"Do you know what my favourite renewable fuel is? An ecosystem of innovation."
Thomas Friedman
Renewables
guru Per Dahlen once commented that Southeast Asia has the potential to produce
14 million barrels / day, which is more than Saudi Arabia (For more info, visit here).
However, what will unlocking this potential cost the region? When I encountered
this statistic, one disturbing idea that came off my head was the diversion of edible
food crops away from the plates of citizens into machines guzzling out fuel by
the barrel, or plots of land that could be used for the growth of food to be
eaten being taken away by big businesses to grow biofuel crops instead. Classified
into ethanol and biodiesel based on the crops used (ethanol uses starchy crops,
biodiesel uses natural oils), biofuels remain a controversial topic across the
world and while I have been interested by food vs fuel debate, I have never actually looked
into it in-depth. Well, today that ends!
In our search for alternative fuels, have we forgotten biofuel takes land away from subsistence farmers and food away from the hungry?
(Source: http://globalenergyscenario.blogspot.sg/)
To
learn more about the importance of biofuels in the ASEAN region, I will be
discussing 2 journal articles that I have read over the week. One article (A review of biofuel policies in the major biofuel producing countries of ASEAN:Production, targets, policy drivers and impacts) covers trends and motivations for biofuel
production and usage in 4 countries, Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand and the Philippines,
whilst the other article (Palm oil-based biofuels and sustainability in SoutheastAsia: A review of Indonesia, Malaysia, and Thailand) zooms in on palm oil biodiesel
and the environmental considerations that are concerned with biofuels, using
Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand as case studies.
Evidence from both articles suggest biofuel production is a
rapidly growing energy sector in ASEAN. With the flexibility of biomass to supply
both heat and power, we observe more food crops such as sugarcane, palm oil and
cassava being grown, only to be used to produce biofuels (Kumar, Shrestha &
Abdul Salam, 2013). Below are graphs showing indicate the steady upward trend
for production of biofuels in the region (except Malaysia, which has decreased)
Graphs show steady increases in production of biofuels in the ASEAN region
(Source: Kumar, Shrestha & Abdul Salam (2013))
(Source: Kumar, Shrestha & Abdul Salam (2013))
Both articles also suggest that governments in the ASEAN
region support biofuel development despite the potential environmental costs. The biofuel industry is defended because it provides greater energy
security by relying less on overseas sources and creating jobs for their
citizens. Although the burning of biofuels is also determined to release far
less CO2 emissions than conventional fossil fuels, concerns for the
environment are highlighted in Kumar, Shrestha & Abdul Salam (2013)’s
report to be less of a driver for most ASEAN countries, as they are not
required to lower their emissions under the Kyoto Protocol. In fact,
environmental problems have stemmed out in recent years from palm oil
production instead, such as excessive deforestation and
transboundary haze (Mukherjee & Sovacool, 2014).
While biofuels can resolve energy insecurity and even lower greenhouse gas emissions, instances of environmental degradation, biodiversity loss and poor air quality remain a primary concern amongst environmental groups and governments.
(Source: Watts, 2011; Chua, 2014)
It is not wrong for policymakers to be considering the energy
needs for these rapidly developing countries, but my biggest qualms after
reading these two reports is whether alternative energy production should be
the biggest priority, considering food security for many citizens in these
countries fluctuates fairly often. Many people in these countries live below the poverty line, and rely on subsistence farmers for their food. However, the diversion of food crops away from markets has made prices rise, causing even more economic pressures for citizens who choose to grow hungry to afford other daily necessities such as rent. Majority of biofuels in ASEAN aren’t even
used domestically, rather it is exported out to Europe and North America (Kumar,
Shrestha & Abdul Salam, 2013), where the demand for biofuels has risen
drastically. This makes it more controversial, as this suggests that the
motivations for ASEAN countries to produce biofuels are economically driven to
the production demands of more developed nations, rather than their own
personal needs. Given biofuel is not a unique good to ASEAN and can be grown in
other areas, what comes across as a simple business transaction between
producer and consumer might actually be an outsourcing of environmental costs by
developed regions to lesser developed nations so as to create opportunity for
higher value services to be established in their own regions.
Biofuels seems to present itself as an emerging alternative
energy in the region from the reports, but little breakthrough has been made at
a national or regional level to ensure continued food security in ASEAN, suggesting that in the eyes of our policymakers, biofuels will always result in
a trade-off. Is this necessarily true? Or is there that magical win-win situation
for this food vs fuel debate? In my next post, I shall stay on the topic of biofuels,
focusing on their production and usage locally and globally, as well as explore
innovations in the biofuel industry that have addressed food security.
References
Kumar,
S., Shrestha, P., & Abdul Salam, P. (2013). A review of biofuel policies in
the major biofuel producing countries of
ASEAN: Production, targets, policy drivers and impacts. Renewable
And Sustainable Energy Reviews, 26, 822--836.
Chua, G. (2014). Parliament: Transboundary Haze Bill penalties too small, say MPs - See more at: http://www.straitstimes.com/news/singapore/environment/story/parliament-transboundary-haze-bill-penalties-too-small-say-mps-2014#sthash.I5ns5yMG.dpuf. The Straits Times. [online] Available at: http://www.straitstimes.com/news/singapore/environment/story/parliament-transboundary-haze-bill-penalties-too-small-say-mps-2014 [Accessed 25 Sep. 2014].
Chua, G. (2014). Parliament: Transboundary Haze Bill penalties too small, say MPs - See more at: http://www.straitstimes.com/news/singapore/environment/story/parliament-transboundary-haze-bill-penalties-too-small-say-mps-2014#sthash.I5ns5yMG.dpuf. The Straits Times. [online] Available at: http://www.straitstimes.com/news/singapore/environment/story/parliament-transboundary-haze-bill-penalties-too-small-say-mps-2014 [Accessed 25 Sep. 2014].
Mukherjee,
I., & Sovacool, B. (2014). Palm oil-based biofuels and sustainability in
southeast Asia: A review of Indonesia, Malaysia, and Thailand. Renewable
And Sustainable Energy Reviews, 37, 1--12.
Watts, J. (2011). Norway accused of hypocrisy over Indonesian deforestation funding. The Guardian. [online] Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2011/dec/01/norway-accused-hypocrisy-deforestation-funding [Accessed 25 Sep. 2014].
Watts, J. (2011). Norway accused of hypocrisy over Indonesian deforestation funding. The Guardian. [online] Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2011/dec/01/norway-accused-hypocrisy-deforestation-funding [Accessed 25 Sep. 2014].