FAO sees risks and rewards from biofuels
What are the potential environmental and economic implications of policies that limit or phase out food-based biofuels and promote only advanced biofuels?
There are a number of potential drawbacks or possible risks environmentally.
Firstly it would limit the possibility of reducing the use of fossil fuels in the transport sector, hence limiting reductions in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from that sector, both in the short term as well as in the medium term. It will take several years before electro-mobility, advanced biofuels or any other type of clean energy transport system will be able to make up for the shortfall of first generation biofuels that are currently produced.
Moreover, there are risks with advanced biofuels related to large-scale monocropping plantations of energy crops, as well as soil degradation if crop residues used to manage the quality of soils are instead used to produce bioenergy.
There is also an ILUC risk associated with advanced biofuels when the feedstock comes from energy crop plantations. Such plantations can result in farmers being displaced from their land and forced to go elsewhere to continue their usual farm production. They might resort to convert carbon-rich land, such as forests or peatland, to achieve this.
From an economic perspective, industrial units that produce food-based biofuels would face financial difficulties due to the serious reduction in market opportunities. The same might happen regarding the income of farmers when they sell the feedstock to first generation biofuels plants.
What role should advanced biofuels assume globally and should this be to the detriment of food-based biofuels?
Second generation biofuels have an important role to play at global level. However, their deployment should not necessarily happen at the expense of food-based biofuels.
Broadly speaking, this is because both advanced and food-based biofuels can be produced either in a sustainable or unsustainable way. For instance, with regards to food-based biofuels, sugar cane ethanol in Brazil is not known for causing food insecurity and performs well with regards to GHG emissions reduction. And the significant increase in sugar cane yields in Brazil allows nowadays producing both sugar and fuel. This has not been caused by an increase in interest in sugar for food, but rather for ethanol production.
In addition, palm oil-based biodiesel produced by small-scale farmers who have been doing it for years will not cause any additional land-use change and hence no additional GHG emissions. It might even bring them an additional source of income.
These examples show that 'flex crops', meaning those that can produce both food and fuel, can lead to positive impacts if managed in a sustainable way.
With regards to advanced biofuels, the potential drawbacks and risks aforementioned show they can be produced in an unsustainable way. Moreover, in Brazil and the US, many existing second generation biofuels units actually piggy-back on first generation plants.
Biofuels are not good or bad per se. What matters is the way they are managed. There is enough global knowledge on how to ensure that biofuels, be they food-based or advanced, are produced sustainably.
Are there pitfalls in using models that analyse competition for land use between agriculture, forestry and bioenergy and related GHG emissions, as a driver for policymaking?
All models require simplifying assumptions. As a result, they do not capture important farming practices — including mixed crop systems, double cropping and, in most cases, crop rotation — with relation to land-use intensity and hence also land-use change.
These limitations are particularly important to take into consideration when one deals with a complex and multifaceted topic such as bioenergy and, in particular, biofuels.
Has the risk of ILUC been properly addressed in policies so far and how might such a consideration inform policy in the future?
On the one hand, the risk of ILUC has been well addressed in so far as it has been acknowledged by policymakers. However, methods to address this risk have focused on reduction in the use of food-based biofuels as, according to global modelling studies — albeit with their limitations — they entail a higher ILUC risk than advanced biofuels.
Very little attention has been placed on policies that support the implementation of good practices, such as sustainable yield intensification, contract farming, agro-ecological zoning and integrated food energy systems. These all reduce the ILUC risk significantly.
In terms of natural resources governance, how might a sustainable renewable fuels industry develop worldwide markets, both importing and exporting countries?
As a general principle, one should accept that bioenergy is a complex and multifaceted topic and that therefore its sustainability is context-specific. One should be 'feedstock agnostic' at the beginning of any assessment of the sustainability of biofuels.
This would mean the assessment of the sustainability of biofuels, be it at operation or territorial level, should be based on real local circumstances. On that basis, a possible pathway towards sustainable biofuels could include starting from a broadly agreed upon framework for action.
In the case of bioenergy, such framework exist in the shape of both the sustainability principles of the Roundtable on Sustainable Biomaterials (RSB) for operations and the indicators on sustainable bioenergy developed by the Global Bioenergy Partnership (GBEP) for reporting at national and sub-national levels.
Furthermore, based on an agreed sustainability frameworks, it could include carrying out the assessment of sustainability based on existing circumstances. Moreover, such assessments would require a multi-stakeholder and cross-sectoral working group.
Combining different types of indicators of sustainability — quantitative, semi-quantitative and qualitative — would also encourage sustainability. There are significant challenges with quantitative indicators, mainly related to available, affordable and reliable data. Therefore, one could consider semi-quantitative and qualitative indicators as proxies to quantitative indicators, for instance, assessing the performance in the implementation of good practices, which are broadly known.
To what extent do food-based biofuels have an effect food prices? Is there a need to assess price transmission from commodity to food and how might this be done on international, national and local levels?
There is no doubt that large-scale production of food-based biofuels can influence food prices. The extent to which this happens is the object of a lot of debate because estimates are based on modelling, with of all the related uncertainties.
Beyond this, biofuels are one of several factors that influence food prices. Higher food prices have a different impact if you are a net buyer or seller of food. And changes in prices at international level do not automatically transmit at national level, where it actually matters.
Prices at these levels can also be influenced by factors such as climate that affect availability of feedstocks, subsidies to food prices and currency exchange rates, among other factors. Therefore, it is important to assess the degree of transmission of changes in food prices between different levels.
What examples of good practices for biofuels production exist globally and how might they be incorporated into policy making at national and regional levels?
Good practices that reduce risks and harness opportunities of biofuels include agro-ecological zoning of the areas where biofuel feedstocks are produced, contract farming where small-scale farmers produce the feedstock for local biofuel plants, integrated food-energy systems and sustainable crop intensification.
Good practices can be promoted through policies that provide incentives, including financial ones, such as soft loans and fiscal advantages, as well as knowledge-related ones, such as training. They can also be encouraged through the use of indicators or score cards assessing, for example, the number of farmers, hectares or operators applying these practices.
Комментарии