Shedding light on biofuels
by Simon Handby in Your car on 16.01.08
Low-energy light bulbs had a bad start to the year, as fears that they may contribute to migraines and skin complaints gave way to alarm over mercury used in the bulbs’ construction.
This week it seems it’s the turn of biofuels to fall from grace, after the Royal Society said on Monday that they were “not the silver bullet” for sustainable transport, and called on the government to encourage use of fuels with the lowest emissions.
Also on Monday, the EU’s Environment Commissioner conceded that the EU hadn’t foreseen the problems that its 10% biofuels target would create: many sources attribute rising food prices to the use of food crops to make biofuels, while the cultivation of fuel-specific crops is said to be increasing the rate of rainforest destruction.
Yesterday’s Independent asked: “Can biofuel help prevent global warming, or will it only make matters worse?” The paper’s question-and-answer article went on to explain that: “The right sort of biofuel crops, grown in the right way and in the right place can be better for the environment in the longer term than burning fossil fuels.”
We picked up on the National Geographic’s comparison of biofuel crops in October, since which switchgrass, a promising crop not mentioned in the Geographic’s article, has come under the spotlight. Last week, BBC News reported US research showing that switchgrass alcohol produced 540% more energy than was used in its manufacture.
It seems that despite the bad news there’s still light on the horizon for biofuel, then. Even if we’re no-longer sure which bulb it’s using.
IMAGE by Flickr user Doctor Swan
Add your comment