Destroying Native Ecosystems for Biofuel, Worsens Global Warming

Researchers from the University of Minnesota have released a study that points out the obvious: the creation of biofuels contributes more to the climate change problem than just burning fossil fuels. Not sure why this isn't understood already. The math is really simple. In order to produce biofuels, carbon sequestering land must be converted to crops to convert to fuel. Once the crop is harvest and converted, a process that consumes fuel, the fuel produced is burned and carbon is released into the atmosphere. And the cycle continues. This versus the burning of fossil fuels, which isn't renewable. The problem is in the decimating of existing forests for farmland.

“If you’re trying to mitigate global warming, it simply does not make sense to convert land for biofuels production. All the biofuels we use now cause habitat destruction, either directly or indirectly. Global agriculture is already producing food for six billion people. Producing food-based biofuel, too, will require that still more land be converted to agriculture.” -- Joe Fargione, The Nature Conservancy.

The biofuel industry was never created to save the world -- rather it was a product of politics and economics. The US, primarily, wanted to reduce its dependence on Middle East oil. Converting farmland for biofuel production also served to placate US farmers who could no longer compete with cheap food imports. Instantly, a new industry cropped up from nowhere, and everyone was touting ethanol to justify their SUV disease. If the goal really was to save the world, forests would be protected and there would be more investment in wind and solar energy production; and legislation mandating stricter fuel efficiency standards would be passed. Used effectively, legislation would spur economic activity in support of conservation. Look what it did for the biofuel industry.