Burning oil and planting forests to compensate for the emission of green house gasses is more environmentally friendly than burning biofuel, scientists have said.
Calculating the difference in net emissions between using land to produce biofuel and the alternative: fuelling cars with gasoline and replanting forests on the land instead, revealed, that biofuel production was not a "green process" anyway.
Cuba Goes Green -135 Million Trees To Be Planted
As part of a UN Environment Programme (UNEP) project , Cuba is planning to plant 135 million trees this year.
Advertisement
Production of biofuel required tractors and fertilisers and land, all of which meant burning fossil fuels to make "green" fuel.
In the case of bioethanol produced from corn - an alternative to oil - "it's essentially a zero-sums game," said Ghislaine Kieffer, programme manager for Latin America at the International Energy Agency in Paris, France.
![Travel Green-Save Your Planet]( "Travel Green-Save Your Planet")
Warwick University researchers have designed the car of the future. The tyres are made of potatoes and the brake pads from ground cashew shells.
Environmentalists have also expressed concern over the growing political backing that biofuel is enjoying, which essentially means chopping down forests to make room for biofuel crops such as maize and sugarcane.
"When you do this, you immediately release between 100 and 200 tonnes of carbon [per hectare]," said Renton Righelato of the World Land Trust, UK, a conservation agency that seeks to preserve rainforests.
Righelato said findings further revealed that reforestation would sequester between two and nine times as much carbon over 30 years than would be saved by burning biofuels instead of gasoline.
"You get far more carbon sequestered by planting forests than you avoid emissions by producing biofuels on the same land," said Righelato.
He said, as such, governments should steer away from biofuel and focus on reforestation and maximising the efficiency of fossil fuels, if they are really concerned over controlling emissions.
"If the point of biofuels policies is to limit global warming, policy makers may be better advised in the short term to focus on increasing the efficiency of fossil fuel use, to conserve existing forests and savannahs, and to restore natural forest and grassland habitats on cropland that is not needed for food," Righelato said.
The study appears in the journal Science, reports New Scientist.
Source: ANI
LIN/B
Travel Green-Save Your Planet
Warwick University researchers have designed the car of the future. The tyres are made of potatoes and the brake pads from ground cashew shells.
Advertisement
Environmentalists have also expressed concern over the growing political backing that biofuel is enjoying, which essentially means chopping down forests to make room for biofuel crops such as maize and sugarcane.
"When you do this, you immediately release between 100 and 200 tonnes of carbon [per hectare]," said Renton Righelato of the World Land Trust, UK, a conservation agency that seeks to preserve rainforests.
Righelato said findings further revealed that reforestation would sequester between two and nine times as much carbon over 30 years than would be saved by burning biofuels instead of gasoline.
"You get far more carbon sequestered by planting forests than you avoid emissions by producing biofuels on the same land," said Righelato.
He said, as such, governments should steer away from biofuel and focus on reforestation and maximising the efficiency of fossil fuels, if they are really concerned over controlling emissions.
"If the point of biofuels policies is to limit global warming, policy makers may be better advised in the short term to focus on increasing the efficiency of fossil fuel use, to conserve existing forests and savannahs, and to restore natural forest and grassland habitats on cropland that is not needed for food," Righelato said.
The study appears in the journal Science, reports New Scientist.
Source: ANI
LIN/B
Bio-fuels Would Increase Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Says Senior British Scientists
Ronald Clift, a senior science adviser to the British government, has come out in the open against bio-fuels, saying they would only increase greenhouse gas emissions
Advertisement
Advertisement
|
Advertisement
Latest Environmental Health
As global warming accelerates, the need for immediate and ongoing action to mitigate climate change's catastrophic consequences becomes imperative.
Forever chemicals or per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) exposure in children, may cause them to mature later during puberty.
To achieve more substantial reductions in emissions, hospital sustainability efforts must extend their focus beyond the surface.
Most parents in Canada support moving school activities indoors to protect children from poor air quality.
The increasing demand for bioinsecticides reflects a broader shift toward sustainable agriculture, prioritizing long-term ecological health and food security.
