Producing more biofuels to combat climate change will release more carbon gases over the next thirty years than fossil fuels, a new study in the academic journal "Science" reports.

Restoring and protecting forests would do far more to reduce the carbon load in the atmosphere than dedicating vast tracts of land to energy crops, argue Renton Righelato and Dominick Spracklen. Science today published an article by the University of Leeds researchers, "Carbon Mitigation by Biofuels or by Saving and Restoring Forests?"

Creating ethanol from sugar beet, wheat, corn or rapeseed – favorite biofuel sources to mitigate climate change – could actually lead to the earth heating up further, the researchers warn.

"If the point of biofuels policies is to limit global warming, policy makers may be better advised in the short term to focus on increasing the efficiency of fossil fuel use, to conserve existing forests and savannahs, and to restore natural forest and grassland habitats on cropland that is not needed for food," said Righelato, a Leeds professor and trustee of the World Land Trust, a British conservation group.

The team compared the CO2 savings from biofuels with CO2 absorption from forests over a 30-year period. They found that reforestation would sequester between two and nine times as much carbon over 30 years than would be saved by burning biofuels instead of gasoline.

As part of Europe's pledge to fight climate change, the EU has pushed for a switch to green fuels. It has set a target of ensuring that biofuels make up 10 percent of vehicle fuel by 2020. But around 40 percent of Europe’s agricultural land would be needed to grow biofuel crops to meet this 10 percent fossil fuel substitution target. That demand on arable land cannot be met in Europe or in the United States, which would force these regions either to convert existing forests and grasslands into "energy crop" fields or to source from developing countries.

The researchers recommend that governments not clear forests to make way for biofuel crops. Instead they should increase efforts to conserve fossil fuels now in use, and restore forests while researching non-carbon fuels that can be developed for future use. Biomass from woody material should be transformed into fuels in the long term, buy only when done in a sustainable fashion. This sort of biomass could yield far greater amounts of biofuel than wheat, corn or even sugar beet, the researchers claim.

The researchers used a 30-year period for their study because they believe unspecified new technologies that do not emit CO2 will be available after that time. The long-term goal should be to create cars that do not require carbon-heavy fuels to run.

German Press Agency contributed to this report

Very interesting.

Thanks for digging this up!

__________________
05 KC SE Smoke
01 Suzuki 600 GSF
88 Fiero 2M4

Here's another article ScienceDaily: Ethanol And Biodiesel From Crops Not Worth The Energy about biofuels that makes you take notice to the fact that when we talk about energy we also need to look at the amount of energy used to produce it not just the MPG of the finished product.....hmmmmm when you start thinking in those terms it makes you wonder how much energy it cost for those yuppie green talking Prius driving S.O.B's to have their bottled spring water? I bet it's a lot when you consider the weight of the water and the fact it's packaged in plastic. makes you start seeing things in a different light, now I need to go get a glass of natural tap water..................in a glass.

eeeewwww.......

I am by no means a yuppie, tree hugging type 'o dude, but I can't bring myself to drink tap water anymore........sucks I know......but back in the day while running around outside a good ole' drink outta the water hose was heaven!!

__________________
'04 2wd with PRG stuff......



"Wait a minute. What did you just say? You're predicting $4-a-gallon gas? ... That's interesting. I hadn't heard that." --George W. Bush, Feb. 28, 2008

Brita does make a water filter for the tap.

If bottled water is your standard of living, then you should make your own and save a bunch of money as well as plastic trash.

Go to Lowes or Home Depot. Purchase a nice undercounter water filter. Attach one outlet to the ice maker and the other to a faucet at the sink. Use it to fill a pitcher in the fridge and also re-fill those plastic bottles.

In the 15 or so years I've been doing this, I would estimate several thousand dollars in savings.

Red

__________________
2005 Titan KC SE, Helwig, True-Track, ARE MX Canopy

Red you make a good point, BUT, think of all the jobs that would be lost. To name a few: the guy who delivers the bottles to your door, the trash compactor operator at the land fill. The Reverse Osmosis operator at the bottled water plant....... Something like this could start the decline and fall of Western Civilization!

Found another energy related article at the link Squid provided. It covers a new technology that uses solar energy to produce hydrogen. Sounds promising.
ScienceDaily: Cheap And Easy Technique To Produce Hydrogen From Visible Light Is Almost Ready

.