Pete Bethune, founder and skipper of Earthrace

Earthrace is committed to the promotion of renewable fuels such as biodiesel and ethanol, and to encouraging healthy debate on the adoption of such fuels on an international scale.  One of the great advantages of biofuels is that countries and their regions can utilise the resources and crops most suited to their area to produce them.  Some countries can potentially harvest a large percentage of their needs locally, while others can harvest less depending on their needs. 

Overall however, the planet simply does not have enough land to grow our total transport energy requirements.  So biodiesel and ethanol will only ever be a part of the transport energy mix - they should certainly not be considered as a silver bullet.  We should ensure we use waste and by-products first (such as used cooking oils and tallow), and adopt dedicated energy crops with caution.  The industry must also research new feedstocks such as algae that, in the long term, may take away the pressure on farmland. 

Biofuels in most countries have a positive effect including:

• reduced emissions
• reduced green house gases
• retains fx earnings at home
• increased employment
• reduced dependence on middle east
• diversity of fuel options as oil increases in price

biofuels and deforestation

One negative factor is the cutting down of rainforest (mostly in Malaysia, Indonesia and Brazil) to plant energy crops that are exported.  Earthrace is opposed to this, although the challenge to resolve this I believe lies in the west recognising there is a cost for CO2 emissions, and paying for this, part of the funds of which should go to the above countries to encourage them to retain their rainforest which we need as a carbon sink. It is positive though to see them developing biofuels that are used domestically.

However, indigenous people have a valid point when they argue that they have every right to develop their own lands for crops just as the western world has most of their land dedicated to farming. 

 It is the developed countries in North America and Europe that emit most of the CO2, and it these same countries that have already cut down the bulk of their forests.  Maybe it is unfair to expect developing economies to simply stop the development of additional farmland when we’ve already used up most of our own land.  Thinking globally however, the world needs countries such as Mayalsia and Brazil to maintain their rainforests because they are of such significance as carbon sinks.

The answer potentially lies in western countries recognising CO2 as a pollutant, paying severe penalties for its emission, perhaps in the form of carbon credits, and then ensuring that such payments go to rainforest countries to ensure the carbon sinks remain.  Certainly the continued clear-felling of rainforest is detrimental to the planet’s effectiveness in absorbing our CO2 emissions, so it is highly desirable we keep as much of the forests as we can.  Without such payments of compensation, it seems likely that clear-felling will continue. 

It cannot be argued against that some biodiesel production is far from sustainable, but that does not diminish the very real environmental and economic advantages that most biodiesel production offers.  Biofuels remain a key element in our journey towards sustainable transport energy, and when combined with new feedstock options and technology developments, they can – and should - become an integral part of the world’s energy mix.

Food versus energy crops

The energy versus fuel debate is also complex.  Most areas producing biofuels do so because there is a financial incentive.  It has a positive economic impact because increased returns come to the farmers. This allows them to in turn invest more in their farms, while also leaving more money in rural regions.

It can lead to increased food prices.  Most agricultural based economies see this as positive, as it means they are earning more overseas.  In some cases however increased food prices can impact on poorer communities.  Often there is a period of stabilisation when new markets appear.  A good example is tea, which is grown extensively in Sri Lanka and India.  When these markets first opened up it impacted heavily on the poor, who had increased food prices because tea was taking up so much of the land.  with time however it stabilised, and tea is now a key component in Sri Lanka’s financial success.

A similar example exists with coffee.  Tea and coffee, it should be remembered occupy many times more land area than biofuels currently do, and these also impact food prices.  so does flower and tobacco production.  if the problem is lack of land for food, then realistically we should also stop production of tea, coffee, flowers, tobacco, and many other non food harvest.

The solution lies in countries recognising where they have specific areas of poverty that need addressing and limiting biofuel production if necessary, to ensure sufficient food production.  these are the exception though, as most countries find strong economic benefits from biofuiels.

We also need to keep in mind biofuels have been produced now for only around 10 years, and the industry has a long way to go to improve feedstock types, locations, production efficiency.  Also we are only on generation I currently. Generation II biofuels, based on by-products, biomass and algaes will be much more easily integrated into economies because they require virtually no land.  But the industry has much to learn and many improvements to make.  Food v Fuel is the teething problem of an industry still in its infancy, and that has many areas of improvement to come/.

Jatropha

Jatropha is a small shrub, robust and to be cultivated arid soil and in very dry climates.  Certain countries in Africa, like Mali, already produce this plant, but for other purposes, mainly to stop soil erosion and shifting sand dunes.

Cattle do not like Jatropha leaves or stalks, so they do not graze in Jatropha hedges, which is why it is also useful to use as a living barrier to protect food-producing crops from cattle.

It’s oil also has a use for making excellent organic manure. Traditionally, women in rural areas also used Jatropha as medicine and to make soap. The traditional soap-making process takes a lot of work and produces small amounts of soap of relatively mediocre quality.

However, if one uses Jatropha oil, either alone or combined with other local plant oils like shea butter, large quantities of better quality soap can be produced. Women may sell this soap on local markets and in nearby towns and thus increase their income using local resources.

Jatropha could be a suitable answer to deforestation. In many African countries, deforestation is a serious problem. We are cutting down our forests for fire wood and charcoal. If we could use Jatropha and other plants to make combustible matter, we would stop depleting our forests. However, it is difficult to predict what would happen if large amounts of African soil were planted with biodiesel products, such as Jatropha. As a result of the current high price oil, there is some concern that farmers could plant biodiesel cultivation on land which they used to grow food-producing crops.

Jatropha can increase family's income, reduce certain household energy costs, contribute to the prevention of soil erosion and increase fertility. It has all these advantages and it is easy to grow, even in dry regions where it is difficult to grow food-producing crops.

Interview with Co-Founder of Greenpeace

Video Windows                Video MAC