The main problems that are experienced with biofuels are the danger of being counterproductive for climate change and the effects they would have on food prices. Both problems are recognised by the European Commission, but are not yet fully acknowledged as opinion on this subject is, at present, still mixed.

While one study says that using the wrong kind of soil for energy crops would cause an emission increase instead of a reduction, another study concludes that the 10% goal in 2020 will need no major new land use. And these are only two examples of studies in recent months about which GreenPrices reported.

So which message on biofuels should we believe?

It is interesting to see the different conclusions the national governments are now drawing. Again the signals are very mixed. With the new UK Renewable Transport Fuel Obligation starting in April, PM Gordon Brown is coming under fire by senior scientific advisors like Bob Watson (see the article in the Guardian this week). He is said to 'prepare a battle' with the Commission about the EU targets.

On the other hand, Dutch ministers Cramer and Koenders are urging for greater speed in deciding on sustainability criteria. They argue that the biofuels demand will increase anyway - with or without the EU. So global biofuels production will be better off with the EU sustainability criteria than without them.

Analysing the discussion, I think all the questions could be reduced to just one: Can we be confident that the proposed criteria will cause a sustainable biofuels production, without large dangers for the world's food supply?

There are no guarantees. But one thing is for sure: If concerned parties don’t have confidence in the Commission, the above question will never be answered in a positive way. If confidence is lacking in Europe, the EU will never convince other countries in the world to go along on the same sustainable path.

Rolf de Vos
Editor in chief
GreenPrices
r.devos@greenprices.com