Biofuels

Ernst and Young reported to (ECOVAST Member organisation) CRC (the Commission for Rural Communities, England) on the government budget 2008:

The UK Government announced in the Pre-Budget Report 2005 that it would introduce the Renewable Transport Fuel Obligation (RTFO) from 2008. The existing duty differential for biofuels has limited scope to recognise different biofuels, whereas the newer RTFO will provide a sharper environmental focus through its sustainability criteria. To encourage the development of the cleanest, most sustainable biofuels the duty differential for biofuels will cease in 2010.

Biofuels produced from biomass such as plants could help reduce both the world’s dependence on oil and CO2 production. However their use is heavily debated and the impact on agriculture and rural communities is unclear.

Phil Turner (who was unable to attend the CRC meeting on the Budget) made the comment that follows:

Financial incentives for use of biofuels offer confidence to those who make investment in farming, managing and processing biomass and seek alternative sources of income from land and woodland. The sustainability criteria would be welcome if they are sufficiently fine tuned towards benefits.

There is much concern and debate on the overal reduction or otherwise of CO2 and other greenhouse gas arising from growing crops for biofuel to be used in vehicles.

Blanket incentives, such as the imminent requirement of a percentage of biofuel content in fuel purchased from filling stations, because they seek large scale supply, tend to encourage large investors. That tends in turn to lead to sourcing biofuels globally (accelerating the competiton between land for food and that for fuel production, clearing forest to create land for fuel crops) which are counter sustainable.

Locally sourced biofuels should be considered for incentives subject to clear sustainability criteria.

An example from Sweden (from a report to CRC on the 2008 Swedish Rural Parliament) http://www.trippus.se/eventus/userfiles/6035.pdf

A pioneering scheme near Trollhättan, Sweden, pipes the methane from animal waste digesters to an ‘upgrading station’ 50 km distant on the edge of town ( a plant that cleans out the sulphur content) and distributes the gas to town suburbs and back to rural areas by parallel pipeline and road tankers. There are 18 farmers with digesters and all are shareholders of the 50 million SK project (£5 million). The 20 GWH is equivalent to 2 million litres of diesel fuel. Further penetration into Trollhättan would give a potential of 120 GWH. www.innovatum.se

Arthur Spiegler has drawn attention to the following site http://www.biomeiler.at/ GOOGLE can give an English translation. Arthur says:...a very interesting visit and talk about the possible use of cut undergrowth, remnants of forest maintenance or the gardening of communities. Have a look at: www.biomeiler.at Although this information is in German you will find a link to an English text (on the left side of page 1) and above that a film. Again in German but the pictures are speaking a lot for themselves. May be you can find other links for English users. This I think a very convincing not-hightech facility. Phil says: - I LOOKED AT THE WEBSITE. WOOD-WASTE AND COMPOSTING FOR LOCAL ENERGY SUPPLY AND EVEN SMALL SCALE VEHICLE FUEL PRODUCTION IS VERY MUCH A POSITIVE WAY FORWARD

http://www.odi.org.uk/nrp/NRP107.pdf

Overseas Development Institute

Biofuels, Agriculture and Poverty Reduction

Leo Peskett, Rachel Slater, Chris Stevens and Annie Dufey

The development of biofuels has generated vigorous debate on economic and environmental grounds. Our attention here is on its potential impacts on poverty reduction. The potential is large, whether through employment, wider growth multipliers and energy price effects. But it is also fragile: it will be reduced where feedstock production tends to be large scale, or causes pressure on land access, and its success can be undermined by many of the same policy, regulatory or investment shortcomings as impede agriculture. Whilst some of the factors facilitating,and impacts of, biofuels can be tracked at global level, its distributional impacts are complex, and point to the need for country-by-country analysis of potential poverty impacts.

Policy conclusions

Of high importance, but unlikely to be achieved in the short term:

• OECD countries need to reduce agricultural support regimes for biofuels to avoid penalising developing countries who already have restricted access to OECD markets.

• Developing countries need to address the same critical policy, regulatory and public investment constraints as affect agricultural production.

• Efforts are needed to make staples markets work better to enable switching between the main staples (maize, rice and wheat) as more maize is used for biofuels production. Much of the requirement for policy improvement is at country level, and whilst highly context-specific, each context is likely to include several of the following:

• Investment in improved land administration systems to deal with conflicting claims emerging under biofuels expansion.

• Improved market coordination.

• Priority investment for biodiesel which, in many contexts, generates more labour, has lower transportation costs and simpler technology.

• On plantations and in processing mills, identification of additional non-seasonal sources of work to avoid highly seasonal employment in biofuels.

• Improving storage infrastructure (especially in ethanol feedstocks) to lengthen the processing season.

• Investing in feedstocks compatible with existing domestic production patterns to keep down costs of processing.

• Striking a balance in processing capabilities between large, centralised units capturing economies of scale and smaller, decentralised units, impacts strongly on rural employment, incomes and economic diversification.

• In food insecure countries/regions, focus biofuels investment on non-staple food crops.

• Provide support for small farmers to increase productivity to cope with downward pressure on biofuels producer prices – for example through improved varieties – and set quotas for procurement from them.

• Depending on context, invest in biofuels feedstocks with higher yields that result in less competition over land; in those that can be cultivated on marginal lands and have net benefits for soil rehabilitation; and/or in those that generate the best multipliers with the wider agricultural and rural economy.

• Ensure enforcement of regulations, standards and appropriate technologies to improve the contribution of biofuels production to climate change mitigation.

Biomass: challenges and opportunities 29-30 November, 2007 Brussels, Belgium Organised with the financial support of the European Commission, Directorate General for Agriculture and Rural Development this seminar aims to provide a forum for discussion regarding the EU Biomass Action Plan and the EU Strategy on biofuels. It will also explain how the reformed CAP and the rural development policy 2007-2013 contribute to sustainable development in the field of renewable energy. The conference aims to identify the challenges and the opportunities for farmers and forest managers in realising the full potential of using biomass from agriculture and forests. For more information, please contact Grazyna Las + 32 2 287 2795 or by e-mail.

Agrofuel – the Green Danger Translation from “Umweltschutz”, Okt. 20 2007 Mr. Clemens Rosenkranz

The matter with bio-energy is the same as that of the “bio-chicken”. They share the inherent contradiction, to satisfy the need for a product that at the same time is of low price and con-soles the ecological conscience. That an equation like this will not pass through tough (but well meaning) ecologists until now were not ready to accept. Experts since long are aware of the dilemma that the amount of existing arable space and the need of the consumers for bio-products can not be brought to match with the exception that consumers would be ready to accept exceedingly higher prices for chicken or for electricity. It is a fact that the space for satisfying the ambitious goals for bio-energy of the Union are not available on our continent even taking into account the big Eastern European countries. Ac-cording to these experts we would need a third of the agricultural space to cover the need for ten percent for bio-sprit from rape. If producing bio-ethanol from beat or crops the amount of space would be less, but in tendency to cover the need from European resources would be possible not without a massive reduction of traditional farming.

It seems as if politicians and plant consultants in their euphoria for biomass wanted to break the basic low of (political) economy namely that of offer and demand and the consequence for the prices. Now the area of business is confronted with the consequences of ignoring these macro-economic principles. Until to day one could have been consoled (deliberately) to im-port the lacking quantities. And frankly it is a sorry state that not before the firm Agrana de-cided to freeze the production of bio-ethanol because of the extreme rise of crop prises many eyes in the eco-field have been opened.

And besides it could not have been missed: following the strategy of the ambitious EU-goals most countries are setting on energies from renewable agro-sources. As therefore in all Europe and the world a boom of need and price is originating the economic vulture is swing-ing its wings above many biomass and biogas plants in the Union and the whole world; in the worst case a third of all relevant Austrian firms will have to close down. They are not able to include their costs for the necessary row material in their retail price despite public support. Many of these enterprises now work at the edge of ruin while some already have closed. The answer to this problem is well known bit not very creative: there must be higher support to make unprofitable production profitable. This would open doors to the spiral of price and support. Mr. Christian Schönbauer, the ecological expert of the E-control bank is sharing this opinion.

The year 2008 could become the year of the many drop outs of green-energy plants, should the problems with raw materials continue. Generally the market for electricity from biomass seems to show saturation and the availability of sources restricted. Looking at the results of E-control the penny has dropped by many potential operators: how else can one explain that a fifth of the already approved (biogas) plants and 50 out of 170 biomass electricity plants still only exist on paper and many of those due to the uncertain supply with row material - and in the long run without calculatable and reasonable prices – will become trash. Moreover the goal of the industrialised countries to reduce their dependency on the classic oil situation through bio-sprit can prove to become a boomerang as they in return would become dependent from countries who have enough space to produce bio-sprit like crazy. Addition-ally in countries like Brazil or Indonesia the continuing rising need for sugar-cane schnapps or palm-oil increases the current felling of rain forests. What Malaysia exercised Indonesia is starting to copy. In this South Asian country of islands the plantations for palm oil to day occupy 6,4 billion hectares and further 20 billion hectares are approved. This year Indonesia is going to produce 17 Million tons of palm oil, Malaysia 16,5 Million tons with this quantity covering 85% of the world market due to an analysis of the “Friends of the Earth”. There is obviously no compromise between these big monocultures and the rain forests. Therefore the fairy tail of bio-sprit in reality is an illusion, as the financial incentives of cutting down rain-forests and drying up wetlands according to the OECD have a very bad environmental bal-ance.

In the background of all this there also exists enormous human grief, as the conflicting goals of nutrition and fuels are carried out on the backs of those people ho already now globally are on the losers part, the poorest of all. According to UN data more than 850 Millions are suffer-ing of hunger. The prospects are still worse as 1% prise rise of basic food increases the num-ber for another 16 Millions. Applied to the newest agro-view of the UN organisation for agri-culture and Food (FAO) the price for rice in the next 10 years will climb for 20% on the global market compared to the average price of the last five years, while corn is expected to rise for a third. The reason is the continuing need for the basics for bio-energy.

The car drivers are tanking “green fuel” and believe to do good to the environment. On the other end of the chain there are the empty stomachs and famine dead in the developing coun-tries. So when looking at pictures like these in TV one gives donations thus improving the inner feelings.

ENDS

Previous EVENT Bioenergy 2007 3 – 6 September, 2007 Jyväskylä, Finland This year’s conference and exhibition is one of the largest events on the theme of bioenergy, and will focus on those factors affecting the sector’s future. This includes: biopower; biofuels in transport, and biobased modern technologies and products; the effects of the energy market; the influence of green marketing; and other trends affecting forestry, agriculture, industry and climate. Apart from the conference, guests can also take part in study tours in order to become updated on modern biomass-based power, heating and combined and heat and power plants, and technologies at all different scales. For more information about the conference please contact Ms. Mia Savolainen. Bioenergy2007@finbio.fi

Item 3 Renewable Energy I have a copy of the PowerPoint? <CCDR52007.ppt> <Bioenergy: the European Commission’s perspective Michèle Lemasson DG Agriculture and Rural Development EUROPEAN COMMISSION>

Key extracts Slide 4: Adopted by the Commission in January 2007 for an effective promotion and development of RE:

• 20% in overall EU energy consumption by 2020 • 10% market share of biofuels by 2020 • Sustainable production of biofuels • New EU legislation in heating & cooling • National Action Plans on how to achieve the targets

The Spring Council endorsed the objectives of the Roadmap in March 2007 Slide 11 : PUBLIC CONSULTATION CURRENTLY OPEN (deadline 4 June 2007):

Slide 13: Expected advantages to agriculture: Slower decline of agricultural employment until 2020 Less land abandonment in marginal regions Less conversion of agricultural land to other uses Positive impact on farm income

The presentation was praised by many. I have detailed notes of statistics. In addressing climate change, and the current generation of greenhouse gases by transport (21% of total), the Commission is proposing a scenario for 2020 that seeks bio-fuels to grow to 20% - 30% of total fuels. Of that, production within EU is to be 70% - 90%, reducing imports to 30% - 10% (less from countries producing Palm Oil - damaging to the environment - and from Russia and Ukraine). It is envisaged that cereal prices would rise 3% - 6%, oilseed increasing from 5%-18% and rapeseed meal (currently dominating production) declining by 40%. 15% - 18% of EU agricultural land. The motor industry needs certainty if engines are to be developed to suit greater proportions of bio-derived fuels. A review of the fuel quality directive points to an increase in bio-fuel (bio-ethanol) content from 5% in petrol to 10%. Bio-fuel is also currently 5% of diesel.

Discussion

The greater efficiency, in terms of greenhouse gas emissions, of second -generation fuels was pointed out. How was this governed in the RDPs?

Germany. Energy plant premium of 45 euro per hectare was considered bureaucratic.

Spain. Replacement crops for beet or cotton in certain rotations would be welcome. Farmers are not yet offered alternatives that are profitable. The impact on world food is important. Spain produces few cereals so would rely on imports.

If maize is diverted from feed for beef cattle then home produced beef would decline and raise imports from South America.

Miscanthus is high yield and could reduce imports and thus ‘fuel miles’.

Portugal. The European policy emphasis on sustainability should not stand in the way of bio-fuels.

Greece. Production cycles and supply chains can be unsustainable. Cyprus and Greece have no large surface areas suitable for energy crops. Higher premiums would be needed. EU policy should be interpreted locally.

RED (Peltre) pointed to the food-based challenges of agriculture and the valid demand from forestry for wooden goods and equipment. Future supply of energy depends on fossil fuel oil futures. There is a real competition between demands. That differs in different places. What are the territorial implications and what regard will be given to democracy, sustainability and the Lisbon agenda? Much depends on the will of the EU.

Italy. If bio-fuels are added to the European production model, what evaluation is there of effects of replacement crops on soils, environment, biodiversity? How to balance new production with climatic effects, cultivable land, and water shortage? How to quantify the effects on agricultural jobs?

Other points made: CAP Pillar 1 Single payment. Cross Compliance and compatible crops such as second-generation brassica. Research and development on bio-refineries and new energy sources. Current investment by farmers is limited to EAFRD. Why not Structural Funds and Cohesion Funds?

Comments of the Commission

Impact assessments are being made. Agri-food - the 10% share is being studied. 38 million extra tonnes of cereal can be expected from the existing land area (of Europe) - 15 million tonnes from existing set-aside. Second generation fuel crops require less land, relieving pressure on markets. Imports of ethanol are protected and will reduce to 10% - 30% by 2020. Care will be taken to avoid increasing CO2 outputs in the whole process of producing and transporting bio-fuels. The CAP Healthcheck will be an opportunity to take a closer look at adapting the set-aside system. Further simplification is aimed at reducing bureaucracy. The territorial dimension will be addressed by a Market-based approach. It is up to member states as to how they implement directives and objectives.

Energy for a Changing World

The European Commission proposes an integrated energy and climate change package to cut emissions for the 21st Century (IP/07/29)

http://ec.europa.eu/energy/energy_policy/index_en.htm

Ian Traynor and David Gow in Brussels Saturday March 10, 2007 The Guardian

Europe became the world leader in tackling climate change yesterday when 27 governments agreed to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 20%, and commit the EU to generating a fifth of its energy from renewable sources, within 13 years.

http://environment.guardian.co.uk/climatechange/story/0,,2030727,00.html

UK Draft Climate Change Bill published

The Government’s blueprint for tackling climate change is published today. The draft Climate Change Bill, the first of its kind in any country, and accompanying strategy, set out a framework for moving the UK to a low-carbon economy. It demonstrates the UK’s leadership as progress continues towards establishing a post-Kyoto global emissions agreement. The draft bill will be subject to a full public consultation alongside pre-legislative scrutiny in Parliament. Environment secretary David Miliband said: 'With climate change we can’t just close our eyes and cross our fingers. We need to step up our action to tackle it, building on our considerable progress so far. And time isn’t on our side. This bill is a critical part of the equation. It will help us achieve the twin goals I set out in the strategy I am also publishing today - demonstrating leadership through action at home, while also continuing to work towards a strong international agreement post-2012.' It sets out a vision for how the UK can move to a low carbon economy including: investment in low-carbon fuels and technologies, such as carbon capture and storage, wind, wave and solar power; significantly more efficient use of energy; a step change in the way energy suppliers operate, so that they focus on reducing demand rather than just supplying as much energy as possible; consumers becoming producers as well as consumers of energy. Country/Regional Focus: UK Themes: environment, politics Web: http://www.defra.gov.uk/news/latest/2007/climate-0313.htm 13 March 2007 © Defra

Can bio-fuels transform the rural economy? http://society.guardian.co.uk/ruralcommunities/story/0,,2038545,00.html

A new consultation programme designed to find ways to promote biofuels has been launched by the European Commission this week. The project is aiming to discover a route to achieving a 10% biofuel share in transport - and a 20% share of overall renewables by 2020 - without compromising sustainability in production. Issues such as effects on land use and ongoing environmental monitoring will be priorities during the consultation, which is expected to involve local authorities, industry and NGOs. Biofuels play a key role in improving security of supply and reducing greenhouse gas emissions in transport, while offering new sources of income to people dependent on agriculture, both in the EU and in developing countries, said Commissioner Piebalgs. However, these advantages should not be offset by environmental damage through inappropriate land use or outdated production processes. This consultation exercise will help us design a simple and practical sustainability scheme.

Focus: Europe

Tags: Environment, Energy

Web: http://www.xpressdigest.org.uk/2007/05/04/europe-tackles-biofuel-question/

02 May 2007 © Green Consumer Guide

Biofuels

Ernst and Young reported to (ECOVAST Member organisation) CRC (the Commission for Rural Communities, England) on the government budget 2008:

The UK Government announced in the Pre-Budget Report 2005 that it would introduce the Renewable Transport Fuel Obligation (RTFO) from 2008. The existing duty differential for biofuels has limited scope to recognise different biofuels, whereas the newer RTFO will provide a sharper environmental focus through its sustainability criteria. To encourage the development of the cleanest, most sustainable biofuels the duty differential for biofuels will cease in 2010.

Biofuels produced from biomass such as plants could help reduce both the world’s dependence on oil and CO2 production. However their use is heavily debated and the impact on agriculture and rural communities is unclear.

Phil Turner (who was unable to attend the CRC meeting on the Budget) made the comment that follows:

Financial incentives for use of biofuels offer confidence to those who make investment in farming, managing and processing biomass and seek alternative sources of income from land and woodland. The sustainability criteria would be welcome if they are sufficiently fine tuned towards benefits.

There is much concern and debate on the overal reduction or otherwise of CO2 and other greenhouse gas arising from growing crops for biofuel to be used in vehicles.

Blanket incentives, such as the imminent requirement of a percentage of biofuel content in fuel purchased from filling stations, because they seek large scale supply, tend to encourage large investors. That tends in turn to lead to sourcing biofuels globally (accelerating the competiton between land for food and that for fuel production, clearing forest to create land for fuel crops) which are counter sustainable.

Locally sourced biofuels should be considered for incentives subject to clear sustainability criteria.

An example from Sweden (from a report to CRC on the 2008 Swedish Rural Parliament) http://www.trippus.se/eventus/userfiles/6035.pdf

A pioneering scheme near Trollhättan, Sweden, pipes the methane from animal waste digesters to an ‘upgrading station’ 50 km distant on the edge of town ( a plant that cleans out the sulphur content) and distributes the gas to town suburbs and back to rural areas by parallel pipeline and road tankers. There are 18 farmers with digesters and all are shareholders of the 50 million SK project (£5 million). The 20 GWH is equivalent to 2 million litres of diesel fuel. Further penetration into Trollhättan would give a potential of 120 GWH. www.innovatum.se

Arthur Spiegler has drawn attention to the following site http://www.biomeiler.at/ GOOGLE can give an English translation. Arthur says:...a very interesting visit and talk about the possible use of cut undergrowth, remnants of forest maintenance or the gardening of communities. Have a look at: www.biomeiler.at Although this information is in German you will find a link to an English text (on the left side of page 1) and above that a film. Again in German but the pictures are speaking a lot for themselves. May be you can find other links for English users. This I think a very convincing not-hightech facility. Phil says: - I LOOKED AT THE WEBSITE. WOOD-WASTE AND COMPOSTING FOR LOCAL ENERGY SUPPLY AND EVEN SMALL SCALE VEHICLE FUEL PRODUCTION IS VERY MUCH A POSITIVE WAY FORWARD

http://www.odi.org.uk/nrp/NRP107.pdf

Overseas Development Institute

Biofuels, Agriculture and Poverty Reduction

Leo Peskett, Rachel Slater, Chris Stevens and Annie Dufey

The development of biofuels has generated vigorous debate on economic and environmental grounds. Our attention here is on its potential impacts on poverty reduction. The potential is large, whether through employment, wider growth multipliers and energy price effects. But it is also fragile: it will be reduced where feedstock production tends to be large scale, or causes pressure on land access, and its success can be undermined by many of the same policy, regulatory or investment shortcomings as impede agriculture. Whilst some of the factors facilitating,and impacts of, biofuels can be tracked at global level, its distributional impacts are complex, and point to the need for country-by-country analysis of potential poverty impacts.

Policy conclusions

Of high importance, but unlikely to be achieved in the short term:

• OECD countries need to reduce agricultural support regimes for biofuels to avoid penalising developing countries who already have restricted access to OECD markets.

• Developing countries need to address the same critical policy, regulatory and public investment constraints as affect agricultural production.

• Efforts are needed to make staples markets work better to enable switching between the main staples (maize, rice and wheat) as more maize is used for biofuels production. Much of the requirement for policy improvement is at country level, and whilst highly context-specific, each context is likely to include several of the following:

• Investment in improved land administration systems to deal with conflicting claims emerging under biofuels expansion.

• Improved market coordination.

• Priority investment for biodiesel which, in many contexts, generates more labour, has lower transportation costs and simpler technology.

• On plantations and in processing mills, identification of additional non-seasonal sources of work to avoid highly seasonal employment in biofuels.

• Improving storage infrastructure (especially in ethanol feedstocks) to lengthen the processing season.

• Investing in feedstocks compatible with existing domestic production patterns to keep down costs of processing.

• Striking a balance in processing capabilities between large, centralised units capturing economies of scale and smaller, decentralised units, impacts strongly on rural employment, incomes and economic diversification.

• In food insecure countries/regions, focus biofuels investment on non-staple food crops.

• Provide support for small farmers to increase productivity to cope with downward pressure on biofuels producer prices – for example through improved varieties – and set quotas for procurement from them.

• Depending on context, invest in biofuels feedstocks with higher yields that result in less competition over land; in those that can be cultivated on marginal lands and have net benefits for soil rehabilitation; and/or in those that generate the best multipliers with the wider agricultural and rural economy.

• Ensure enforcement of regulations, standards and appropriate technologies to improve the contribution of biofuels production to climate change mitigation.

Biomass: challenges and opportunities 29-30 November, 2007 Brussels, Belgium Organised with the financial support of the European Commission, Directorate General for Agriculture and Rural Development this seminar aims to provide a forum for discussion regarding the EU Biomass Action Plan and the EU Strategy on biofuels. It will also explain how the reformed CAP and the rural development policy 2007-2013 contribute to sustainable development in the field of renewable energy. The conference aims to identify the challenges and the opportunities for farmers and forest managers in realising the full potential of using biomass from agriculture and forests. For more information, please contact Grazyna Las + 32 2 287 2795 or by e-mail.

Agrofuel – the Green Danger Translation from “Umweltschutz”, Okt. 20 2007 Mr. Clemens Rosenkranz

The matter with bio-energy is the same as that of the “bio-chicken”. They share the inherent contradiction, to satisfy the need for a product that at the same time is of low price and con-soles the ecological conscience. That an equation like this will not pass through tough (but well meaning) ecologists until now were not ready to accept. Experts since long are aware of the dilemma that the amount of existing arable space and the need of the consumers for bio-products can not be brought to match with the exception that consumers would be ready to accept exceedingly higher prices for chicken or for electricity. It is a fact that the space for satisfying the ambitious goals for bio-energy of the Union are not available on our continent even taking into account the big Eastern European countries. Ac-cording to these experts we would need a third of the agricultural space to cover the need for ten percent for bio-sprit from rape. If producing bio-ethanol from beat or crops the amount of space would be less, but in tendency to cover the need from European resources would be possible not without a massive reduction of traditional farming.

It seems as if politicians and plant consultants in their euphoria for biomass wanted to break the basic low of (political) economy namely that of offer and demand and the consequence for the prices. Now the area of business is confronted with the consequences of ignoring these macro-economic principles. Until to day one could have been consoled (deliberately) to im-port the lacking quantities. And frankly it is a sorry state that not before the firm Agrana de-cided to freeze the production of bio-ethanol because of the extreme rise of crop prises many eyes in the eco-field have been opened.

And besides it could not have been missed: following the strategy of the ambitious EU-goals most countries are setting on energies from renewable agro-sources. As therefore in all Europe and the world a boom of need and price is originating the economic vulture is swing-ing its wings above many biomass and biogas plants in the Union and the whole world; in the worst case a third of all relevant Austrian firms will have to close down. They are not able to include their costs for the necessary row material in their retail price despite public support. Many of these enterprises now work at the edge of ruin while some already have closed. The answer to this problem is well known bit not very creative: there must be higher support to make unprofitable production profitable. This would open doors to the spiral of price and support. Mr. Christian Schönbauer, the ecological expert of the E-control bank is sharing this opinion.

The year 2008 could become the year of the many drop outs of green-energy plants, should the problems with raw materials continue. Generally the market for electricity from biomass seems to show saturation and the availability of sources restricted. Looking at the results of E-control the penny has dropped by many potential operators: how else can one explain that a fifth of the already approved (biogas) plants and 50 out of 170 biomass electricity plants still only exist on paper and many of those due to the uncertain supply with row material - and in the long run without calculatable and reasonable prices – will become trash. Moreover the goal of the industrialised countries to reduce their dependency on the classic oil situation through bio-sprit can prove to become a boomerang as they in return would become dependent from countries who have enough space to produce bio-sprit like crazy. Addition-ally in countries like Brazil or Indonesia the continuing rising need for sugar-cane schnapps or palm-oil increases the current felling of rain forests. What Malaysia exercised Indonesia is starting to copy. In this South Asian country of islands the plantations for palm oil to day occupy 6,4 billion hectares and further 20 billion hectares are approved. This year Indonesia is going to produce 17 Million tons of palm oil, Malaysia 16,5 Million tons with this quantity covering 85% of the world market due to an analysis of the “Friends of the Earth”. There is obviously no compromise between these big monocultures and the rain forests. Therefore the fairy tail of bio-sprit in reality is an illusion, as the financial incentives of cutting down rain-forests and drying up wetlands according to the OECD have a very bad environmental bal-ance.

In the background of all this there also exists enormous human grief, as the conflicting goals of nutrition and fuels are carried out on the backs of those people ho already now globally are on the losers part, the poorest of all. According to UN data more than 850 Millions are suffer-ing of hunger. The prospects are still worse as 1% prise rise of basic food increases the num-ber for another 16 Millions. Applied to the newest agro-view of the UN organisation for agri-culture and Food (FAO) the price for rice in the next 10 years will climb for 20% on the global market compared to the average price of the last five years, while corn is expected to rise for a third. The reason is the continuing need for the basics for bio-energy.

The car drivers are tanking “green fuel” and believe to do good to the environment. On the other end of the chain there are the empty stomachs and famine dead in the developing coun-tries. So when looking at pictures like these in TV one gives donations thus improving the inner feelings.

ENDS

Previous EVENT Bioenergy 2007 3 – 6 September, 2007 Jyväskylä, Finland This year’s conference and exhibition is one of the largest events on the theme of bioenergy, and will focus on those factors affecting the sector’s future. This includes: biopower; biofuels in transport, and biobased modern technologies and products; the effects of the energy market; the influence of green marketing; and other trends affecting forestry, agriculture, industry and climate. Apart from the conference, guests can also take part in study tours in order to become updated on modern biomass-based power, heating and combined and heat and power plants, and technologies at all different scales. For more information about the conference please contact Ms. Mia Savolainen. Bioenergy2007@finbio.fi

Item 3 Renewable Energy I have a copy of the PowerPoint? <CCDR52007.ppt> <Bioenergy: the European Commission’s perspective Michèle Lemasson DG Agriculture and Rural Development EUROPEAN COMMISSION>

Key extracts Slide 4: Adopted by the Commission in January 2007 for an effective promotion and development of RE:

• 20% in overall EU energy consumption by 2020 • 10% market share of biofuels by 2020 • Sustainable production of biofuels • New EU legislation in heating & cooling • National Action Plans on how to achieve the targets

The Spring Council endorsed the objectives of the Roadmap in March 2007 Slide 11 : PUBLIC CONSULTATION CURRENTLY OPEN (deadline 4 June 2007):

Slide 13: Expected advantages to agriculture: Slower decline of agricultural employment until 2020 Less land abandonment in marginal regions Less conversion of agricultural land to other uses Positive impact on farm income

The presentation was praised by many. I have detailed notes of statistics. In addressing climate change, and the current generation of greenhouse gases by transport (21% of total), the Commission is proposing a scenario for 2020 that seeks bio-fuels to grow to 20% - 30% of total fuels. Of that, production within EU is to be 70% - 90%, reducing imports to 30% - 10% (less from countries producing Palm Oil - damaging to the environment - and from Russia and Ukraine). It is envisaged that cereal prices would rise 3% - 6%, oilseed increasing from 5%-18% and rapeseed meal (currently dominating production) declining by 40%. 15% - 18% of EU agricultural land. The motor industry needs certainty if engines are to be developed to suit greater proportions of bio-derived fuels. A review of the fuel quality directive points to an increase in bio-fuel (bio-ethanol) content from 5% in petrol to 10%. Bio-fuel is also currently 5% of diesel.

Discussion

The greater efficiency, in terms of greenhouse gas emissions, of second -generation fuels was pointed out. How was this governed in the RDPs?

Germany. Energy plant premium of 45 euro per hectare was considered bureaucratic.

Spain. Replacement crops for beet or cotton in certain rotations would be welcome. Farmers are not yet offered alternatives that are profitable. The impact on world food is important. Spain produces few cereals so would rely on imports.

If maize is diverted from feed for beef cattle then home produced beef would decline and raise imports from South America.

Miscanthus is high yield and could reduce imports and thus ‘fuel miles’.

Portugal. The European policy emphasis on sustainability should not stand in the way of bio-fuels.

Greece. Production cycles and supply chains can be unsustainable. Cyprus and Greece have no large surface areas suitable for energy crops. Higher premiums would be needed. EU policy should be interpreted locally.

RED (Peltre) pointed to the food-based challenges of agriculture and the valid demand from forestry for wooden goods and equipment. Future supply of energy depends on fossil fuel oil futures. There is a real competition between demands. That differs in different places. What are the territorial implications and what regard will be given to democracy, sustainability and the Lisbon agenda? Much depends on the will of the EU.

Italy. If bio-fuels are added to the European production model, what evaluation is there of effects of replacement crops on soils, environment, biodiversity? How to balance new production with climatic effects, cultivable land, and water shortage? How to quantify the effects on agricultural jobs?

Other points made: CAP Pillar 1 Single payment. Cross Compliance and compatible crops such as second-generation brassica. Research and development on bio-refineries and new energy sources. Current investment by farmers is limited to EAFRD. Why not Structural Funds and Cohesion Funds?

Comments of the Commission

Impact assessments are being made. Agri-food - the 10% share is being studied. 38 million extra tonnes of cereal can be expected from the existing land area (of Europe) - 15 million tonnes from existing set-aside. Second generation fuel crops require less land, relieving pressure on markets. Imports of ethanol are protected and will reduce to 10% - 30% by 2020. Care will be taken to avoid increasing CO2 outputs in the whole process of producing and transporting bio-fuels. The CAP Healthcheck will be an opportunity to take a closer look at adapting the set-aside system. Further simplification is aimed at reducing bureaucracy. The territorial dimension will be addressed by a Market-based approach. It is up to member states as to how they implement directives and objectives.

Energy for a Changing World

The European Commission proposes an integrated energy and climate change package to cut emissions for the 21st Century (IP/07/29)

http://ec.europa.eu/energy/energy_policy/index_en.htm

Ian Traynor and David Gow in Brussels Saturday March 10, 2007 The Guardian

Europe became the world leader in tackling climate change yesterday when 27 governments agreed to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 20%, and commit the EU to generating a fifth of its energy from renewable sources, within 13 years.

http://environment.guardian.co.uk/climatechange/story/0,,2030727,00.html

UK Draft Climate Change Bill published

The Government’s blueprint for tackling climate change is published today. The draft Climate Change Bill, the first of its kind in any country, and accompanying strategy, set out a framework for moving the UK to a low-carbon economy. It demonstrates the UK’s leadership as progress continues towards establishing a post-Kyoto global emissions agreement. The draft bill will be subject to a full public consultation alongside pre-legislative scrutiny in Parliament. Environment secretary David Miliband said: 'With climate change we can’t just close our eyes and cross our fingers. We need to step up our action to tackle it, building on our considerable progress so far. And time isn’t on our side. This bill is a critical part of the equation. It will help us achieve the twin goals I set out in the strategy I am also publishing today - demonstrating leadership through action at home, while also continuing to work towards a strong international agreement post-2012.' It sets out a vision for how the UK can move to a low carbon economy including: investment in low-carbon fuels and technologies, such as carbon capture and storage, wind, wave and solar power; significantly more efficient use of energy; a step change in the way energy suppliers operate, so that they focus on reducing demand rather than just supplying as much energy as possible; consumers becoming producers as well as consumers of energy. Country/Regional Focus: UK Themes: environment, politics Web: http://www.defra.gov.uk/news/latest/2007/climate-0313.htm 13 March 2007 © Defra

Can bio-fuels transform the rural economy? http://society.guardian.co.uk/ruralcommunities/story/0,,2038545,00.html

A new consultation programme designed to find ways to promote biofuels has been launched by the European Commission this week. The project is aiming to discover a route to achieving a 10% biofuel share in transport - and a 20% share of overall renewables by 2020 - without compromising sustainability in production. Issues such as effects on land use and ongoing environmental monitoring will be priorities during the consultation, which is expected to involve local authorities, industry and NGOs. Biofuels play a key role in improving security of supply and reducing greenhouse gas emissions in transport, while offering new sources of income to people dependent on agriculture, both in the EU and in developing countries, said Commissioner Piebalgs. However, these advantages should not be offset by environmental damage through inappropriate land use or outdated production processes. This consultation exercise will help us design a simple and practical sustainability scheme.

Focus: Europe

Tags: Environment, Energy

Web: http://www.xpressdigest.org.uk/2007/05/04/europe-tackles-biofuel-question/

02 May 2007 © Green Consumer Guide