The organic industry isn’t too pumped about biofuel.
While many farm groups are thrilled that the federal government has lived up to its commitment to establish a national mandate for renewable fuel, people in the organic sector feel the country is heading down a dangerous path.
“Industrial-scale biodiesel and ethanol production is arguably the biggest threat to environmental sustainability and local organic food systems since the introduction of GMOs,” said Elizabeth White, former president of Canadian Organic Growers in the latest edition of the association’s quarterly magazine.
Read Also
Canola oil transloading facility opens
DP World just opened its new canola oil transload facility at the Port of Vancouver. It can ship one million tonnes of the commodity per year.
COG executive director Laura Telford said that might be overstating it, but she agrees with the general sentiment expressed by White.
“I don’t think biofuels necessarily have to be evil but the direction they are going is not the right one,” she said.
Telford’s objection stems from ethanol’s reliance on corn and biodiesel’s preference for canola, two predominantly genetically modified crops – the nemesis of organic agriculture.
As part of her argument for moving away from corn-based ethanol she points to a 2005 study by Cornell University ecologist David Pimentel showing that turning an input-intensive corn crop into ethanol requires 29 percent more fossil energy than it produces.
But according to the Worldwatch Institute, another group devoted to environmental sustainability, that is bunk.
In a report released last summer the group said there is an emerging consensus in the scientific community that all common biofuel contains more useful energy than is required to produce them. That includes the controversial corn-based ethanol.
“Its average energy balance now clearly exceeds 1, (the ratio of fossil fuel used to make biofuel) thanks to improved energy efficiency in both agriculture and ethanol refining,” said the institute in its June 7, 2006 report.
Even if that is the case Telford doesn’t want the Canadian government to promote a biofuel agenda that encourages the proliferation of GM crops because that threatens organic markets where there is zero tolerance for GM contamination.
The GM crop issue isn’t the only objection to alternative fuels. Telford said organic producers don’t want industrial crops to displace those grown for food. On that front the organic industry is in step with the Worldwatch Institute.
“It is essential that government incentives be used to minimize competition between food and fuel crops and to discourage expansion onto ecologically valuable lands,” said Worldwatch biofuel project manager Suzanne Hunt.
In its report, Biofuels for Transportation: Global Potential and Implications for Sustainable Agriculture and Energy in the 21st Century, the institute recommends policies to accelerate the development of cellulose-based biofuel, a process that converts raw material like switchgrass fibres and crop residue into ethanol.
That is an approach to biofuel development that Telford could stomach.
“There is lots of promise. We just have to do it right,” she said.
Telford acknowledged the organic sector is not beyond reproach when it comes to the energy issue. Organic growers are heavily reliant on tillage for weed control, which means plenty of time spent on diesel-guzzling tractors.
“That is a criticism of organic agriculture and I agree that we haven’t solved that,” she said.
The industry is attempting to address the issue by sponsoring research into low-till organics and by developing equipment like crimping machines that break weeds rather than plowing them under. But for the time being tillage remains necessary in organic circles.
Despite its overreliance on that practice, Telford contends that with no chemical inputs, more manual labour and the use of cover crops, the organic sector still uses far less net energy than conventional farming. That is why she thinks there could be a market for organic biofuel.
