What is clear is that biofuels will increasingly be used in Europe in cars, buses and lorries. In March last year EU leaders meeting in Brussels endorsed plans to ensure that biofuels account for 10% of all petrol and diesel consumption in the 27 member bloc by 2020.
What exactly are biofuels?
Biofuels are made from plants and are used principally for transport. The most well known biofuels are bio-diesel and bio-ethanol. They can be used almost "pure" if an engine is adapted, or mixed with standard diesel or petrol as an additive. At the moment biofuels are made from maize, soya rape seed or sugar cane and palm. Theoretically future fuels could come from other biomass such as waste or algae.
Biofuels have become attractive as domestic biofuel production could reduce dependency on foreign imported oil. The present sustained period of high oil prices have also made them financially viable to an extent never seen before.
They are also seen as a way of limiting CO2 emissions. As the amount of CO2 released when they are burnt is only the amount that was absorbed when the plant was growing, the argument goes that they do not "add" to emissions, merely balance them out.
Why are they under a cloud?
In the last year scientific evidence, though disputed, has indicated that biofuels may not be as good for the environment as was once thought. Critics point out that the intensive production of biofuels themselves may add to the release of nitrous oxide - a potent greenhouse gas. Also, the clearing of large tracts of forest to grow biofuels, especially in South America, may lead to the destruction of biodiversity, huge water usage and the felling of forests that act as huge "carbon sinks".
Then there are the potential social impacts to indigenous people and others having their homes and livelihoods threatened by forest clearance, as well as possible food shortages that could accompany it as land is used for fuel not food.
How efficient should biofuels be before we use them?
The issue of how much greenhouse gas biofuels should save (compared to petrol and diesel) before it receives government and public support was discussed. The European Commission believes if a biofuel offers a 30% reduction in such gases then it is worth embracing. Parliament's Environment Committee has adopted a report, drafted by Ms Corbey,calling for 50% reductions to justify biofuel use.
Many workshop participants dismissed this as too arbitrary. Some MEPs also feel it is too high. German Christian Democrat Anja Weisgerber said it "would exclude most biofuels currently produced in Europe". Greg Archer, from the UK's Low Carbon Vehicle Partnership, suggested that biofuels should be “rewarded according to what savings they provide". He believed it was "wrong to think that European produce is always more sustainable".
British Conservative Neil Parish, who chairs Parliament's Agriculture Committee, argued that if Europe is to use biofuels they should be produced closer to home: "one of the main benefits of biofuels is added energy security, but if the only way to meet the targets is to import all our biofuels, clearly the supply is as vulnerable as oil or gas" he said.
The right crop at the right place
Although there were differences over biofuels most agreed that it really depended on the question of the "right crop, the right place, the right volume".
Bas Eickhout from the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency said there was little white or black: “Biofuels are grey all over”. Finally Ms Corbey concluded by saying that "biofuels may cause food prices to rise, contribute to loss of valuable natural resources and biodiversity and even increase the emission of green house gasses. There is still hope for biofuels, but we need to differentiate between good and bad biofuels. Sustainability criteria are the way forward: good biofuels can contribute to a better environment".
A full report of the workshop including all presentations will be published in the "Activities" section of the website shortly.
The Parliament and EU Ministers in the Council are currently negotiating a possible agreement on a revised fuel quality directive. Once these negotiations are concluded the Corbey report will be presented in plenary.
