RFA says 2007 “a seminal year”; critics raise the ghost of Malthus, link biofuels to global starvation

In Florida, the Renewable Fuel Association said that “naysayers notwithstanding, 2007 was a seminal year for the industry“. Bob Dineen, executive director of the RFA, in his State of the Industry address at the annual RFA conference in Orlando, said that domestic production reached 6.5 billion gallons, consumption exceeded 7 billion gallons, 29 new refineries opened, and the new Renewable Fuel Standard set out a path for industry growth through 2022. He called the “food-vs-fuel” debate a “fallacy”, noting that ethanol producers do not use the protein in corn, and called articles in Science magazine a “worst case scenario”.

However, writing in the Financial Times, Mark Thirwell raised the ghost of Malthus and the question of how long the present imbalances between agricultural supply and demand will last, and can last.

Henry Miller writes in World Politics Review that politicians are “drunk with the prospect of corn-derived ethanol” and “starvation and malnourishment are becoming worse among the poorest of the poor.”

Jay Ambrose writes in the Scripps-Howard News Service that “Americans, who can mainly afford it, are paying more for food these days, but as a new U.N. report reminds us, there are poor people around the world who can’t afford the rising prices. They are going hungry, are rioting in some countries ― are even resorting to eating mud cookies in Haiti ― and maybe you are wondering why. Ethanol, that’s why.”

Earlier this month, an editorial by David Ridenour of the National Center for Public Policy Research, linking biofuels to higher retail food prices in the US, and “chronic hunger, malnutrition and starvation” in the poverty-stricken nations of Africa and Southeast Asia, has been widely syndicated in the United States.

The Raleigh News & Observer, the Sacramento Bee, the Fresno Bee, the Billings Gazette, the Washington Tri-City Herald, the Press of Atlantic City, the Bellingham Herald, the Anchorage Daily News, Hilton Head Island Packet, the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, the Oakland Tribune, the Alameda Times-Star and the Argus have run the story so far.

Reaction to last week’s shocking Science magazine articles continued, as biofuels associations and academics continued to respond to Science magazine articles published last week that condemned US biofuel production efforts.

The complete supporting online material from the Searchinger study, including well-to-wheel emission tables can be downloaded (free) here.

More on the Science magazine controversy from Biofuels Digest:

Editorial in Newsday that calls biofuels supporters “Biofools”

Argonne National Lab says Science article authors’ models did not factor in changing crop yields

Bad, bad biofuels”, more Science magazine reaction, and downloads to complete underlying data

A group of scientists write to US President George Bush and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi urging them to revise US biofuels policies

Biofuels emissions authors say biofuels OK if made from waste, perennials, or abandoned land

93 percent increase in greenhouse gases? Renewable Fuel Association says fossil fuels created the “carbon debt we can never repay”

Nature Conservancy study says converting land for biofuels increases net carbon usage

Reaction from world press is linked below, most of it strong reading, usually condemning biofuels:

The Register
San Francisco Chronicle
World Changing
Wall Street Journal
Science
The Morning Call
TIME
National Post (Canada)
CTV
The Car Connection
The Nature Conservancy
New York Times
Los Angeles Times
Washington Post
25×25 response