cross-posted from: https://lemmy.zip/post/53665220

The governments of Brazil, Italy, Japan, and India are spearheading a new pledge calling for the rapid global expansion of biofuels as a commitment to decarbonizing transportation energy.

An analysis by a clean transport advocacy organization published last month found that, because of the indirect impacts to farming and land use, biofuels are responsible globally for 16 percent more CO2 emissions than the planet-polluting fossil fuels they replace

  • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    13 hours ago

    This delay tactic again. They’ll probably bring back algae biofuel next time around.

    • Rhaedas@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      10 hours ago

      Climate Town just did a video on that topic. Exxon is apparently still running the PR commercials they made for it, but that project is all but dead because it wasn’t going anywhere. Turns out doubling the output of not much doesn’t get much.

        • Rhaedas@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 hours ago

          From a science pov it makes sense that it’s something to pursue, even as just a renewable biofuel. Algae grows fast, it’s where oil comes from, it’s a biological “fix”. It’s perfect. Except it didn’t work nearly as well as hoped.

          I looked into it a long time ago as a “solution” to how to best pull carbon of out the air and sequester it. Algae farms over deep water areas, grown and culled and the dead carbon sunk deep to stay out of the loop. Sounds perfect, doesn’t it?

          But in both scenarios there are so many costs and variables to consider that are left out when proponents are selling it. Some are just the “forgotten” costs of running a process that pollutes on their own and take energy (that requires emissions too). Some are effects outside the process that damage the environment in other ways. And the costs and effects of feeding the algae itself, it just won’t grow in a vat of water alone. So many things that change the net result. And with the case for fuel (which doesn’t lock the carbon away so it’s not a help to existing carbon in the air) assuming the fuel percentage per weight would be high enough to justify the rest of the costs. Which Exxon figured out it was not, while selling it as a miracle.