This is an article discussing the major issue that a recent European Commission report on the cost effectiveness of biofuels might not be as cost effective as once believed. This report could have a negative impact on the current biofuel policies that the commission once believed to be critical in the fight against global warming.
This report, coming at a bad time for the already scrutinized biofuel industry, contends that the man justification for biofuels is that they are greener than their petroleum based counterparts. “Many environmental advocates claim that a large number of fuels grown from crops do not merit public subsidies or production incentives” claims the articles authory, James Kanter, of the New York Times.
In December of 2008, European governments agreed that only biofuels that reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 35 percent, compared to their fossil fuel counterparts, would be qualified for meeting the current goal reducing the carbon footprint. However, these European governments directed the European Commission to investigate the impact of indirect land use change, and to decide whether any changes needed to be made about which biofuels would qualify toward this goal.
According to the report, most of the models in studies used for calculating emissions would rule out fuels made from crops in the E.U. According to Amandine Lecourt, the spokeswoman for the European Biodiesel Board, negative effects on emissions from indirect land use change were “still unproved.”