Biofuels: Yes, but Not Just Any Way

This article was originally published in our "Décryptage Mobilité" newsletter. To receive future articles by email as soon as they are published, Subscribe now.

By Éloise Dulac, Consultant

The use of biofuels is one of the solutions considered in most transition scenarios to limit the rise in temperatures to below +2°C. For example, if used in both the road and air transportation sectors, they could reduce emissions by more than 3 GtCO2 by 2050, under the 2DS (2°C-compatible) and RTS (Business-As-Usual) scenarios of the International Energy Agency (IEA) [1], particularly with so-called “advanced” biofuels.

In this context, it is important to note that For example, France is Europe's largest producer of agricultural alcohol, a significant portion of which is used in bioethanol production [2]. In 2017, the inputs used for this production were distributed as follows [3]:

Bioethanol is produced primarily from raw materials that can be used for human or animal consumption (wheat, sugar beets, corn, etc.). It therefore falls under the category of first-generation biofuels and is not considered an “advanced” biofuel, according to the terminology used by the IEA. Biodiesel, which is an oil derived from oilseeds such as rapeseed or sunflower, falls into the same category. These first-generation biofuels, which compete with food crops, are highly controversial for various reasons. First, their production can lead to two types of land-use change (LUC):

• Direct land-use change: land covered by forest or permanent grassland is converted to cropland (primarily in Asia and Africa)
• Indirect land-use change: Land previously used for food crops is converted to energy crops, leading to a shift in food production to other, previously uncultivated land (e.g., France)

In addition to affecting biodiversity, land-use change is an important factor in estimating the climate impact of biofuels. In fact, crops store very little carbon compared to a forest or primary grassland, and these biofuel production methods generally result in carbon emissions into the atmosphere. Finally, first-generation biofuels are criticized for their role in the volatility of grain prices, as grains are essential for feeding a large portion of the population. If we focus solely on the climate issue, due to the difficulties in estimating emissions from the various stages of the production process (cultivation, processing, and transportation)—and particularly emissions linked to land-use changes— Estimates of the GHG benefits of biofuels vary widely depending on the sector and the production process. However, despite these uncertainties, The conclusions are sometimes clear enough to enable lawmakers to make bold decisions. Thus, in December 2018, French lawmakers voted to ensure that products made from palm oil would not be considered biofuels, largely due to concerns about the deforestation caused by its production [4]. In light of the controversies we have just briefly mentioned, Research has now shifted toward using non-food feedstocks and waste to produce biofuels.We’ll come back to this in a future newsletter, as the world of so-called “advanced” biofuels is particularly vast …

Sources: [1] IEA [2] Cars and Motorcycles [3] MTES [4] Les Echos