| 31/03/08 Biofuels are widely considered one of the most promising sources
                of renewable energy by policy makers and environmentalists alike.
                However, unless principles and standards for production are developed
                and implemented, certain biofuels will cause severe environmental
                impacts and reduce biodiversity – the very opposite of
                what is desired.
               Corn-based ethanol is currently the most widely used biofuel
                      in the United States, but it is also the most environmentally
                      damaging among crop-based energy sources. A new article
                      published in Conservation Biology, a publication of the
                      Society for Conservation
                      Biology, qualitatively contrasts
                      major potential sources of biofuels, including corn, grasses,
                      fast-growing trees and oil crops. The study highlights
                      their relative impacts on the environment in terms of water
                      and fertilizer use and other criteria to calculate the
                    environmental footprint of each crop. “The central goals of any biofuel policy must minimize
                      risks to biodiversity and to our climate,” says lead
                      author Martha Groom of the University of Washington. She
                      recommends the further use of algae and fast-growing trees
                      as biofuel sources because they yield more fuel per acre
                      than any feedstocks currently being pursued. As well as comparing potential biofuel feedstocks, the
                      study also recommends a number of major principles for
                      governing the development of environmentally friendly biofuels.
                      Feedstocks should be grown according to sustainable and
                      environmentally safe agricultural practices with minimal
                      ecological footprints (the area of land required to grow
                      and support sufficient amounts of the crop). In particular,
                      emphasis should be placed on biofuels that can sequester
                      carbon or have a negative or zero carbon balance. “While some biofuels may be an improvement over
                      traditional fuels, we believe we should focus much more
                      on the biofuels of the future that can be developed in
                      small spaces, rather than extensively on crop lands,” explains
                      Groom. “We also must shun biofuels that are grown
                      by clearing biologically-rich habitats, such as tropical
                      rainforests, as has occurred with oil palm and some other
                      biofuels.” The study was co-authored by Elizabeth
                      Gray, the director of science for The Nature Conservancy’s
                      Washington state program, and Patricia Townsend, a Ph.D.
                      candidate in the Department of Biology at UW. 
                      Defra Launches New Organic Advisory Service for Farmers 
  Making Millions from Wind Farms 
  Farmers Understand the Carbon Footprint Science |