Maravi

(HERALD) Biofuels: Promote research on non food crops

Biofuels: Promote research on non food crops
Science and Technology by Sifelani Tsiko

THE biofuels debate is generating a lot of interest among readers with the pro-green movement calling for a total ban on the use of food crops for biodiesel production and the rival biotechnology camp pushing for increased use of food crops and other plants for biofuels as a way of mitigating the effects of climate change.

Ecologists, agronomists and others in the green movement sent e-mails that generally showed concern over the growing use of food crops such as maize, soy, sugar cane and others for biodiesel production.

They argued that the biofuels boom could reduce food security and drive up food prices in a world where up to 25 000 people die of hunger every day.

The use of food crops, they suggested, threatens food aid provisions for emergency situations in the South and opens competition for land — food crops versus food crops for biofuels production.

They also feared that the agro-fuels boom could push indigenous communities out of their lands, increase deforestation and poverty in rural areas as well as threaten biodiversity and the ecological system through unsustainable production systems.

The pro-biofuels camp expressed confidence that the agro-fuels direction is the way to go and that African governments should channel more resources towards research into renewable fuels as part of addressing energy challenges on the continent.

They felt strongly that African scientists in partnership with scientific institutions in the North could help develop renewable energy technologies that can help minimise the impact of climate change in Africa.

They also argued that Africa cannot afford to fold its hands in the wake of the huge opportunities that lie with the exploitation of renewable energies.

Africa, they also added, has numerous advantages over the North when it comes to the production of agro-fuels.

Critics charge that large oil multinationals are ganging up to exploit the benefits of this emerging industry and that without adequate regulatory frameworks, Africa stands to lose rather than gain from the biofuels boom.

After weighing the scales and taking the arguments from these two rival camps, it is important to also look at the third school of thought which is calling for the removal of food out of the biofuels boom.

"The only way to reap the benefits of biofuels without squeezing the food supply is to take food out of the picture," wrote Joel Bourne of the National Geographic.

He advocates increasing use of stalks, leaves, saw dust and other plant residues to produce biofuels.

"While each acre of corn (maize) produces around 300 gallons of ethanol a year and an acre of soybeans around 60 gallons of biodiesel, each acre of algae theoretically can churn out more than 5 000 gallons of biofuel each year," he said.

The production of maize on a large scale requires large doses of herbicide and nitrogen fertiliser and can cause more soil erosion than any other crop and environmentalists also argue that the production of ethanol from food crops consumes just about as much fossil fuel as the ethanol itself replaces.

Environmentalists further argue that the process of ethanol production gives off large amounts of carbon dioxide through increased use of fossil fuels in the distillation process.

"Biofuels are a total waste and misleading us from getting at what we really need to do — conservation," David Pimentel of the Cornell University was quoted saying. "This is a threat, not a service. Many people are seeing this as a boondoggle."

And, this week a visiting post doctoral researcher at the Institute of Microbial Biotechnology and Metagenomics at the University of the Western Cape, in an interview, called on African governments to support research into the use of non-food crops — maize stalks, waste, grass, bagasse, biomass and other micro-organisms to produce bio-ethanol.

"In Africa there is a lot of concern over food security and the use of food crops such as maize, sugar cane, soybeans and maize to produce biodiesel or ethanol," said Mark Taylor, a microbiologist who visited Zimbabwe recently.

"We should take food out of the picture and instead look at the whole range of microbes that produce ethanol. I work with a group that I call thermophiles — bacteria that grows at high temperatures. These are found in compost heaps and on the edges of active volcanoes, hotsprings and others places associated with high temperatures," he said.

Taylor said they collect the bacteria and screen it before using to increase the amount of ethanol they produce using genetic engineering techniques.

"Thermophiles degrade biomass and organic waste to produce bio-ethanol. It is crucial for African countries to fund more research into bacteria that can help produce ethanol or renewable fuels.

"Of course, there is concern of genetic engineering but the genetic engineering we do only uses natural processes. We delete and express genes that are endogenous (that are already there). We only work with genes that are only there in a bacteria and will always stay there," Taylor said.

"Food security in Africa is a hugely important issue and bio-ethanol production that does not use food crops merits priority in terms of research and funding."

Taylor is part of a pioneering group of researchers at the Institute for Microbial Biotechnology and Metagenomics specialising on research on biofuels using microbes. The research is being done in collaboration with a United Kingdom-based biofuels firm — TMO Renewables.

"Collaboration is always a good thing to do when it comes to research. We can all bring something to the table, together we can be stronger in terms of resources and intellectual input," he said.

"African countries have a huge potential for running bio-ethanol programmes because they have surplus land and biomass that can be used and dedicated for bio-ethanol production."

When asked about the growing worries over genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and their threat to food security and biodiversity, Taylor said: "I don’t have major concerns with GMOs though I understand that to the general public it can be intimidating. There should be focus on educating the people to understand that GMOs are generally safe when handled properly."

"GMOs should always be contained and never allowed to spread. They should be well managed while tapping on the benefits that come with it especially in bio-ethanol production. For bio-ethanol programmes to be successful in Africa legal frameworks and infrastructure should be developed to manage this new technology," he added.

"Our technology specifically focuses on non-food crops — microbes, stalks, husks, waste, biomass, grass and other plant residues. African governments should be involved because this (renewable fuel security) is a national concern. There are risks but we have to minimise the negative impact of our research while maximising the positives," Taylor said.

He said the bio-fuels field has a huge potential both nationally and internationally if meaningful research into the use of non-food crops for biofuels production is promoted.

"We should explore research into microbes that can produce bio-ethanol and examine prospects for using it as fuel for cars. We have not done any trials using ethanol derived from thermophiles (bacteria) but I believe this is a novel area worth investing research time on. It creates a lot of conflicts and generates debate.

"As scientists we need that criticism to ensure that we do a good job. Our research must have an impact on everyday life in a positive way," Taylor said.

Taylor is married to tennis enthusiast and social commentator Albert Nhamoyebonde’s daughter, Sandra. His views offer new insights into the biofuels debate.

There are now three dimensions to the biofuels debate — those advocating for the use of food crops for biofuels production in the genetic engineering field, environmentalists, agronomist and ecologists against the use of food crops and other plant crops such as jatropha and third way — calling for the use of non-food crops — bacteria, waste, plant residues for biofuels.

Out of the three, which do you as readers believe is better and why?

l Feedback- email to sifelani@ctdt.co.zw

Labels: BIOFUELS

posted by MrK @ 4:58 AM