EU renewables policy: doubts and flaws
Major flaws in the Renewables directive include:
Doubts raised about EU renewables policy
On Monday 21 January 2008, the UK House of Commons Environmental Audit Committee called for a moratorium on agrofuel targets because of fears that some agrofuels emit more greenhouse gases than fossil fuels, and that habitats such as tropical rainforests are being destroyed in order to plant the new crops. It argues that the Government should instead concentrate on the use of sustainable biofuels such as waste vegetable oil and the development of more efficient biofuel technologies that could have a role to play in the future once they have been shown to be sustainable.
On Monday 14 January 2008, the UK Royal Society published a report in which scientists counselled caution, noting that current policies on biofuels risk “failing to deliver significant reductions in greenhouse gas emissions from transport and could even be environmentally damaging”.
An unpublished study by the Joint Research Centre (JRC) of the EU notes that estimated costs to taxpayers could reach 65 billion euros by 2020; the costs could easily outweigh any real benefits as regards tackling climate change. [note]
Ref: Biofuels in the European Context – Facts, Uncertainties and Recommendations, JRC working paper, December 2007
Doubts have also within the European Commission. Development Commissioner Michel expressed support for the call by the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food Jean Ziegler for governments to impose an international moratorium on setting targets for the increased use of agrofuels. Environment Commissioner Dimas admitted to the BBC that the environmental and social problems caused by agrofuels "are bigger than we thought they were".
According to the Stern Review, GHG emissions from agriculture were 14 per cent of the global total in 2000, long before biofuels were on the EU's agenda. Stern found that land use change, of which a major proportion is due to deforestation, accounted for 18 per cent of emissions. This means that biofuels and biomass for electricity have the potential to add massively to the very emissions they are meant to reduce. Ongoing work at University of California Berkeley indicates that emissions caused by land use changes and the ‘displacement’effect will be far greater than previously admitted.
Meanwhile the growth of EU road traffic shows that any benefits from agrofuels would instantly be swallowed up by traffic growth, especially if the European Parliament caves in to pressure from the car industry to have more time to reduce CO2 emissions. The expansion of industrial agriculture to produce agrofuels will further reduce climate benefits from the use of agrofuels, if any.
Press release: Renewables Directive: agrofuel target is ‘irresponsible and unsustainable’
This briefing was issued by:
Africa Europe Faith and Justice Network
Biofuelwatch
Corporate Europe Observatory
Grupo de Reflexion Rural
Econexus
Ecoropa
GM Freeze (UK)
Latin American Network against Monoculture Tree Plantations
Munlochy Vigil
NOAH - Friends of the Earth Denmark
Rettet den Regenwald
Salva la Selva
Transnational Institute
World Rainforest Movement
Also by TNI
- Six Steps towards a Drugs Policy that Promotes Peace and Respects Human Rights April 2012
- What was achieved in Marseilles and Vienna March 2012
- Democratise from below and save Europe's Economy February 2012
- State of Corporate Power 2012 January 2012
- Critical Perspectives and Alternative Solutions to the Eurozone Crisis December 2011
Subscribe
Upcoming events
-
Het vrijhandelsverdrag met Colombia
May 2012
Amsterdam, Netherlands
-
EU crisis: Another way is possible
June 2012
Amsterdam, Netherlands
-
Global Land Grabbing Colloquium
June 2012
Den Haag, Netherlands
-
Hoe schoon is gas?
June 2012
Amsterdam, Netherlands








