Biofuels, and what else ?!

According to some experts, farming biofuels produces gaz emissions. This is bad for the climate change.

Many persons consider the wider use of biofuels a promising way of reducing the surplus carbon dioxide (CO2). The theory is that plants such as sugar cane and wheat, take up CO2 during their growth, so burning fuels made from them should have no effect on the amount of that gas in the atmosphere. In theory, biofuels should not contribute to global warming.

Nonetheless, there are some differences between theory and practice. An English thinktank report concludes that the production of biofuels has aggravated rather than ameliorated global warming.

Several scientists concluded that most analyses had underestimated the importance to global warming of a gas called nitrous oxide (N2O). The amount of this gas released by farming biofuel crops probably negates by itself any advantage offered by reduced emissions of CO2.

Though N2O is not common in the Earth’s atmosphere, it is a more potent greenhouse gas than CO2.

An international report suggests that N2O emissions, in general, are probably more important than had been realised. Previous studies, including those by the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), a United Nations's experts, may have miscalculated theirs results.

What seems certain is that the nitrogen cycle is changing faster and more deeply than the carbon cycle, which has attracted more attention.

Very soon, the United-Nations will held a meeting about the organization of an international assessment of what is going on. We thought the biofuels as the solution for the Earth's future, but once more it was just some powder in eyes. The biofuels's case shows that without proper consideration of all greenhouse gases, not just CO2, it is too easy to rush headlong into expensive methods of mitigation that actually make things worse.

Pierre Sanchez