Biofuel: the debate continues

Environmental groups in the Netherlands have reached agreement with energy companies about co-firing wood with coal in power stations. But a debate hosted by the KNAW on 10 April will give voice to critics who say that any confidence in biofuel as an alternative to fossil fuels is misguided.

The agreement between the energy companies and environmental groups including Greenpeace comes after a two-year deadlock, which has slowed down implementation of the government's crucial Energy Agreement.

Tough guarantees

The Energy Agreement is meant to pave the way for more sustainable energy and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Among other things, it offers energy companies subsidies for switching to cleaner fuel. But according to Greenpeace and other environmental groups, the conditions imposed to ensure sustainable production of these alternative fuels were not strict enough.

The agreement announced by the Economic Affairs ministry on Friday means the Netherlands will now have the toughest guarantees "of any country", said Ed Nijpels of the Social and Economic Council of the Netherlands (SER). And with the threat of litigation averted, there are no longer any obstacles to implementing the Energy Agreement in full.

Flawed science

But last January, the Royal Academy of Arts and Sciences (KNAW) published a position paper (.pdf) that casts serious doubt on the science behind this part of the agreement.

Authors Martijn Katan, Rudy Rabbinge and NIOO-director Louise Vet summarise the conclusions of a number of independent experts, who say the use of biofuel and wood combustion will not lead to a substantial decrease in greenhouse gas emissions. According to these experts:

• Wood produces at least as much CO₂ as coal, and if you plant new trees it will take 20-100 years before they can absorb the extra emissions
• Whole forests are now being cut down because the subsidies offered by the Dutch government make it more profitable for land owners to do so
• Biofuel competes with more valuable and more urgent uses of biomass, e.g. extracting raw materials to convert them into plastics

Hearing both sides

The position paper sparked a great deal of controversy in the Netherlands, with supporters of biofuel such as André Fraaij of the Energy Academy Europe accusing the KNAW of political activism. That's why the KNAW is now organising a symposium that offers a platform to both sides.

Fraaij will be one of the speakers on 10 April. The subject of his paper is "How biobased economy can be part of sustainable development and why we can't do without it". Other speakers, such as Martin Junginger from Utrecht University and David MacKay from Cambridge University, will focus more on the "uncertainties" and on "sustainable energy without the hot air."

There is more information about the symposium on the KNAW website. Participation is free, but as there is a limited number of places registration is compulsory.