Much needed straight talk about Indirect Land Use Changes and Biofuels from Oak Ridge National Lab

[JohnWxy]

researchers.

Here is a very good, concise statement about the realities of land use changes (particularly with regard to deforestation of rainforests) from actual scientists, from the Oak Ridge National Laboratory. This is not the sort of article that will get reported with hysterical headlines (won't sell papers I guess) so you'll only see it here, you'll never hear tell of these insights on this issue in the M$M.

I must caution the true believers who are certain biofuels (read: Ethanol) is the work of the devil or the product of witchcraft and sorcerers - this article presents the scientific perspective using empirical evidence. This will certainly be viewed as dangerous blasphemy by you true believers. Read this at your peril for you will see facts presented and clear non-hysterical discussion of the issue of land use changes and what really causes deforestation. Very evil stuff indeed!!


http://www.geocities.com/jwalkerxy/ILUC_Oak_Ridge.pdf


~~
~~
Not only have many criticisms of biofuels been alarmist, many have been simply inaccurate. In 2007 and early 2008, for
example, a bumper crop of media articles blamed sharply higher food prices worldwide on the production of biofuels, particularly
ethanol from corn, in the United States. Subsequent studies, however, have shown that the increases in food prices were primarily
due to many other interacting factors: increased demand in emerging economies, soaring energy prices, drought in foodexporting
countries, cutoffs in grain exports by major suppliers, market-distorting subsidies, a tumbling U.S. dollar, and speculation in commodities markets.

Although ethanol production indeed contributes to higher corn prices, it is not a major factor in world food costs. The U.S.
Department of Agriculture (USDA) calculated that biofuel production contributed only 5% of the 45% increase in global food
costs that occurred between April 2007 and April 2008.

.... A Texas A&M University study concluded that energy prices were the primary cause of food price increases, noting that between January 2006 and January 2008 the prices of fuel and fertilizer, both major inputs to agricultural production, increased by 37% and 45% respectively.

.... And the International Monetary Fund has documented that since their peak in July 2008, oil prices declined by 69% as of December 2008, and global food prices declined by 33% during the same period, while U.S. corn production has remained at 12 billion bushels a month


In another line of critique, some argue that the potential benefits of biofuel might be offset by indirect effects. But large
uncertainties and postulations underlie the debate about indirect land-use effects of biofuels on tropical deforestation, the critical implication being that use of U.S. farmland for energy crops necessarily causes new land clearing elsewhere.


~~
~~
According to this argument, if U.S. farm production is used for fuel instead of food,{this argument contains an implicit fraudulent proposition that food is lost to the food chain when ethanol is made form corn. It ignores the fact that all the protein from the corn is recovered when ethanol is made and sold as a high quality feed supplement to farmers - while it's true the starch content is used to make fuel, the protein is not lost to the food chain. __JW}, food prices rise and farmers in developing countries respond by growing more food. This response requires clearing new land and burning native vegetation and, hence, releasing carbon. This “induced deforestation” hypothesis is based on questionable data and modeling assumptions about available land and yields, rather than on empirical evidence. The argument assumes that the supply of previously cleared land is inelastic (that is, agricultural land for expansion is unavailable without new deforestation). It also assumes that agricultural commodity prices are a major driving force behind deforestation and that yields decline with expansion. The calculations for carbon emissions assume that land in a stable, natural state is suddenly converted to agriculture as a result of biofuels.


A review of the issues reveals, however, that these assumptions about the availability of land, the role of biofuels in causing
deforestation, and the ability to relate crop prices to areas of land clearance are unsound. Among our findings:


First, sufficient suitably productive land is available for multiple uses, including production of biofuels. Assertions that U.S.
biofuel production will cause large indirect land-use changes rely on limited data sets and unverified assumptions about global land
cover and land use.
(authors go into some detail here)
~~
~~

Estimates for idle croplands, prone to confusion with pasture and grassland, range from 520 million acres to 4.9 billion acres globally. The differences illustrate one of many uncertainties that hamper global land-use change calculations. To put these numbers in perspective, USDA has estimated that in 2007, about 21 million acres were used worldwide to produce biofuel feedstocks, an area that would occupy somewhere between 0.4% and 4% of the world’s estimated idle cropland.

Diverse studies of global land cover and potential productivity suggest that anywhere from 600 million to more than 7 billion additional acres of underutilized rural lands are available for expanding rain-fed crop production around the world, after excluding the 4 billion acres of cropland currently in use, as well as the world’s supply of closed forests, nature reserves, and urban lands. Hence, at a global scale, land per se is not an immediate limitation for agriculture and biofuels.

~~
~~

.. although models may assume that increased use of U.S. land for biofuels will lead to more land being cleared for agriculture in other parts of the world, evidence is lacking to support those claims.


Second, there is little evidence that biofuels cause deforestation, and much evidence for alternative causes. Recent scientific papers that blame biofuels for deforestation are based on models that presume new land conversion can be simulated as a predominantly marketdriven choice. The models assume land is a privately owned asset managed in response to global price signals within a stable rule-based economy — perhaps a reasonable assumption for developed nations. However, this scenario is far from the
reality in the smoke-filled frontier zones of deforestation in less developed countries, where the models assume biofuel-induced
land conversion takes place. The regions of the world that are experiencing first-time land conversion are characterized by market
isolation, lawlessness, insecurity, instability, and lack of land tenure. And nearly all of the forests are publicly owned.

~~
~~

The causes of deforestation have been extensively studied, and it is clear from the empirical evidence that forces other than
biofuel use are responsible for the trends of increasing forest loss in the tropics. Numerous case studies document that the factors driving deforestation are a complex expression of cultural, technological, biophysical, political, economic, and demographic interactions. Solutions and measures to slow deforestation have also been analyzed and tested, and the results show that it is critical to improve governance, land tenure, incomes, and security to slow the pace of new land conversion in these frontier regions.

~~
~~
Testing the hypothesis that U.S. biofuel policy causes deforestation elsewhere depends on models that can incorporate the processes underlying initial land-use change. Current models attempt to predict future landuse change based on changes in commodity prices. As conceived thus far, the computational general equilibrium models designed for economic trade do not adequately incorporate the processes of landuse change. Although crop prices may influence short-term land-use decisions, they are not a dominant factor in global patterns of first-time conversion, the land clearing of chief concern in relating biofuels to deforestation. The highest deforestation rates observed and estimated globally occurred in the 1990s. During that period, there was a surplus of commodities on world markets and consistently depressed prices.

~~
~~
...Some observers have suggested that the increase in U.S. corn production for biofuel led to reduced soybean output and higher soybean prices, and that these changes led, in turn, to new deforestation in Brazil. However, total deforestation rates in Brazil appear to fall in tandem with rising soybean prices. This cooccurrence illustrates a lack of connection between commodity prices and initial land clearing. This phenomenon has been observed around the globe and suggests an alternate hypothesis: Higher global commodity prices focus production and investment where it can be used most efficiently, in the plentiful previously cleared and underutilized lands around the world. In times of falling prices and incomes, people return to forest frontiers, with all of their characteristic tribulations, for lack of better options.

(more)

[excess_3]

1. does the US 'owe' food to the world? .n/t

[kristopher]

2. Do you have a link

to the journal where this "real scientist" published this piece of work after and in order to have it reviewed by peers?

[JohnWxy]

3. you may have not understood but the article I linked to is a statement summarizing what research

has shown re evaluating land usage and changes in land usage. It is offered in that it is a good summary piece and therefor much more readable than a report on a specific study.

(Some people even have trouble understanding statements like "this is a good concise statement" (not you of course) without subjecting them to a research paper.) Many people won't read anything as dense as a technical paper. A summary article which clearly states what research has shown is therefor of value.

Conversesly, even something called research, or even sometimes appearing in a peer reviewed journal, alas may have questionable methodology andor dubious assumptions as was pointed out re the "study" of Searchinger, et al.

here Searchinger et al overstated land needed for substitution 100%

and here: More criticism of Searchinger, et al "study"


"....This, together with the fact that the paper is not replicable, since the models and parameters used are not accessible, places a question mark over the refereeing procedures used for this paper by the journal Science. A paper that seeks to place a procedure in the worst possible light, and refrains from allowing others to check its results, is perhaps better described as ideology than as science."


and here: Devastating Criticism of Searchinger, et al, "study"


Now, in the article I provided a link to, if you had read it, you would know that the authors did refer to research and included links at the end of their article. I suggest you try putting your cursor on one of those links and clicking your mouse button. This should take you to that article.

The authors also iincluded their email addresses.

Apparently you have not heard of the Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Here is link to their home page:

http://www.ornl.gov/ornlhome/energy.shtml

Here is what you'll find there:

ORNL is one of the world’s premier centers for R&D on energy production, distribution, and use and on the effects of energy technologies and decisions on society. Clean, efficient, safe production and use of energy have long been our goals in research and development. At ORNL, unique facilities for energy-related R&D are used both for technology development and for fundamental investigations in the basic energy sciences that underpin the technology work.

Bioenergy Science Center
Energy and Engineering Sciences Directorate
Energy Efficiency and Electricity Technologies
Engineering Science and Technology
Fossil Energy
Fusion Energy
NanoApplications Center
Nuclear Science and Technology
Nuclear Technology
US ITER



This is a better fact page on ORNL: http://www.esd.ornl.gov/people/kline/ornl_usaid_fact_sheet_10_2007.pdf

General Capabilities

Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) is the Department of Energy’s largest science
and energy laboratory with over 4,000 staff members and an FY 2008 budget exceeding
$1 billion. Managed since April 2000 by a partnership of the University of Tennessee and
Battelle, ORNL was established in 1943 as a part of the secret Manhattan Project. Located
in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, ORNL is the most diverse R&D institution in the DOE family.
Work includes the basic energy sciences, the life and environmental sciences, energy and
environmental technologies, and energy and environmental analysis, assessment, and
institution-building.

ORNL Partnerships with USAID date back to the early 1980s,
when the Agency decided to undertake major energy initiatives worldwide while relying
on the R&D infrastructure already available through other federal agencies, especially
DOE. As environmental programs became a major USAID emphasis, the decision was
often made to rely on the strengths in other agencies including DOE, EPA, and USDA.
In 1981, ORNL was asked by USAID to assist with energy program planning, including
scoping the major RFP for the energy efficiency assistance competition. A formal
PASA relationship between USAID and DOE for ORNL’s technical assistance began in
April 1982 with energy planning assistance to USAID/Liberia and one or more PASAs have
been in place between USAID and ORNL nearly every year since.

Over the past twenty-five years, ORNL has led or supported more than 50 USAID
projects in 40 developing countries in Africa, Asia, Eastern Europe/New Independent
States, Latin America, the Caribbean, and the Near East. Over this period, ORNL has
been the only DOE laboratory closely involved with USAID’s internal program planning,
development and evaluation, including assistance with the requirements of “reengineering
government” and managing for results. ORNL is familiar with how USAID works -- its
policies and procedures, its vocabulary, and its traditions.

ORNL has addressed all major energy technologies relevant to sustainable development
as well as most energy policy options and environmental issues in support of USAID
programs worldwide. Support for developing country programs has involved more than
100 ORNL staff members from 8 Divisions of the Laboratory, as well as scores of
consultants and subcontractors (when requested and authorized by USAID).

ORNL Roles

In its relationships with USAID, ORNL is a gap-filler. It does not compete with the
private sector for program implementation contracts and it does not generally manage
subcontractors unless specifically requested by USAID. Instead, ORNL serves (a) to
extend technical capacity of Agency staff in roles that would represent a conflict of
interest for private contractors, such as program design, monitoring, and evaluation; (b) as
a source of short-term technical assistance in areas where the Laboratory is especially
well-qualified; and (c) as a source of short-term and long-term technical and managerial
support where appropriate.

ORNL’s past work with USAID has focused in the areas listed below.

Subject Matter Capabilities

• Clean energy development
• Environmental policymaking and institution-building
• Biodiversity conservation and natural resource management
• Assessing regional and sector-specific vulnerabilities and responses associated
with global climate change

Regional Experience

• Africa
• Asia
• Eastern Europe and New Independent States
• Latin America and the Caribbean
• Near East

Cross-Cutting Capabilities

• Program design and development
• Program monitoring and evaluation
• Institution-building
• Information systems
• Technology transfer

A report on ORNL’s relationships with USAID is available upon request. It summarizes
past experiences and provides the rationale for Lab assistance with a more detailed
description of Laboratory capabilities and staffing.

Points of Contact:

Thomas J. Wilbanks Keith L. Kline
Corporate Fellow Environmental Sciences Division
Multi-Scale Energy and Environmental Systems Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Oak Ridge National Laboratory [phone]

[phone] [e-mail]


[e-mail] http://www.esd.ornl.gov/people/kline/index.html