Any place where trade journalists congregate there is likely to be a high cynicism quotient. It is pretty much the de rigeur attitude for journalists. While it may seem unfair, it does, one hopes, keep the PR machine reasonably honest, and means that any story published contains more fact than promoter’s purple prose and gives a fair and reasonable view of what has, or is about to, take place.
Read the rest of this entry →
Over two years ago I wrote on another blog that biofuels would be a crucial factor in the ‘08 race for the Whitehouse. It was, I boldly forecast, going to be such an important topic that it would be the key to the success or failure of the candidates’ campaigns.
Well I was wrong. As it was so long ago I was tempted to ignore how badly my prediction had been, but really I thought it was simply too important to ignore.
The topic of biofuels has hardly come up at all during the campaign. In fact the topic is of apparently so little importance that I actually wrote to both campaigns three weeks ago just to see if they had a position on biofuels. I contacted the press office of the candidates and asked for a statement on their stance on the future of biofuels.
The outcome of the emails is that to date I have been swamped by begging messages from the Obama campaign, asking for money, and I have heard absolutely nothing from the McCain camp.
Overall while Obama was initially seen to be keen on biofuels (see his myspace blog of 2006), more recently a BBC news piece highlighted a noticeable change in his approach. Turning to the McCain camp it has, by and large, been anti, but has kept the fact low profile as it might impact on his votes in the midwest corn belt which has been doing pretty well out of the recent ethanol push from the US government. However, it’s worth looking at a piece published in Ethanol Producer Magazine in August this year, which suggests that McCain’s energy plan doesn’t include biofuels (read the article) at all.
There really is little more to add. If you thought that biofuels really mattered to the politicians think again. They were sexy when they thought there might be a vote in them. Once it got complicated it was easier just to ignore them.
I was at a conference a couple of weeks ago, where the initial session was given over to some highly experienced pundits giving their views on the way the biofuels market could develop. Without exception they pointed to Africa as having huge potential for producing a substantial amount of biofuel feedstock. However, only one speaker even acknowledged that there could be some “difficulty” in the continent matching up to the projected figures.
The pundits at the conference certainly aren’t the only one’s who are including substantial African figures in their projections. A quick call round the market seem to back up the general feeling that it is reasonable to include Africa’s vast feedstock potential in the forecasts.
Intelligent debate is crucial to the development of biofuels. It is right and proper that people with ideas put them forward and that those idea are rigorously challenged, by people who think it is wrong or bad.
Sadly, however, some students at Brown University and their half witted friends at Greenwash Guerillas, don’t think this is the right way to go about things. It would seem that silencing critics is easier as New York Times columnist and author Thomas Friedman was pied by the Greenwash Guerillas while giving an Earth Day Lecture at Brown University. (see the video at the end of this piece.)
There is a long history of organizations and governments who chose to squash comment and opinion that they didn’t agree with; the Nazis, Pol Pot, Stalin, Robespierre to name a few. I’m sure Greenwash Guerillas and the students at Brown are proud to be associated with such company.
Perhaps the next step for The Greenwash Guerillas set-up a book burning night where they can get rid of any book that they consider transgresses their greenwash rules.
Whatever happened to the idea, often attributed to the great thinker Voltaire:
I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
The increasingly acrimonious spat between the EU and the USA over the dumping of subsidised diesel on to the European market, will do neither party, or for that matter the biodiesel industry, any good in the long run.
For those of you who have, so far, missed this particular piece of nonsense let me bring you up to speed. Early last year the effect of a piece of US Federal legislation, enacted in 2004, started to be felt in Europe. The legislation, designed to support the US biodiesel industry, effectively gave a subsidy of about $300/tonne, in the form of tax credits, to a B99.9 blend biodiesel. In other words, a drop of mineral diesel in the tonne of biodiesel produced a huge subsidy.
Well you have to give it to the New York Times a couple of weeks ago I took severe exception to one of its columnists, Paul Krugman, who had written an appallingly smug piece, “Pointing the finger at biofuels won’t solve the problem“, about the biofuels market. According to Mr Krugman all the evils of the world could be laid squarely at the door of biofuels. In fact, if he were to be believed, we would rather have the four horsemen of the apocalypse trotting down the high street rather than countenance biofuels.
Well this week we have another op/ed columnist at the NY Times, Roger Cohen, whose piece “Bring on the right biofuels” rather neatly offers the other side of the story. In a nutshell he suggests that it is time to ditch the hysteria, look at the science and make positive choices about the biofuels that can help so many. It’s worth a read.
I found myself on the Food First site (www.foodfirst.org) today reading what is possibly one of the best overviews of the current food crisis I have come across. While, it does get a little conspiratorial half way through the piece, Pouring Fuel on the Food, written by Eric Holt-Giménez, Ph.D. Executive Director, Food First/Institute for Food and Development Policy, highlights the sheer stupidity of international food policy.
But as Dr. Holt-Giménez so rightly points out this crisis has been in the making for decades. While it is convenient to point the finger at biofuels, the international community really does need to get together and do something about it now. Right now!
There’s nothing quite as smug as an op-ed columnist, who claims the high ground, and currently The New York Times’s Paul Krugman is unbelievably smug. In a column, Grains Gone Wild (read the full piece) published on 7th April Krugman opens up with the platitude; “These days you hear a lot about the world financial crisis. But there’s another world crisis under way — and it’s hurting a lot more people.”
He is, of course, referring to a real and chronic shortage of staple food stuffs around the world. While I may not like his writing style, he is absolutely right. He is also bang on the nose when he suggests that there are a variety of reasons for the problem; “How did this happen? The answer is a combination of long-term trends, bad luck — and bad policy.”
Perhaps the best example of weak economic and scientific logic at work on this issue is the recent attempt to push for biofuels and ethanol as alternative energy sources which can protect the environment and enhance national energy security in certain markets.
A forthright quote that leaves the reader in no doubt as to the speaker’s position. But who said the words, Greenpeace, Friends of the Eath, George Monbiot…? Well actually none of the above. In fact it was part of a speech (read the full text) given by The Honourable Ali bin Ibrahim Al-Nami, the Minister of Petroleum and Mineral Resources for Saudi Arabi at the International Oil Summit in Paris last week.
While there is really nothing to add to the story, I couldn’t let the delightful tale of a man who has been arrested in the USA for allegedly stealing cooking grease from a fast food outlet, go unmentioned here. According to a report on the CBS website (Man Arrested In South Bay Restaurant Grease Heist) the alleged theft was possibly carried out in order to make biofuels with the inedible grease.
Any other pieces of delightful biofuels nonsense are much appreciated at “Fuelling the biofuels debate” just drop them on an email to giles@biofuelreview.com
![[del.icio.us]](http://www.fuellingthedebate.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/delicious.png)
![[Digg]](http://www.fuellingthedebate.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/digg.png)
![[Google]](http://www.fuellingthedebate.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/google.png)
![[Newsvine]](http://www.fuellingthedebate.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/newsvine.png)
![[Reddit]](http://www.fuellingthedebate.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/reddit.png)
![[StumbleUpon]](http://www.fuellingthedebate.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/stumbleupon.png)
![[Technorati]](http://www.fuellingthedebate.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/technorati.png)