Brussels, 07/03/2007 (Agence Europe) - Amid the voices clamouring for the Spring summit of 8-9 March to set binding targets for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions and renewable energy, a coalition of European environmental NGOs stands out: it is calling on heads of state and government to reject the 10% binding target for biofuels by 2020.
In a press release published on the eve of the European Council, Birdlife International, the European Environmental Bureau (EEB) and Transport & Environment (T&E) jointly state that biofuels are not necessarily good for the environment. They want the Spring summit to replace the proposed target with lifecycle greenhouse gas emission reduction targets for transport fuel, which would differentiate between biofuels according to their environmental performance and only encourage the best performing.
A 10% binding target for biofuels in the energy mix would mean that “one tenth of the fuel used in the EU must be produced from plant material”, but the “unconditional public support” for biofuels needs to be moderated, say the NGOs, which denounce the risk of destroying tracts of tropical rainforest to create vast plantations.
“We call for a strong response from the European Council to the challenge of fighting climate change. The EU should set itself a binding target of 30% greenhouse gas reductions by 2020, compared with 1990. And it should set ambitious binding targets for the introduction of renewables. But we don't want this to include a target for biofuels that will result in major environmental and social problems. We should focus much more on energy efficiency and truly sustainable renewables, such as wind and solar power. The transport sector in particular should invest in energy efficiency and cleaner mobility alternatives,” says John Hontelez of EEB.
Jos Dings of T&E is critical of “Europe's approach to alternative fuel sources like biofuels”, which has been “to promote them regardless of whether or not they're good for the environment”, and feels the lifecycle approach proposed by the Commission in its new draft directive on fuel quality would be much more preferable. “If it's designed right, this policy would ensure that only the cleanest biofuels are promoted and the fossil fuel production process also cleans up its act. The approach requires fuel suppliers actually to improve their climate performance, rather than just blending in a product with uncertain environmental consequences.”
Ariel Brunner of BirdLife International urged “Europe's political leaders …strongly to support mandatory certification of biofuels, covering, beyond greenhouse gas balance, also their other environmental impacts such as on biodiversity and freshwater supplies”. This, he says, is the absolute minimum we should expect. (an)