Greenpeace environmental activists and the Canadian Alliance party usually are not natural allies, but last week the two were sharing a skeptical viewpoint about ethanol’s role in reducing greenhouse gas.
The federal government announcement that it will put $100 million into developing ethanol plants drew an unenthusiastic response from Greenpeace climate campaigner Steven Guilbeault in Montreal. The ethanol funding was part of a $1 billion announcement on measures Canada will take to meet commitments made under the 1997 Kyoto protocol.
“I’m skeptical that ethanol will be a significant contributor to emission reductions,” he said in an interview. “The jury is still out. It takes a lot of energy to create ethanol and while burning ethanol reduces emissions, burning the fuel to make ethanol adds emissions.”
Read Also
Agriculture ministers agree to AgriStability changes
federal government proposed several months ago to increase the compensation rate from 80 to 90 per cent and double the maximum payment from $3 million to $6 million
He said it is rural policy disguised as environmental policy.
“To me, this really is some kind of subsidy for farmers,” he said. “I support help for farmers but using Kyoto money to do it is not right.”
In Red Deer, Alliance MP and party environment critic Bob Mills said he is glad for the boost ethanol expansion gives farmers and rural economies.
However, he too said ethanol should not be considered part of a permanent solution.
“I don’t think we should invest too much faith in ethanol,” he said Aug. 14. “I think there is a real question of how much it costs to produce and the amount of energy it consumes. I believe we should see ethanol as a transition fuel. We should be moving toward a clean air strategy that gets us away from carbon.”
Mills said development of hydrogen fuel technology offers far more hopeful prospects as a clean fuel and as a technology, that can be sold to developing countries that are serious polluters.
