."

"The rise in the price of oil has resulted in the US diverting 20% of its maize/corn production for biofuels and the European Union 68% of its vegetable oil production."

Meanwhile, looking at the world's population figures:-
AD 0001 ~300 Million
AD 1000 ~310 Million (Yes, that's a 10 million increase in 1000 years!)
AD 1500 ~450 Million
AD 1804 ~1 Billion
AD 1927 ~2 Billion
AD 1960 ~3 Billion
AD 1975 ~4 Billion
AD 1989 ~5 Billion
AD 2000 ~6 Billion (Yes, that's a 1 Billion increase in 11 years!)
Today ~6,662,731,966 (At midday today - probably several 100 thousand more in a few hours!)
AD 2010? ~7 Billion?
AD 2050? ~9.2 Billion+?

From a 10 Million increase in a thousand years, to a 10 Million increase over a matter of days! Maybe Malthus wasn't so crazy after all, simply a little ahead of his time. It doesn't look too good really, does it?

Addendum:
At least it looks as if the EU is going to revue the biofuels targets - from the Guardian.

Oooooops!!

This from The Times highlights an issue that is going to really stress producers, refiners and the retail outlets of all within the fuel industry. Just how can you guarantee that the Gov's requisite content of biofuel (2.5% as of tomorrow) comes from sustainable sources?

"An investigation by Greenpeace found that 30 per cent of the biofuel in Tesco diesel came from palm oil. A litre of Tesco diesel typically contains 5 per cent biofuel."

Oh, its not Tesco's fault though ..... "Tesco said that the concentration of palm oil in its biodiesel was the responsibility of Greenergy, its supplier."

"A spokeswoman for Greenergy also initially denied using palm oil but later said: 'It’s a very, very small proportion of our feedstock mix.'"

Interesting to note that Tesco actually owns 25% of Greenenergy though. Isn't it amazing just how incestuous big business is nowadays?

Branson bites back!

I missed this from Wednesday's Guardian CIF - a response from Richard Branson to the sniping comments made by Willie Walsh, CEO of British Airways.

Though he makes his points well, and they are actually DOING something (questionable as it may be), and I do agree with him that looking for viable (important key word) alternative fuels has to be done, there are some quite scathing posts in response.

'Green gold' or problems untold?

Neat headline from a decent and objective analysis of biofuels from CNN International, that clearly and concisely provides a great deal of useful information without the hysterics that our British media tend to add in.

If you take natural habitat and convert it to growing crops for biofuel, it's all about carbon debt that ensues. Some are obviously unacceptable.

"The worst land to convert is tropical peatland rainforest (creating a carbon debt of 840 years) or Amazonian rainforest (320 years) with the lowest carbon debt of 17 years created by converting the wetter woodland-savannahs of Brazil's Cerrado."

Well worth a perusal.

There's what we get told by government...

There's what we get told by media*.
There's what we get told in blogs*.
And then... there's what we chance upon in follow -up letters pages....

Biofuel production is not justified

Now, maybe they are right. Maybe they are wrong.

But it all rather makes my case that whatever we do get 'told' to 'help' 'us' make decsions, it may not be all we need to know to arrive at the right... or at least best-informed ones.

*I blogged on this t'other day.

Peak soil as well as peak oil?

That's just a little snippet from a well reasoned article by George Monbiot, on biofuels. Monbiot argues that many of the crops (and even crop wastes) grown for biofuels actually create a net carbon debt of decades (and even centuries in some cases), and lead to soil exhaustion, not to mention competing with land for food production.

"Removing crop wastes means replacing the nutrients they contain with fertiliser, which causes further greenhouse gas emissions. A recent paper by the Nobel laureate Paul Crutzen suggests that emissions of nitrous oxide (a greenhouse gas 296 times more powerful than CO2) from nitrogen fertilisers wipe out all the carbon savings biofuels produce, even before you take the changes in land use into account. Growing special second generation crops, such as trees or switchgrass, doesn’t solve the problem either: like other energy crops, they displace both food production and carbon emissions."

So just when we were beginning to think that some selected biofuels were the way forward, the counter arguments appear to become more convincing.

"All these convoluted solutions are designed to avoid a simpler one: reducing the consumption of transport fuel. But that requires the use of a different commodity. Global supplies of political courage appear, unfortunately, to have peaked some time ago."

Political courage? Come on George, we haven't see any of that for decades!

Sticking your oar in

I've cut back a lot on stuff that flies around the e-ther via other media, and am especially dubious about sharing the welter of stories that involve research or scientists, but this is worth popping up: Biofuels make climate change worse, scientific study concludes

No 'may' or 'suggests' here. We have a 'make' and a 'concludes'. So I take more notice. And, though noting it is 'just' in a UK quality national, according to The Independent this is the '...first thorough scientific audit of a biofuel's carbon budget.'

And the words used subsequently are not minced: 'damning evidence' ... 'biggest environmental con-tricks' ... 'actually make global warming worse'.

Hold that last thought. enviROI anyone? I take no pleasure in this, but here we have a very telling example of what headlong rushes into 'anything green that must be good' can possibly lead to.

It is to be hoped that we can expect this salutory lesson be applied to ensure the real e-value of all manner of other green initiatives, from wind turbines... to simply banning plastic bags with no thought for the consequences of the alternatives (or lack of).

So I would wish government, activists... and media... would all learn to give pause before the leap on the green band, and/or banwagon as they too often do.

Indy - Michael McCarthy: 'Free lunch' that could cost the earth

Gaurdian - Biofuel farms make CO2 emissions worse

Biofuels not a silver bullet

"Biofuels risk failing to deliver significant reductions in greenhouse gas emissions from transport and could even be environmentally damaging unless the Government puts the right policies in place"

That's from a report issued by the Royal Society which warns that "without the right support, including of the research and development community, there is a risk that we will miss out on developing the biofuels that could bring greater benefits and that we could become locked in to using inefficient biofuels."

Let's hope that our government, for once, listens, takes note, and acts accordingly. The crazy subsidies that the US government put in place for the production of ethanol from corn has already started to cause a disaster. I hope our lot can learn from that. It's not too much to ask, is it?

An Englishman's acre...

This got me to wondering just what one would need to sustain one's family (of 4), acre-wise, when the revolution comes: Ask the experts: The rural consultant

'I was just wondering. Take the future 'situation we might face' to a rather stark conclusion, and what would a family of four need to be self-sustaining?

That is, once it has been ring-fenced and armed against marauding hordes who opted for the weekend break in the Maldives and latest X5 by way of lifestyle investments.'

It's not what you know. It's how you choose to share it.

The climate change 'debate' rumbles on, not always productively. I think this is a worthwhile exchange to share in this regard: Find the error

Journalistic errors, no matter how minor, need to be corrected. But I must say that as I read this, I found myself wondering what the heck was going on (whilst admitting that the error, and its explanations, really stretched this science graduate. Well we are talking over 30 years ago). What the residents of Ely made of it gawd knows.

However, I did note the conclusion, which seemed an epitome of civilised behaviour on all sides.

To me there is a lesson, and that is in addressing the issue of CC it is best to maintain a calm, dignified and factual approach, free of smug 'we know stuff' and relentless, complex links.

Help those seeking knowledge to understand and they will appreciate it. They may even err on acting more proactively on what you have shared.

Guardian - Free energy? It doesn't measure up - By coincidence.

I found this a good reply: "science is fun when you're making people look stupid"
Oh dear. No - science is fun when you're making people - including yourself - less stupid.

I will add it to another I use to inspire my own actions and, where I can those around me: 'A great man (it was a pre-PC era) makes others feel small. A truly great man makes others feel great'

Guardian - A balanced contribution - It's related.. sort of.

Guardian - Cry wolf, but gently - Now who else has been saying something like that (I think I may have phrased it differently though - Don't cry wolf, just persuade via honesty and reason!) Interesting to see the author that inspired my original post coming into the frame. I have used this to add a new search label that is a growing cause for concern - Climate Fatigue. I fear it will crop up again.

When the going gets tough, the tough start labelling

Now I know the uneladed pump is green, but now which shade...? Time To Ecolabel Biofuels?

Quills sharpened, and dipped in...?

An interesting choice for the Sunday Times' review of the Bjorn Lomborg book: Cool It

Richard Girling is eminently qualified and actually I have a lot of time for him, but in view of his environmental advocacy I do wonder whether he could be seen to be approaching it from a balanced viewpoint.

But rely on it I must, as I have not the money nor the time to invest in reading it myself. At least not for a while.

Lomborg’s view is certainly a view. And though it's coming from a different place and leading to different conclusion to mine on best moves, he at least seems to have the spirit of enviROI at heart, where few others do.

But logic certainly does not seem to be his strong point, as this amply nails: ' If we really can’t stand the heat, then he looks forward to “increased access to air-conditioning”. How these powerful appliances can be run without further consumption of fossil fuel is another nice teaser for the technology boys.'

Does this review serve the cause any more than Mr. Lomborg's book? For me, not really. As a poster has indicated: 'I would also suggest that characterizing skeptics as 'nutters' and 'right-wing pressure groups' is evidence of a rather unscientific attitude. And I speak as a left-winger. ' Quite.

And speaking of crass and callous, on the subject that dare not be discussed, I merely note a slight disconnect between corrective mechanisms that nature may already being employing and the advocacy for where more money goes if not to address climate change. I must carefully avoid any opinion one way or the other, but there seems to be some logical (but not moral or ethical or compassionate) issues to consider here.

ADDENDUM - A question was posed, so I replied... and had a wee dig:

'...if one does not already exist. If one is available, please help direct me. Henry Markant'

You can try RealClimate.org.

As with everything in the heated (warmed?) debate cum industry, you have to read what is being said and who/where it's coming from, but as an attempt at looking at the facts and science objectively it's better than most.

Though as it gets more popular the pejoratives from either side are starting to creep in before you ever get to proper analysis, as they have here.

ADDENDUM - The western appetite for biofuels is causing starvation in the poor world
- meanwhile, back at the coalface (I mix metaphors a bit). On the one hand biofuels look like a techno-solution. On the other...

Would sir like the food, or the famine and fuel special?

Every now and again you come across something that really depresses you. This is one such. A comprehensive article on the global pressures on basic food stuffs by the Guardian's environment editor John Vidal.

"Wheat has doubled in price, maize is nearly 50% higher than a year ago and rice is 20% more expensive"

"shortages of beef, chicken and milk in Venezuela and other countries as governments try to keep a lid on food price inflation".

"India, Yemen, Mexico, Burkina Faso and several other countries have had, or been close to, food riots in the last year"

"There are 854 million hungry people in the world and 4 million more join their ranks every year. We are facing the tightest food supplies in recent history. For the world's most vulnerable, food is simply being priced out of their reach."

"The food crisis is being compounded by growing populations, extreme weather and ecological stress, according to a number of recent reports. This week the UN Environment Programme said the planet's water, land, air, plants, animals and fish stocks were all in "inexorable decline"."

Now this is the consequence of multiple factors; climate, drought, weather patterns, over population, but the article firmly points the finger of significant blame at the rush to turn arable land over to the growth of crops for biofuels.

Much as I like the idea of biofuels, providing it can be proven that they are environmentally sound and carbon neutral, both of which some, of late, have been seriously questioned, I simply cannot understand that some can view fuel as more important than food. At the end of the day a human being can survive on a couple of sacks of maize, but will starve, even with a tank full of ethanol, if no food is available.

Maybe its time to start thinking about building the underground bunker again?

What do I owe bio?

Adding fuel to the fire

Like you, I was on board early. What's not to like about anything with the prefix 'bio'? Well, there's biowarfare, I guess, but all the rest seems...seemed.. well spiffy.

I even had myself down for a SAAB when the Volvo (oops, I just read on in your piece) clapps out terminally. Just the small matter of the money. With luck I won't need (with all that word implies) a car by then!

Why does this all smack of yet another set of targets, which the box-tickers have pinned on our backs. Not to mention those less able to ask awkward questions.

CONFERENCE - Biofuels, Newark Notts, 17-18 Oct

MONTH - Next

FIELD: Enviro-related
WHEN: 17-18 Oct, time N/K
WHAT: NEW HOLLAND SPONSORS THE 2007 BIOFUELS CONFERENCE
WHAT... MORE?: A presentation on the role of biofuels in agriculture. A display
of the brand's products will feature prominently outside the
venue, showing a selection of New Holland machinery that can
run on 100% biodiesel, while a team of specialists will be on
hand to give delegates the latest information on the use of
biodiesel in agricultural equipment.
WHERE: Newark, Notts
WHO: N/K
HOW: N/K
URL: www.newholland.com
COMMENTS: It's a sponsored event, so a caution on objectivity

This is posted 'as provided' as a new blog feature.

There's what is. There's what might be. And then there's what probably should be.

I have 'do what?!' sensors. And when I read something like this they get put on alert: ‘Fertilising’ oceans with iron may combat climate change

Now I like science along with the next fellow. I also really like things that can help. But when I see something that 'may' work being written up so factually, especially when it's about a short-term mitigation 'solution' of dubious merit that impacts the rest of the planet, I do wonder why it's up there.

It's only later you get to find out that there are some down sides. Mind you, lobbing a ton of car in to get back 100,000 tons of C02 seems like a deal... if it works. Maybe we could set up a ramp at Land's End. Furthest out gets a prize. I know, a trip to the Antarctic!

Meanwhile this, which I saw in passing, seemed more of a worry: Rapeseed biofuel ‘produces more greenhouse gas than oil or petrol’ - then you read the comments. What to believe?

Tinkers those journos, eh?