Nature Conservancy study questions benefits of biofuels

February 15, 2008—A new Nature Conservancy study finds that converting land for biofuel crops results in major carbon emissions, actually worsening the problem of global warming instead of mitigating it.

The first-of-its-kind study will be published in Science later this month and was posted online recently.

“This research examines the conversion of land for biofuels and asks the question ‘Is it worth it?’ Does the carbon you lose by converting forests, grasslands, and peatlands outweigh the carbon you ‘save’ by using biofuels instead of fossil fuels? And surprisingly, the answer is no,” said lead author Joe Fargione, a scientist for The Nature Conservancy.

According to research, the conversion of peatlands for palm oil plantations in Indonesia resulted in the greatest carbon losses, or ‘debt,’ followed by the production of soy in the Amazon.

These findings coincide with observations that increased demand for ethanol corn crops in the US is likely contributing to conversion of the Brazilian Amazon and Cerrado (tropical savanna). American farmers traditionally rotated corn crops with soybeans, but now, they are planting corn every year to meet the ethanol demand. Instead, Brazilian farmers are planting more of the world’s soybeans—and they’re deforesting the Amazon to do it.

Researchers did note that some biofuels do not contribute to global warming because they do not require the conversion of native habitat. These include waste from agriculture and forest lands and native grasses and woody biomass grown on marginal lands unsuitable for crop production. The researchers urge that all fuels be fully evaluated for their impacts on global warming, including impacts on habitat conversion.

For more information, see the Nature Conservancy Web site.

Topics

Share this article

LinkedIn
Instagram Threads
FM Link logo