|
Britain still supports a
European Union target to get 10% of the bloc's road
transport fuel from renewable sources like biofuels by 2020, according
to a European(British) diplomat source who declined to be named.
But the OECD group of 30 industrialised nations published a
report in Paris on Wednesday saying public support for biofuels
was costly and that the alternative transport fuel did little in
the fight against climate change.
The British diplomat was speaking at the presentation in
Brussels of a biofuel report by Ed Gallagher, chair of Britain's
Renewable Fuels Agency (RFA), whose report last week prompted
London to say it would slow its introduction of biofuels because
of indirect effects on deforestation and food prices.
Britain had no plans to scupper the EU's 2020 target, agreed
by EU leaders last year and awaiting EU Parliament approval but
now under pressure to include tight conditions on social and
environmental impacts.
"The UK government still supports the 10 percent target by
2020 but wants the indirect effects of biofuels to be part of
the sustainability criteria, and the UK wants a rigorous review
of the target in 2013-2014," the diplomat told international news agencies.
A recent World Bank report estimated that, alongside drought
and speculation, biofuels derived from crops such as grains, oil
seeds and sugar were responsible for up to three quarters of
recent hikes in food prices which have hurt the world's poorest.
Global demand for agricultural land would soar by 2020
meaning in future all biofuel demand must come from marginal
land, including use of hi-tech fuels derived from waste like
straw and wood chips instead of food, Gallagher said last week.
"(The EU's) is an aspirational target, rather than a
strictly realistic one," he told Reuters on Wednesday. The
target may still be achieveable using such controls and
so-called second generation biofuels, he added.
RFA Chief Executive Nick Goodall told Reuters: "I know of no
evidence to suggest that prudent observation of carbon and
sustainability standards presents a barrier to the EU achieving
its aspirations.
Governments would do better promoting lower energy
consumption than subsidising biofuels to fight climate change,
the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development said
in a report on Wednesday.
Biofuels were originally hailed as a low carbon-emitting
substitute for fossil fuels, but have since come under fire for
causing carbon emissions as a result of intensive farming
practices or contributing to forest clearances.
The OECD report estimated that support policies including
tax incentives, blending targets and trade restrictions in the
EU, United States and Canada would rise to $25 billion a year in
2013-17, for a reduction of less than 1 percent of emissions
from transport in 2015, from $11 billion in 2006.
Ethanol produced using sugar cane in Brazil yielded the best
carbon emissions cuts versus conventional fossil fuels, it said,
estimating 80 percent carbon cuts using sugar cane compared to
40-55 percent using vegetable oil as in the EU, and less than 30
percent using ethanol from U.S. corn.
Biofuel industry groups wrote an open letter to oil
producers group OPEC on Wednesday underlining the need for
alternative fuels at a time of record oil prices.
The groups' advertisement in the Financial Times did not
address criticisms of biofuels' negative impacts on forests,
land access and food prices.
"That can be true," Robert Vierhout, secretary-general of
the European Bioethanol Fuel Association (eBIO), told Reuters
when asked whether using more European oil seeds for biofuels
could indirectly raise demand for Asian palm oil, threatening
more tropical deforestation.
PetrolWorld 160708
|
