William Jaeger, an Oregon Science University agricultural economics professor, recently spoke out against biofuel production to the Oregon State Legislature. Below are two important quotes from his written testimony.
"Can biofuels help us reduce our use of fossil fuels by a significant amount, and can they do it at a reasonable cost? The answers from our analysis to both parts of the question would appear to be “no.” Concerning the second question: Can biofuels help us reduce our greenhouse gas emissions by a significant amount and can they do it at a reasonable cost? The answers to both parts of this question appear to be an even more resounding “no.” "If we place our analysis of biofuels in this context, relying on biofuels to achieve the goals of reduced fossil fuel use and greenhouse gas emissions, would be like having the Oregon Department of Transportation pick a bridge design costing at least 900 percent more than the least cost alternative, and one that would only reach a fraction of the distance across the river." In an earlier study, Jaeger found that to achieve a given improvement in energy independence using ethanol from corn, biodiesel from rapeseed (canola oil), and ethanol from wood-based cellulose could be 6 to 28 times more costly than other policy options, such as raising fuel economy standards. Using all three biofuels at maximum estimated scales of production in Oregon would lead to a net energy gain of just two-thirds of one percent of Oregon’s annual energy use. None of the biofuels were found to be marketable without large taxpayer subsidies, and the much hyped cellulosic ethanol was found to be the most expensive of all the biofuels to produce. Professor Jaeger doubts that biofuels can ever replace more than 1% of United States fossil fuel use on a net energy gain basis. See Biofuels in Oregon from an Economic and Policy Perspective at: http://arec.oregonstate.edu/jaeger/energy/Brief%20of%20Oregon%20Biofuels%20Jaeger%20v2.pdf _______ The greatest threat to United States national security is biofuel production, not terrorism. Biofuels do not contribute to "energy independence." Biofuel production contributes to high food prices, increased environmental damage, the speeding of global warming, erosion of precious topsoil, water shortages, and global hunger. Infecting millions of acres of US farmland with biofuel weeds is an evil plot worthy of a James Bond villain, not a positive new energy source. When you try to grow both fuel and food at the same time, you greatly increase the rate of topsoil erosion, because disturbing the land by tilling and harvesting makes soils vulnerable to wind and rain. Globally, topsoil is being lost ten times faster than it is being replenished, and 30% of the world's arable land has become unproductive in the past 40 years due to erosion. The human race would quickly starve to death without topsoil, and the USA is in serious jeopardy of losing adequate food growing capacity within 100 years or less due to erosion. Biofuel production is helping clog the Mississippi and other rivers with topsoil from our prime growing areas. In 1850, Iowa prairie soils had about 12-16 inches of topsoil, but now have only about 6-8 inches. We are continuing to lose Iowa topsoil at a rate of approximately 30 tons of topsoil per hectare (10,000 square meters) per year. As it takes nature hundreds of years to replace just 1 inch of lost topsoil, ask biofuel advocates if helping to destroy the ability of future generations to grow food is a worthy environmental goal. For full scientific details of the biofuel disaster and better energy alternatives, see "The biofuel hoax is causing a world food crisis!" at: http://home.att.net/~meditation/bio-fuel-hoax.html Christopher Calder --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Global Change ("globalchange") newsgroup. Global Change is a public, moderated venue for discussion of science, technology, economics and policy dimensions of global environmental change. Posts will be admitted to the list if and only if any moderator finds the submission to be constructive and/or interesting, on topic, and not gratuitously rude. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/globalchange -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
