Biofuels Digest investigation: dubious Reuters article on emissions fans anti-biofuel flames
An investigation by Biofuels Digest revealed that peer reviews have given the thumbs-down to an article published last week on nitrous oxide emissions from biofuel production.
The article, produced by a team including Nobel Prize-winning chemist Paul Crutzen, was described as “simplistic” in one peer review, while another concluded that the authors undercounted nitrogen absorption by 75%. Peer reviewers said that use of generally accepted data would have shown a net climate cooling from use of biofuels, rather than an increase.
Peer reviewers also criticized the study for calculating emission levels from rapeseed cultivation as high as 27 kilogram per hectare when numerous field trials have established a range of 9-15 kilograms per hectare.
The publishers of the original article, the Journal of Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, and Crutzen himself, have not publicized the article during the peer-review period.
Chemistryworld.com crafted a press release on September 24th, linking the study to an OECD report on biofuels, a report which ultimately turned out not to be from the OECD. The Chemistryworld press release mentioned that the original article was still in the peer-review period, it omitted coverage of the objections which had been posted to that date.
Reuters picked the story up on September 27th, interviewing one of the co-authors, Keith Smith. The Reuters article did not interview any of the peer reviewers, or mention the peer review objections.
The original article authors responded vigorously to questions about their nitrogen absorption factor assumption, but have remained silent on their reasons for rejecting accepted emission figures based on field trials.
