Ethical and Legal Issues with Biofuels:
How much actual greenhouse gas emissions will be achieved by different biofuels throughout their life-cycle?
- The impact of using corn as a feedstock for ethanol on global food costs alone raise significant concerns about distributive and procedural justice and should be reasoned enough that another course of action is needed. Those most affected by rising corn prices have little or no say in the wider technological decisions that are driving interests in corn ethanol- a process being driven primarily by certain agriculture lobbies in Washington. A recent study conducted by Alder et al (2007), produced a lifestyle assessment of various crops used for biofuels. The findings suggested that "compared with the lifestyle of gasoline and diesel, ethanol and biodiesel from corn rotations reduced GHG emissions by 40% , reed canarygrass by 85%, and switchgrass and poplar by 115%. These findings show that corn by no means seem like the best candidate compared to the other biofuel sources as switchgrass. Some suggest that ethanol is not carbon neutral because of the energy needed to grow the crops, transport it and to convert it into usable engine fuel. Also, some say ethanol is actually worse for the environment because it takes up vital land that used to be covered by non replaceable forests that feed on carbon.
Is it fine to genetically modify a certain crop so as to increase the yield per acre?
- Genetic engineering (GE) is also used for the growing cycle and composition (higher starch content). Without genetically modified crops being used to grow crops for fuel, it wouldn't be practical to grow it anymore because the output and volume wouldn't be sufficient to convert into ethanol. Already much of the vegetables that we consume is somehow or another genetically modified to either grow bigger, be a different color, or be less susceptible to drought or cold conditions. But the use of genetic engineering also bring up another good point about cross pollination into non-GE corn crops. Other possible signs of risk of GE feedstocks are coming to the fore, such as the possible contribution of GE pollen to the colony collapse disorder of bee colonies all across Europe and the U.S. The long term risks of eating these foods are still not known. Avoiding increasing the amount of GE in relation to at least food based feedstocks for use in biofuels would be preferable, and follow from the application of the precautionary principle of the case, but, it appears that some genetic engineering is assumed necessary.
Is it more important to grow crops to be used for biofuels while there are direct consequences on the global food prices resulting in food shortages and millions of starving humans?
- This question brings up a very controversial and important issue regarding the ethics of biofuels. It is called "Food vs. Fuel" and it is a major dilemma the world faces to this day. It regards diverting farmland and crops for biofuels production while it may have a direct impact on the food supply on a global scale. From January 2005 until June 2008, maize prices almost tripled, wheat increased almost 127% and corn used in ethanol production went p by a factor of three in less than three years. Also,corn is commonly used a feed for livestock, and higher corn prices lead to higher prices in Animal source foods. So not only did the price of food for people increase, but food prices for livestock increased as well.
- Venezuela's President Hugo Chavez dismissed Bush's ethanol plan of 2007 as "a crazy thing" and accused the U.S of trying "to substitute the production of foodstuffs for animals and human beings with the production of foodstuffs for vehicles, to sustain the American way of life."
Above, is a chart that shows different crops greenhouse gas emissions, the use of resources during growing and production, and the amount of U.S soil to meet half the amount of the demand for fuel in the U.S in present-day.
Looking at the picture above, on the left, it shows an example of a corn crop without being genetically modified. And on the right, is a corn crop that was genetically modified. The motive behind the genetic engineering is to make the crop more durable to weather, temperature, soil condition and disease. Scientists can alter the DNA of the corn plant to make it resistant to something that may hurt it.
In the above picture, George W. Bush and President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva visit one of the many sugar cane plants where they convert it into an ethanol biofuel. Brazil has now become independent and doesn't get any imported oil because they can sustain their own country's energy needs.
Millions of people all across the globe are directly affected by food price increases. The World Bank estimated that in 2001, there were 2.7 billion people who lived in poverty on less than U.S $2 per day. This was nearly half of the world population in 2001 of 6 billion.
Although ethanol and other biofuels may not be a viable and practical source of fuel in the near future, many scientists are devoting much if not all of their time to researching new biofuels, or finding ways to enhance and make the ones available more efficient and more sustainable. Even though we rely mostly on fossil fuels to run much of our daily lives, they will eventually run out whether it may be 50 or 500 years from now. There is also no doubt that humans here on Earth are directly in some way affecting climate change. The way we live our daily lives and utilize our resources is in no way sustainable. To reverse this problem, the U.S along with the rest of the world is finding and creating newer, cleaner, more sustainable sources of fuel for the future: Biofuels. While we lessen our carbon footprint, we are also securing a better future for not just ourselves, but the future generations to come.