Biofuels and biomass lose favor: Investors beware!

Rachel Smolker, Huffington Post

Having spent the past eight years or so of my life fighting back against large-scale commercial and industrial bioenergy, it feels good to finally see the tides turning, albeit slowly, maybe not always for the right reasons, and perhaps too little too late. But consider that in just the past two weeks there have been some remarkable signs that awareness is growing and policies may be slowly shifting. A few examples:

The DC Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against the EPA, stating the agency has no basis for a three-year deferral that would have exempted CO2 from “biogenic” sources (ethanol, biomass, municipal wastes, landfill gases) from greenhouse gas regulations under the Clean Air Act.

The European Union Environment committee voted to cap the percentage that biofuels made from food crops can contribute to their overall target. They also voted to consider default value “ILUC” (indirect land use change) factors in determining the emissions from biofuel production. While these fall far short of the strong steps needed to stem the tide of destruction caused by EU bioenergy policies, they do at least reflect some glimmer of changing opinion.

A growing chorus of voices in the U.S. is calling to cut back the Renewable Fuel Standard. A Senate bill to repeal the mandate was recently introduced. Those calling for repeal may not have the protection of the environment in mind — they include American Petroleum Institute and their ilk, as well as livestock producers and grocery manufacturers contending with rising costs of corn and soy.

More locally, a long-fought battle against the “Pioneer” biomass incinerator in Greenfield Mass., ended in victory for residents who favor clean air and healthy forests over false solutions. Several other biomass incinerators in the state have already been halted or are on hold after regulations were tightened last year.

A judge in Maricopa County Arizona ruled that burning garbage is not “renewable” energy and thus ineligible for subsidies.

And…

Ten-thousand Chinese citizens took to the streets to protest one of the five waste incinerators proposed for Guangzhou, citing threats to their children’s health.

The food crisis helped bring to light the foolishness of using food to fuel cars. We still hear endlessly repeated the simplistic view that the problem will be solved simply by shifting to non-food crops, eventually, if we can figure out how. But common sense tells us that land, water, and fertilizers are all needed whether the crop is edible or not. And those are in ever shorter supply. Meanwhile, as we are plummeting deeper and deeper into climate and weather extreme chaos, the protection of forests and ecosystems, is urgent. Cutting, burning, and clearing our forests and fields to supply massive quantities of plant materials to electric utilities and refineries appears ever more ludicrous and misguided. Think ancient Mayan civilization collapse.

Will visitors from another world sometime in the future arrive here, piece together what happened and marvel at the idiocy that permitted a species to first contaminate its’ life-sustaining atmosphere by burning fossil fuels and digging up and deforesting the landscape — and then tried to remedy the situation by burning what remained?

Let’s hope the story has a happier ending.

US Navy’s “Green Fleet” sparks praise and cynicism

U.S. President Barack Obama with the Navy’s F/A-18 Green Hornet. Photo: Official U.S. Navy Imagery/ CC by 2.0
U.S. President Barack Obama with the Navy’s F/A-18 Green Hornet. Photo: Official U.S. Navy Imagery/ CC by 2.0

By Lucy Wescott, Inter Press Service

The United States military, an organisation that consumes 90 percent of the country’s federal oil allowance, is trying to become a greener institution.

The U.S. Navy has said that by 2016 it will run one of its 11 carrier strike groups using biofuel. In a test run of the new approach in the Pacific Ocean, a novel mixture of jet fuel, algae and cooking grease powered FA-18 Super Hornets, a type of fighter aircraft.

Within a decade, half of the Air Force and Navy’s fuel needs will be met by alternative energy sources, according to Christopher Merrill, director of the International Writer’s Program at the University of Iowa.

Merrill, who penned an essay for Orion Magazine titled ‘The Future of War‘, suggested that with climate change posing an increasing threat to U.S. national security, another name for this pioneering strike group could be the Great Green Fleet.

The military also believes that the threat of climate change to U.S. security is not simply a temporary trend, Merrill said.

“I don’t view this as a one-off thing, I view this as somebody trying to look into the future, trying to figure out what (we) are going to have to do to defend the country,” Merrill said.

Climate change and security

In 2010, the Department of Defence recognised in its Quadrennial Defence Review (QDR) that climate change and energy will both play “significant roles in the future security environment”.

The military’s look towards a more sustainable future was confirmed by a report released by the Executive Office of the President last month, which affirmed U.S. President Barack Obama’s commitment to lower U.S. greenhouse gas emissions by 17 percent of 2005 levels by 2020.

The report rendered the effect of climate disasters difficult to ignore: last year was the second most expensive year on record for the United States, with 11 weather-related natural disasters costing over 110 billion dollars in damages.

Marcus King, associate research professor of international affairs at the George Washington University, believes that threats from climate change would affect not only the United States through phenomena such as sea-level rise and droughts but the rest of the world as well.

The United States ought to be concerned that other nations, including U.S. allies, “could be constrained because they don’t have (the) adaptive capacity (to deal with climate change),” King told IPS.

Some, such as journalist Thomas Friedman, believe that issues around food security in Syria were the catalyst for the uprising there that began two years ago. And as climate change causes more humanitarian crises, the U.S. Navy will continue to assist in disaster relief and recovery, King pointed out.

“Once you look at global climate change as a threat, Africa has the least resistance…(and) it’s of strategic importance to the U.S.,” King said.

The Department of Defence recognised the potential increase in the Navy’s response to disasters abroad, reporting in the QDR that climate change is one factor “whose complex interplay may spark or exacerbate future conflicts”, along with cultural tensions and new strains of diseases.

Good PR?

But Leah Bolger, formerly with the U.S. Navy and now a peace activist, believes the green move to be more a publicity stunt than a progressive statement signalling changing times.

“I spent my (twenty) years in the military ambivalent about what the military policies were in foreign policy. It was a job…I didn’t really question my part in the military machine,” Bolger told IPS.

Now, however, Bolger called the Navy’s decision to make one carrier strike group green by 2016 “laughable”.

“(The green move is) like a page out of a PR book – something they can put out in their public affairs office to say, ‘We’re so mindful of the environment,’” Bolger said.

Still, one additional advantage of the green move is that the potential demand for alternative fuels could create a new market, Merrill told IPS. Already tax credits are being granted to wind farms, according to him.

“Once that market gets established, it’s likely that you’ll see the kind of innovations that came in the wake of the invention of the Internet,” he predicted.

Nevertheless, a change in the military’s energy consumption doesn’t necessarily mean a change in the behaviour of Americans, who consumed 19 percent of the world’s total energy resources in 2010, according to data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration, despite comprising around five percent of the global population.

Even if Americans knew about the Great Green Fleet, Bolger said, it wouldn’t do much to change their habits.

While the Great Green Fleet doesn’t necessarily improve the operational abilities of the Navy, the impetus is noble, King said. “If they have the ability to create demand (for alternative fuels)… I think that’s great, as long as it’s consistent with national security, which it is.”

About these ads

Thanks to this Spanish town, your car could one day run on poop

Original image by Mark in DetroitFill ‘er up!
Original image by Mark in Detroit
Fill ‘er up!

Holly Richmond, Grist

Poop is good for a lot of things: throwing at your sister, lighting your neighborhood park, and powering everything from your house and spaceship to your nearest sewage plant and margarita machine (how that last one is different from a blender, I don’t know). And now Southwest Spain town Chiclana de la Frontera is adding “fueling your car” to that list.

It’s not as simple or quaint as just cramming crap into your fuel tank. Essentially, poopy water plus sunlight equals algae, which is the basis of the biofuel that actually runs your car. According to Reuters:

The project in Chiclana, called All-gas to sound like “algas” or seaweed in Spanish, seeks to … [become] the first municipal wastewater plant using cultivated algae as a source for biofuel.

While industries such as breweries or paper mills have produced biogas from wastewater for their own energy needs, All-gas is the first to grow algae from sewage in a systematic way to produce a net export of bioenergy, including vehicle biofuel. 

Adds Inhabitat:

[O]nce out of the pilot phase, the plant should be able to produce enough fuel to run 200 cars annually. On top of creating clean fuel, the plant is also cheaper than a conventional sewage plant, making it doubly good for the town.

In order to create the fuel, the plant requires a lot of land — about 10 football fields when all is said and done — and a lot of sunshine. Chiclana de la Frontera fits the bill perfectly because of its sunny location and abundant land. Other cities in southern Spain have their eye on the project, and at least 300 other small towns have been identified that would also be ideal sites for a plant.

Does this mean even poop is a cleaner energy source than coal? Because that’s pretty awesome.