04-01-08 Biofuels may have worse environment impacts than conventional fossil fuels, reports a study published in the journal Science.
Analyzing recent findings from a Swiss government study on transport biofuels, J.P.W. Scharlemann and William F. Laurance say that arguments in favour of some large-scale biofuels often fail to fully account for the environmental costs of production, including destruction of forests, emissions of trace greenhouse gases, and air pollution.

Fuels derived from “residual products, such as bio waste or recycled cooking oil, as well as ethanol from grass or wood” may offer lower environmental costs, according to the authors.
“Biofuels are going to have a massive impact on nature and our economies, and we need to focus on the smartest biofuels,” Laurance, a senior researcher at the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute, told. “Some of the most important biofuels -- notably those produced from corn, soy and palm oil -- are generally bad for the environment. Biofuel fromsugarcane is also harmful if tropical forests are being destroyed to produce it.”

“The key point is that biofuels vary enormously in their relative merits. New biofuel technologies, especially those that focus on using fast-growing weedy plants or algae, are likely to be much more beneficial than using food crops for biofuels,” he continued.
“Food crops require lots of water, fertilizer, pesticides, and prime agricultural land, and these should be used for food -- not biofuels.”

J.P.W. Scharlemann and W.F. Laurance (2007): “How Green are Biofuels?” Science vol. 319, 4 January 2008.