World’s Scientists Being Asked to Stand Behind Biodiesel.Does it Make Sense?
An ongoing effort asking scientists from around the world to pledge their support for biodiesel is getting quick results ( according to the United Soybean Board).Scientists who sign the petition are agreeing that biodiesel can reduce dependence on petroleum, help address climate change and boost domestic economies. Additionally, by signing the declaration, the scientists pledge their support for further investment and research, which will enhancebiodiesel’s status as a sustainable fuel for transportation and other uses as well as its ability to meet the world’s food, feed, fiber and energy needs of the future.
Roger Beachy, Ph.D., president of the Donald Danforth Plant Science Center in St. Louis, and Rob Myers, Ph.D., founder of the Thomas Jefferson Agricultural Institute in Columbia, Mo., serve as co-chairs of the campaign, which invites all members of the scientific community to visit http://www.biodieselsustainability.com/scientists.html and add their names to the list of biodiesel supporters.
The soybean checkoff has a long-term investment in researching sustainable,renewable biodiesel, said Vanessa Kummer, United Soybean Board (USB) communications chair and a soybean farmer from Colfax, N.D. So it’s good to see the scientific community coming out in support of biodiesel. It’s important to increase awareness of the science behind using soy biodiesel as an answer to decreasing our dependence on petroleum while still providing food, feed and fiber for the world.
More than 80 scientists have signed up since Myers and Beachy announced the declaration at the National Biodiesel Board Conference and Expo earlier this year.
As a consistent source of funding for the research and promotion of biodiesel, the soybean checkoff has been a major force in increasing biodiesel production from 500,000 gallons in 1999 to nearly 700 million gallons in 2008. Checkoff-funded research, for example, has found that soybean oil is the superior biodiesel feedstock due to the improved lubricity, cold-flow properties and other diesel-engine benefits provided by soy biodiesel.
According to Myers, biodiesel is an obvious choice as a fuel of the future.
Biodiesel is such a good fit with our goals for domestically produced, renewable energy
sources,” said Myers, who grew up on a corn and soybean farm in Illinois. “Soybean, as the
predominant crop currently used forbiodiesel, is an environmentally friendly crop from the
standpoint that it produces its own nitrogen and doesn’t need nitrogen fertilizer.
Short URL: http://www.mygreeneducation.com/?p=2804
Posted by Gordon Smith
on Jun 3 2009. Filed under Energy Tech, Environmental, Green Career, Green Jobs.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0.
You can leave a response or trackback to this entry
In the last ten years, soybean producers received over $15 billion in subsidies, constituting anywhere from 3% to 34% of annual crop value. More acreage under cultivation would result in a proportional increase in subsidies. Long-term “energy independence” is not achieved through artificial economies. Market externalities, such as irrigation water diversion project subsidies and fertilizer water pollution, should also enter into the equation. Biofuels requiring heavy direct and indirect US Government subsidies are not a viable alternative, short or long term.
I welcome the discussion around this, and acknowledge that biodiesel has a place in a peak-oil and climate change response. How and where it becomes part of the change needs very careful consideration, and I would like to draw your attention to the excellent article by Sharon Astyk on the Ethics of Biofuels.
In particular the use of soybeans for biodiesel is problematic where it leads to more rainforest destruction in the Amazon, and raised global food costs. In his testimony before the United States Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, Joachim von Braun covers the issue of Biofuels, International Food Prices, and the Poor.
Biofuels requiring government subsidies are not a viable solution. About time we looked at the biofuels industry in such a cold, harsh but realistic light.
The article Ethics of Biofuels is good, at least I think so. So, are we going to have beef or drive our cars, the article aks.
We do need sensible discussion; I am listening. A worry is that emotionalism on being wonderfully green, and lack of fuller discussion may be leading investment and talent away from areas which may have better potential.
How do we get to that point of sensible discussion? One way would be for the learned people, such as these two above, to keep educating everyone else.
Of the various energy ideas, wind power certainly seems feasible and so does cellulosic ethanol (still needs much development) if done at the local level so the cost of transporting farm wastes do not overwhelm the cost/energy equation.
But, I am learning all this, so do please excuse any guffaws.