Biofuels. Stir in the wrong direction?

Modern concepts consider biofuels as a green alternative to oil is less harmful to the environment. However, according to two scientists, as expressed by them in the pages of Bioenergetics (GCB Bioenergy), the benefits of biofuels are overrated.

According to researchers, estimates of greenhouse gas emissions from biofuel production and use do not include important information, which led to distortion.

Criticism of scientists focused on the model of life cycle analysis (Life Cycle Analysis, LCA) of biofuel production. Life cycle analysis is used to collect, collate and examine all the factors associated with the production, use and disposal of fuel or product. The authors concluded that the adopted model of LCA overestimates the positive aspects of biofuels compared to fossil fuels. The current assessment ignores CO2 emissions from vehicles running on biofuels.

Supporters of biofuels believe that this carbon should not be taken into account, because he collected plants grown for processing into fuel, and only returned to nature. Critics argue that in this case, biofuels do not reduce the level of carbon in the atmosphere. Biofuels can reduce carbon emissions only if it stimulates further growth of plants or uses for the production of biomass waste, which decompose with the release of carbon anyway.

Revaluation of bioenergy is further enhanced when one considers that there is still little attention paid to emissions of nitrogen fertilizer required for the cultivation of plant material. According to lead study author Dr. Keith Smith (Keith Smith) from the University of Edinburgh: "Emissions of N2O from the soil makes a huge contribution to global warming, which is associated with the culture of production. Each kilogram of N2O in the atmosphere has roughly the same effect as 300 kilograms of CO2 ».

Dr. Smith argues that current methods of life cycle analysis underestimated the percentage of nitrogen in fertilizers, which is actually released into the atmosphere as a greenhouse gas. The authors believe that the observed increase in atmospheric N2O shows that this percentage is actually almost twice that used in assessing the life cycle of biofuels, which significantly changes the results.

Given that the results of life cycle assessment is widely used, researchers Keith Smith and Timothy Sichinger (Timothy Searchinger) from Princeton University, concluded that the overall development of alternative fuels is moving in the wrong direction.

"The best opportunity to make a useful biofuel, is a waste treatment or focus on relatively moist, but very meager soil," - said Dr. Smith. "If bioenergy crops grown on degraded land will be allocated fewer greenhouse gases and more contact. Additional advantages of this approach - biofuels will not compete with food production, textiles and other goods. "