London, 8 June - Three NGOs have called on the EU to introduce "sustainability safeguards" as part of the ongoing review of the EU Biofuels Directive. A failure to do so, they warn, will lead to negligible savings in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, will harm biodiversity, and risk turning the public against biofuels.

 

"Climate change and biodiversity loss are among our most pressing challenges," said John Hontelez, secretary general of the European Environment Bureau (EEB). "We must urgently reduce the GHG emissions that drive climate change. But we must tackle climate change and biodiversity loss in tandem.

"Biofuels are only part of the solution. Unless we produce biofuels sustainably, we'll end up with more energy-intensive and environmentally damaging farming practices and hasten the degradation of our ecosystems."

The three groups – the EEB, Birdlife International, and the European Federation for Transport and Environment – want a mandatory certification system for biofuels, and biofuel development within a broader energy policy focusing on reducing energy demand.

The call comes as the European Council is debating – today and tomorrow – the EU's Biomass Action Plan, which was published in December. The EU intends to meet 5.75% of its transport fuel needs with biofuels by 2010 – a target that would involve using 14-27% of EU agricultural land. This compares to some 1.4% in 2005.

The NGOs note that it is likely that the EU will meet a substantial portion of biofuel demand from developing countries, "and the reliance on imports of palm oil and sugar cane-derived fuels only raises the stakes of what's at risk".

 

Editorial comment: If you drive from Johor Bahru at the southern tip of peninsular Malaysia to Kuala Lumpur on the main North-South highway, a distance of several hundred miles, you see little other than oil palm plantations on both sides of the road. This monoculture is largely a result of the demand for palm oil for food use. Once the West's new biodiesel processing plants come on line, the demand for palm-oil will be huge. Palm oil is the only realistic volume alternative to rapeseed, soy and corn as biodiesel feedstock, and markets for these have already been impacted by the demands of the nascent biofuels industry (see previous article "Biodiesel cause of increased US soy consumption".

 

Even with palm planting proceeding apace in the world's second largest producer, Indonesia, and starting in earnest in Thailand, supply from South-East Asia cannot meet demand indefinitely.  This would indicate the potential for development of palm in West Africa, from where 'elaeis guineensis' originates, a region which produces comparitively little palm oil at present.  While this could be good news for that region's export earnings, indiginous flora and fauna will continue to suffer wherever vast areas of land are planted with a single species.

 

David Smith, Singapore