Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament Biofuels Progress Report Report on the progress made in the use of biofuels and other renewable fuels in the Member States of the European Union COM(2006) 845 final
Date: 2007-10-24
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: EU Member State, energy policy, environmental protection, renewable energy, substitute fuel

C 44/34

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

16.2.2008

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a Directive of the
European Parliament and of the Council on the suppression of radio interference produced by
agricultural or forestry tractors (electromagnetic compatibility)’ (Codified version)

COM(2007) 462 final — 2007/0166 (COD)

(2008/C 44/09)

On 5 September 2007 the Council decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under
Article 95 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the abovementioned proposal.

Since the Committee unreservedly endorses the proposal and feels that it requires no comment on its part,
it decided, at its 439th plenary session of 24 and 25 October 2007 (meeting of 24 October), by 153 votes
to 1 with 8 abstentions, to issue an opinion endorsing the proposed text.

Brussels, 24 October 2007.

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Dimitris DIMITRIADIS

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Communication from the
Commission to the Council and the European Parliament Biofuels Progress Report Report on the
progress made in the use of biofuels and other renewable fuels in the Member States of the
European Union’

COM(2006) 845 final

(2008/C 44/10)

On 10 January 2007 the Commission decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee,
under Article 262 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the abovementioned proposal.

The Section for Transport, Energy, Infrastructure and the Information Society, which was responsible for
preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 5 September 2007. The rapporteur
was Mr Iozia.

At its 439th plenary session, held on 24 and 25 October 2007 (meeting of 24 October), the European
Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 142 votes to 13 with eight abstentions.

1. Conclusions and recommendations

— ensuring the competitiveness of European economies and

the availability of affordable energy;

1.1
The Committee takes issues relating to energy efficiency,
climate change and reducing greenhouse gas emissions very
seriously, and in general agrees with the conclusions of the
Spring European Council of 8 and 9 March, drawing attention
to the three pillars of the Energy Policy for Europe:

— promoting environmental

sustainability and combating

climate change.

— increasing security of supply;

In its Biofuels Progress Report, the Commission points
1.2
out that without mandatory objectives, it will be impossible to
achieve a satisfactory level of biofuels use. It argues that the
target of a 5,75 % market share by 2010 is not realistic and that

16.2.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 44/35

consequently, in order to meet the requirements laid down by
the Council, an objective of 10 % by 2020 — considered by the
Commission to be achievable — should be set, using the possi-
bility offered by Article 4(2) of Directive 2003/30/EC, known as
the ‘review clause’. Strangely enough, the Commission points to
the benefits of a scenario in which use of biofuels stands at
14 %, although the declared objective is 10 % — the communi-
cation indulges in a display of window-dressing, suggesting
unrealistic results.

The use of

1.3
first-generation biofuels, however, entails
many difficulties, and they do not fully meet European aims.
The production costs are high, as are the environmental costs,
they take cereals away from human and animal consumption
and, as argued by the FAO, they are in part responsible for
increasing cereal prices on world markets.

1.4
The use of biofuels therefore raises ethical issues, such as
food-fuel competition, which the Commission seems to mini-
mise. The Committee underlines the need for closer cooperation
with global institutions and agencies working in the sphere of
agriculture and food, such as the FAO and the WFP (World
Food Programme).

Neither

1.5
impact study mention some serious difficulties.

the Commission document nor

the attached

Particular attention should be given to the following problems
concerning biodiesel:

— limited productivity,

— high cost (EUR 0,4-0,7/L),

— stability problems (presence of oxygenated groups), resulting

in storage problems.

Ethanol, in turn, is affected by the following problems:

— limited productivity (albeit less than for biodiesel),

— high consumption of water and fertilisers,

— unsuitability for

transit

through existing pipelines

for

oil-based fuels (corrosion problems).

issues,

1.6
The Committee emphasises the need for the social, envir-
onmental and economic impact of the development of biofuels,
together with the related technical
to be carefully
assessed. The specific question arises of the biofuel yield from
raw materials: 1 tonne of beet yields some 400 litres of
bioethanol
(approximately 1 500 Mcal). Given the energy
this ratio appears
required to convert biomass into biofuel,
uneconomic and inefficient. It would be far more efficient to
use biomass directly to produce electrical energy or heating, or
for maritime or urban public transport.

1.7
The Committee points out that, from a strictly environ-
mental point of view, thought needs to be given to risks of

deforestation and those arising from the storage of raw mate-
rials. The related biological and biochemical
issues must be
clearly and carefully examined.

The Committee would also raise an issue of ‘scientific
1.8
ethics’. Planet Earth is an open system,
inexorably declining
towards a point of equilibrium which will signal its end. It is the
responsibility of scientists to slow this downward trend, and it is
the responsibility of politics to facilitate the necessary work and
studies.

1.9
The Committee recommends that a serious analysis be
carried out to find out if the chemical processes of combustion
involving molecules other than hydrocarbons may cause the
formation and development of
free radicals responsible for
oxidative stress, which is considered to be a pathological state
preliminary to more serious illnesses. This recommendation is
justified by the lack of data available in this area.

1.10
The Committee considers special care and protection of
the soil to be essential. It must be protected, as it protects us.
the water-
The progressive contraction and deterioration of
bearing strata is caused by misguided exploitation policies and
impoverishment of the soil. Crop rotation should be guaranteed
in order to facilitate soil recovery.

1.11
The Committee urges the Commission and all the Euro-
pean institutions to focus closely on water consumption in the
production of biofuels. Among the many harmful effects of
climate change, shrinking water resources may reach crisis
proportions in some regions. Recent IWMI studies have calcu-
lated that a minimum of 1 000 litres, and possibly as much as
4 000 litres of water are needed to produce one litre of biofuel,
depending on the type of product and the area of production.

1.12
Apart from these concerns, which could be alleviated if
monitoring and certification measures were to be adopted
covering biofuels production methods,
in part by means of
product traceability, the Committee believes that further support
should be given to research and development of second- and
even third-generation biofuels such as biobutanol. Biobutanol
has low vapour pressure and shows tolerance to water contami-
nation in petrol blends, facilitating its use in existing petrol
resupply and distribution channels. Biobutanol can be mixed
with petrol in higher concentrations than existing biofuels, with
no need to modify vehicles. Furthermore, it offers higher fuel
economies than petrol-ethanol blends, thus improving energy
efficiency and reducing consumption per litre. The new genera-
tion fuels provide high energy yields and low environmental
costs by using refuse and biochemistry to facilitate natural
processes for breaking down cellulose, which are complex and
costly.

C 44/36

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

16.2.2008

1.13
The Committee also believes that the development of
biofuels could provide the European economy with opportu-
nities, and thereby help to achieve the objectives of the Lisbon
agenda. The 7th Framework Programme specifically provides for
this type of action, but better synergies are needed between the
various
and the processing
farm producers
industry, but also environmental and local area conservation
associations, and workers' organisations, who have a growing
interest in combining sustainable development with ever-more
advanced models for corporate social responsibility.

stakeholders:

The opportunities that the farming sector detects in the
1.14
development of biofuels should be encouraged,
insofar as
farmers also undertake to help protect primary environmental
assets and safeguard shared resources, such as water and food
for human and animal consumption. It is the task of farmers'
associations to keep rural communities informed about any
rules devised by the international community to govern the
production and sale of biofuels. The dissemination of certifica-
tion, traceability and conformity control practices are all topics
on which the various agricultural organisations are expected to
offer vital
input, both at European level and nationally and
locally. The Committee is willing to cooperate with national
ESCs — which have previously expressed a lively interest, and
are providing input for some of the Committee's own opinions
— in this area and in others regarding energy efficiency, redu-
cing greenhouse gas emissions and climate change.

1.15
On the question of tax treatment, it is clear that the
range of candidates for public assistance is endless — especially
as regards duties on biofuels and assistance for farmers, for the
car industry in sustaining the necessary research expenditure,
for consumers regarding the work required on vehicles not
designed to use biofuels, and for biofuel manufacturers.
Germany has recently cut its tax incentives significantly, trig-
gering an immediate fall in consumption, and equally prompt
protests from industry. Investment requires certainty and stabi-
lity, but the biofuels markets are still virtually non-existent. Any
aid granted, however, must not serve to distort competition.

The transport sector, for its part, is not subject to the
1.16
emissions quotas system. The Committee suggests that
the
Commission examine the possibility of extending the emissions
certificates system to transport, as they may provide a further
spur to enhance efficiency in the search for new solutions to
reduce harmful emissions. The Committee is preparing a
working hypothesis in a specific exploratory opinion, requested
by Commission vice-president Barrot.

1.17
The Committee agrees with the EP resolution on a
strategy for biomass and biofuels, which calls on the Commis-

sion to introduce a mandatory and comprehensive certification
scheme allowing the sustainable production of biofuels at all
stages, and to support the development and use of the Global
Monitoring for Environment and Security (GMES) system to
monitor land use in the production of bioethanol so as to
prevent
rainforests and other negative
the destruction of
impacts on the environment.

1.18
In view of the problems identified in this opinion, the
Committee urges the Commission to keep the 10 % target
under continuing review, and to be ready to bring forward
proposals to modify it if the problems cannot be resolved in a
satisfactory and sustainable way.

2. The Commission communication

2.1
The Commission introduces its Report on the progress
made in the use of biofuels by emphasising the fact that, for the
2005-2020 period, an increase in greenhouse gas emissions (in
this case only CO2) of 77 million tonnes per annum is expected
in the transport sector alone, accounting for more than 60 % of
the total increase in emissions, which is expected to reach 126
million tonnes per annum.

2.2
Another key factor highlighted is transport's almost
complete dependence on oil imports, which is the energy source
presenting the most acute security of supply challenge. Such
dependence would diminish if
the use of biofuels were to
increase significantly.

2.3
The benefits of developing biofuels in terms of reduced
greenhouse gases will not be felt if, for example, existing crops
are converted or land rich in biodiversity (such as rainforest) is
used.

2.4
The market share of biofuels was 0,3 % in 2001, and
only five Member States had any experience in their use. While
not laying down any obligations, Directive 2003/30/EC set a
target for 2010 of a 5,75 % share of the market for petrol and
diesel in transport, with an interim target of 2 % for 2005.

Article 4(2) of

2.5
the directive contains a review clause
enabling the Commission to submit proposals for mandatory
national targets in the event of significant and unjustified slip-
page with respect to the 2 % target.

2.6
The Common Agricultural Policy has a key role to play,
especially since the 2003 reform. By decoupling the payments
made to farmers from the crops produced, the reform has
allowed set-aside land to be switched to non-food crops,
frequently for the production of biofuels.

16.2.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 44/37

2.7
A premium for ‘energy crops’ will be paid in 2007,
combined with policies to promote the production of wood
energy and support for renewable energies under rural develop-
ment policy (1).

EUR 63-85/barrel ranges respectively (USD 92,76-102,18/barrel
and USD 84,76-114,28/barrel, at an exchange rate on 25 May
2007 of USD 1,3444 to the Euro).

2.8
The use of biofuels has grown significantly, but only two
Member States reached the targets set, the overall result being
1 % in 2005 — 1,6 % for biodiesel and 0,4 % for ethanol. On
this basis, the Commission concludes that the 5,75 % target for
2010 will not be achieved.

2.16
The reduced cost of storing reserves — still working on
the 14 % in 2020 hypothesis — would produce savings of up
to EUR 1 billion (EUR 720 million with the 10 % scenario). A
supply mix from third countries and Member States represents
the best solution, together with the desirable arrival on the
market of second- generation biofuels.

2.9
Experience shows that positive results have been achieved
through both tax incentive policies, with no limits on the
amounts eligible, and by obliging suppliers to put a specified
percentage of biofuels on the market. The Commission
considers that obligations represent the most effective approach.

The Commission states in its communication that:
2.10
‘There is a pressing need for the Union to send a clear signal of
its determination to reduce its dependence on oil use in trans-
port’. It views biofuels as the only practical means of insuring
against high oil prices.

This signal must be in the form of

2.11
legally binding
targets if it is to carry any weight with the oil producers, who
sell 300 million tonnes of oil on the EU market in the transport
sector alone.

The strategy most likely to succeed is to promote joint
2.12
research and technological development
in the 27 Member
States. A 10 % market share by 2020 would be a realistic target.

This scenario would have positive effects on employ-
2.17
ment, creating 144 000 more jobs (100 000 under the 10 %
scenario) if bioethanol production is primarily domestic, and
would also boost Community GDP (growth of 0,23 %). Lastly,
the positive effects of research, particularly into second-genera-
tion biofuels, could sustain competitiveness in the renewable
energy sector.

Using the ‘well-to-wheel’ method,

2.18
the Commission
calculates that employing the optimum, most economically
advantageous techniques, a reduction in greenhouse gas emis-
sions of 35-50 % could be achieved. Ethanol produced from
sugar cane in Brazil cuts these emissions by 90 %, and biodiesel
from palm oil and soya leads to savings of 50 % and 30 %
respectively. The production of
second-generation biofuels
should bring about savings of 90 %. The 14 % scenario should
in greenhouse gas emissions of around
result
101-103 million tonnes CO2eq per year (or 71-75 mT CO2eq
under the 10 % scenario).

in savings

2.13
A clear legal framework, with the minimum administra-
tive burden, setting intermediate objectives — e.g. for 2015 —
is essential if vehicle manufacturers are to be able to adapt their
design processes.

In the communication, a 14 % share is reckoned to be
2.19
manageable from the environmental
impact point of view,
provided that production is not from inappropriate land such as
rainforest or habitats of high environmental value.

2.14
In analysing the economic and environmental impact, a
number of scenarios are presented in connection, on the one
hand, with the evolution of oil prices, imports and the competi-
tiveness of agricultural prices and, on the other, with the devel-
opment of new technologies that might spur the growth of
‘second-generation’ biofuels, helping to reduce the environ-
mental cost.

In cost

2.15
terms, an assumed increase in the use of
biofuels to reach 14 % would generate additional costs of
between EUR 11,5 and 17,2 billion in 2020 with an oil price
around the USD 48/barrel mark, and between EUR 5,2 and
11,4 billion at USD 70/barrel. The break-even points for
lie in the EUR 69-76/barrel and
biodiesel and bioethanol

The Commission concludes its review by maintaining
2.20
that greater biofuel use will bring substantial greenhouse gas
emission benefits, and that security of supply will increase. A
targeted incentives/support policy should neutralise the risks of
using land with high biodiversity value or bad systems for
biofuel production, by encouraging the use of second- genera-
tion processes.

The following will be needed in order to achieve these

2.21
objectives:

(1) So far the figures are the same as for last year, with no increase, and
recently the Commission expressed doubts as to whether the premium
would be maintained in 2008.

— a review of the diesel standard (EN 590) and probably the
petrol standard (EN 228) to make it easier to blend biofuels
with fossil fuels;

C 44/38

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

16.2.2008

— introduction of (low-cost) adaptations to new vehicles;

— development of BTL (biomass to liquid) technologies;

— introduction of wood farming and rapeseed cultivation;

— constant monitoring of the environmental impact.

Lastly, the Commission proposes to revise the biofuels
2.22
directive, to set a 10 % minimum standard for the share of
biofuels in 2020, and to assure the use of efficient and environ-
ment-friendly biofuels.

some manufacturers have already adjusted their vehicle specifi-
cations, while others restrict their guarantee cover to B5 blends.
Because of their hygroscopic characteristics, detergency and low
storage stability, high-percentage blends may require special
measures to be taken for vehicles and product distribution
systems.

3.5
The Commission convincingly addresses the need to
promote the development of biofuels with greater determin-
ation. Realistically, it does not consider that it will in the future
be possible to replace current petrol production (1,2 billion
tonnes worldwide in 2004) with biofuels (46 million tonnes in
2005, of which 3 million in the EU, as shown in the table
below), but aims at a minimum biofuels share of at least 10 %
in addition to existing fuels in a little more than 13 years, to be
achieved through a directive and individual targets for each
Member State.

3. Biofuels: a few technical points

2005

Litres, millions

soya

Biodiesel

(methanol). Bioethanol

is obtained by crushing rape,

and
3.1
sunflower seeds, and by a transesterification reaction which
results in the original alcohol components (glycerol) being
replaced with methyl alcohol
is an
alcohol (ethanol or ethylic alcohol) obtained through a fermen-
tation process using various agricultural products rich in carbo-
hydrates and sugars such as cereals (maize, sorghum, wheat,
barley), sugar crops (beet and cane), fruit, potatoes and marcs.
Products obtained by the chemical combination of molecules of
biological origin with molecules of fossil origin are also consid-
ered to be biofuels. The main example of this is provided by
ETBE, ethyl tertiary butyl ether, obtained by a bioethanol and
isobutene reaction.

3.2
it has a
Ethanol has the qualities of an excellent fuel:
high octane count and can be blended (E5, E10) without
requiring major adjustments
to engines, although specific
engines are necessary for more substantial use (E85).

3.3
The main difficulties in the use of ethanol arise from
blending with petrol. Even at low ethanol percentages, vapour
pressure rises significantly (approximately 10 kPa) as do, conse-
quently, evaporate emissions. Ethanol's affinity for water can
lead to problems with the product's final quality. Blends of
ordinary hydrocarbon petrols with petrols containing ethanol
should be avoided: a separate logistics and distribution chain
should be used for the latter.

3.4
Blends of biodiesel and conventional diesel can be used
in diesel engines. In European countries, a blend of up to 5 %
(B5) is widely used in standard quality diesel, with no compat-
ibility problems having arisen. Fuels with a high biodiesel
content (more than 8-10 %) may cause problems for vehicles
with engine seals made of incompatible polymer materials. The
most serious difficulties arise in particulates and fine dust filters,
which require major and costly modifications. For this reason,

USA

Brazil

China

India

EU

Others

16 130

15 990

3 800

1 700

2 900

5 480

3.6
Hydrogen, which is already being used — at least experi-
mentally — as an energy vector by some European car manu-
facturers,
is still produced essentially by electrolysis, or by
extraction from natural gas or other fossil fuels. This would not
produce any greenhouse gas reductions. In spite of the recent
development of research geared to producing hydrogen from
biomass, sometimes with the use of biotechnologies or renew-
able sources, the potential widespread use and marketing of
hydrogen-fuelled cars is also determined by the high cost of the
fuel cells. For hydrogen to become an economically practicable
alternative energy source, production costs must be brought
down. Current research at the University of New South Wales
has set out to meet this aim by using individual ceramic solar
panels made of titanium oxide. Titanium is a highly popular
option in the solar hydrogen field:
it has the right semicon-
ductor characteristics and is water-resistant. In its natural, unmo-
dified state, however, it is not yet efficient enough.

16.2.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 44/39

4. General comments

A few difficulties

4.1 While demonstrating the possible benefits, the Commis-
sion avoids drawing attention to the problems and difficulties
involved in developing biofuels, although some warnings do
occasionally emerge. In contrast, the Committee believes that
the Commission's proposal must be closely and carefully
analysed so that by resolving one problem, further more serious
ones are not created, and to prevent only the ‘pros’ being high-
lighted to the exclusion of the ‘cons’. It is rather strange that the
unrealistic scenario of a 14 % share by 2020 is used in order to
emphasise the benefits of the proposal! The benefits in the
event of the 10 % target being met would objectively be more
modest.

For

4.6
large-scale use, glycerol — unrefined, pure or
blended with other fuels — may be envisaged. The disadvan-
tages of this alternative need to be set out: the cost of glycerol if
its low
used pure, the cost of processing if used unrefined,
calorific yield and, in all cases, the need to break down the toxic
substances formed during combustion (mainly acrolein, also
known as acrylic aldehyde).

4.7
Another approach could be based on genetic modifica-
tion of certain organisms best placed to render certain crops
particularly suitable for bioprocessing, with high yields and
consequently low energy consumption during production.
Genetic engineering could also be applied to modify organisms
which can make it easier to use cellulose.

Neither

4.2
the attached
the Commission document nor
impact study identify any serious difficulties. For instance, the
disposal of the waste matter from biofuel production should be
modernised and reviewed in the light of new biofuel cell
systems and production-related electronic technologies.

4.8
From the technical point of view, there is also the ques-
tion of the biofuel yield from raw materials: 1 tonne of beet
yields some 400 litres of bioethanol (approximately 1 500 Mcal).
Is this figure sufficient to justify an overall positive assessment,
given the possible environmental
risks and disadvantages
resulting from the adoption of this type of energy?

Attention is drawn to the following aspects concerning

4.3
biodiesel:

— limited productivity;

— high cost (EUR 0,4-0,7/L);

— stability problems (presence of oxygenated groups), resulting

in storage difficulties.

4.4

And for bioethanol:

— limited productivity (albeit less than for biodiesel);

— high consumption of water and fertilisers;

4.9
A further aspect not to be underestimated concerns the
extraction processes and their selectivity, and the fermentation
processes which are relatively costly if carried out with
maximum attention to the quality of the finished product. More-
over, the possible presence of impurities in the fuel could, when
used, give rise to higher economic losses in connection with
secondary reactions, the quality of the fuel obtained, and the
characteristics of the waste and residues produced.

Environmental protection

— unsuitability for

transit

through existing pipelines

for

oil-based fuels (corrosion problems).

The benefits, meanwhile, include the possibility to increase the
crop cycle, alternating traditional human and animal food crops
with other specific crops destined for biomass and energy
production. This must be developed with an eye to regional
crops. In any case, European crops are subject to regulations
regarding soil protection and the use of fertilisers.

4.10
From a strictly environmental point of view, thought
needs to be given to risks of deforestation (as is currently the
case in Malaysia and Indonesia, due to palm oil production, and
the development of
in Malawi and Uganda on account of
jatropha, in areas intended for food production or particularly
valuable rainforest zones) and those arising from the storage of
raw materials. The related biological and biochemical
issues
must be clearly and carefully examined.

4.5
Biofuels need the right crops, grown on a large scale.
This entails sacrificing other crops that are necessary in order to
meet the requirement on the part of the poorer countries for
foodstuffs at the lowest possible cost. The possibility of using
cellulose to produce biofuels is interesting, but it should be
pointed out
that production requires chemical and physical
pretreatment (a sort of explosion of its mass) to make it reactive
to bioprocessing. The issue of residues and of the catalysts used
also needs to be highlighted, as they complicate the question of
waste disposal downstream of the processing.

4.11
There is also an ‘ethical’ aspect which needs to be
further assessed: competition between food and fuel. The prices
of high-grade raw materials such as wheat, maize and rice are
rising inexorably as a result of
the growing demand from
biofuel ‘distilleries’ (FAO and WFP 2007 Report). In Mexico, the
price of tortillas has risen by 60 %, sparking public unrest and
protests. Since the beginning of the year, in China, the rising
price of soya has driven meat prices up by 43 % and egg prices
up by 16 %. The prices of maize and oats have risen by 40 %
and 20 % respectively. In India, cereal prices have increased by

C 44/40

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

16.2.2008

10 %, with wheat rising by 11 %. According to the US Depart-
ment of Agriculture, the United States too will see price rises of
10 % for poultry, 21 % for eggs and 14 % for milk. If, in the
future, the fuel value of cereals exceeds their food value, the
market will turn to the energy economy — and food prices will
rise with oil prices, increasing the risk of food shortages, even
in Europe.

4.12
The growth of production plants (in the United States
alone, 79 plants are under construction, in addition to the 116
increase in
currently in operation) will trigger an exponential
cereals consumption, estimated by the EPI (Earth Policy Institute)
at some 139 million tonnes, twice the US Department of Agri-
culture's forecast. Since yields stand at 110 gallons (416,19
litres) of ethanol per tonne of maize (slightly more than four
full tanks for an SUV), the issue assumes truly worrying propor-
tions.

In a recent opinion (2), the Committee also stressed the
4.13
need to safeguard biodiversity, especially the rainforest, which
not only constitutes the habitat of fauna which would otherwise
inevitably disappear, but also represents the planet's only and
last ‘lung’. The intensive cultivation of sugar cane in Brazil and
palm trees in Malaysia and Indonesia, which every day sacrifices
hundreds of hectares of forest to single-crop farming, must be
stopped.

4.14
There is also an issue of ‘scientific ethics’. Planet Earth
is an open system, inexorably declining towards a point of equi-
librium which will signal its end. It is the responsibility of scien-
tists to slow this downward trend, and it is the responsibility of
politics to facilitate the necessary work and studies.

4.15
The costs — not only economic, but also environ-
mental and health-related — must be clearly identified. Serious
efforts are needed to evaluate and study the impact accurately.

4.16 With regard to the chemical processes of combustion
involving molecules other than hydrocarbons, a careful exami-
nation should be made of the possible formation and develop-
ment of
free radicals as a result of oxidative stress in the
processes (free radicals are one of the main causes of oncolo-
gical pathologies). No reliable data on their possible increase as
a result of biofuels production are available.

Food security

4.18
The 33rd session of the FAO's Committee on World
Food Security, held in Rome from 7 to 10 May 2007, gives over
a major chapter (point 45) to this issue, stating that: ‘Bioenergy
offers both opportunities and risks for each of the four dimen-
sions of food security: availability, access, stability and utilisa-
tion. The food security implications of bioenergy will be shaped
by the scale and type of system under consideration, by the
structure of commodity and energy markets, and by policy
choices in the areas of agriculture, energy, environment and
trade. Technological change in the bioenergy sector is occurring
rapidly and represents an additional major source of uncertainty
regarding food security’.

4.19
In the same report, the FAO emphasises that ‘the most
prominent feature of the food and feed markets in 2006 has
in particular wheat and
been the surge in prices of cereals,
maize, which, by November, had reached levels not seen for a
decade. Poor harvests in key producing countries associated
with a fast growing demand for biofuel production have been
the main drivers of the grain markets. Supply constraints also
have dominated the rice economy’.

4.20
China too has recently taken steps to reduce the
production of ethanol from maize, as reported by Asia Times
Online on 21 December 2006.
‘In China the first thing is to
provide food for its 1,3 billion people, and after that, we will
support biofuel production’ declared Wang Xiaobing, an Agri-
culture Ministry official.

4.21
On 20 July 2007, the Italian newspaper La Repubblica
published an article entitled ‘Biofuel vs. spaghetti war’. Pasta
prices are set to rise by 20 % owing to a biofuel maize boom.
The price of durum wheat, the main ingredient in Italian pasta,
has risen by more than 30 % as farmers shift to maize crops for
bioethanol. At
the Chicago exchange the price of a bushel
(27 kg) of wheat shot up from USD 3,6404 on 3 April to
USD 5,64 on 14 June. Italians are likely to feel the effect of
these price changes keenly as they are the world's biggest consu-
mers (28 kg per capita a year) and producers (3.2 million
tonnes) of durum wheat.

Water

Care and protection of the soil is crucial. It must be
4.17
protected, as it protects us. The progressive contraction and
deterioration of the water-bearing strata is caused by misguided
exploitation policies and impoverishment of the soil. Crop rota-
tion should be guaranteed in order to facilitate soil recovery.

(2) EESC opinion on the Communication from the Commission on
Halting the loss of biodiversity by 2010 — and beyond — Sustaining
ecosystem services for human well-being — OJ C 97, 28.4.2007.

4.22 Water consumption in biofuels production is another
aspect not receiving enough attention. The most recent research
Institute (IWMI),
by the International Water Management
published on 10 May 2007, shows that,
in Sri Lanka for
example, 1-4 000 litres of water are needed to produce one litre
of ethanol, depending on the type of plant and production tech-
niques used. In Brazil, it is calculated that 2 200 litres of water
are required for one litre of ethanol, while in India — where

16.2.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 44/41

rainfall is not abundant and irrigation must be used — the same
litre of ethanol needs 3 500 litres of irrigation water! These
figures have been confirmed by the UNESCO-IHE Institute for
Water Education in Delft, which is working with the local
university,
studies
conducted by the University of Colorado agrarian studies
faculty, which is developing a special maize strain that needs
less water. These data can also be viewed on the following
website: www.waterfootprint.org.

founded in 2003, and also by recent

4.23
In Europe, those worst affected by water problems are
the southern regions. They have suffered water shortages for
many years and, with temperature rises and resulting evapora-
tion, these difficulties are set to continue, while for now at least
the northern regions do not appear to be concerned.

The cost

4.24
The following table (presented by Mr Mario Marchionna
of the ENI at a recent seminar held by AIDIC — the Italian
Association of Chemical Engineering) compares the cost of
fossil fuels and biofuels, for equivalent energy.

Cost comparison of biofuel components

(equivalent energy value)

Reference price: Brent = 70 (56) $/bl

Fuel

Equivalent €¢/lt

Petrol (1)

Bioethanol

EU

Brazil

US

Italy
(Val Padana)

Diesel (2)

Biodiesel

EU

Malaysia

US

Italy

39 (31)

75

39

47

70-75

46 (37)

78

48

60

78

— 7 million ha of uncultivated land,

— 7 million ha by converting land used for cereal crops with

export subsidies,

— 4 million ha to be taken out of agricultural use.

Benefits for poor countries?

The Commission states that developing the use of
4.26
biofuels will bring significant benefits, especially to the devel-
oping countries, which can step up their production geared to
exports. African farmers, however, are expressing concern about
the economic return on the investments made so far. The
10 May 2007 issue of African Agriculture, raises some serious
questions in an article on Is jatropha excitement a mirage? (the
jatropha is a bush yielding oilseeds that are toxic to humans but
produce reasonable-quality biodiesel, and that do not require
special care).

4.27
African environmental associations are also making
their voices heard, as reported in the East African Business Week
(an online journal produced by Kenya's leading publishing
group, Nation Media Group) of 7 May 2007. Deforestation is
increasing by 2,2 % yearly, compared to a world average of
0,2 % — at this rate the country will have no forest left by
2040. A group of civil society activists has set up the ‘Save
Mabira’ coalition, named for a forest that the Ugandan govern-
ment has decided to hand over to the Sugar Corporation of
Uganda Ltd to increase the amount of land for sugar cane culti-
vation, earmarked for bioethanol. Some 7 100 ha, or one
quarter of the virgin forest, the biggest in the country, will be
sacrificed to produce a few tonnes of bioethanol, that might
even end up being used in eco-friendly buses in Europe!

4.28
The Commission has virtually nothing to say in this
regard, simply mentioning in passing that both the use of food
crops and the use of land of high nature-related value must be
countered in some way, relying on deterrent economic policies
to solve the problem. It is frankly difficult to detect any sign of
courage on the Commission's part here. The Committee is
highly concerned at the environmental risks arising from the
proliferation of GMO crops which, if used for these purposes,
might seem to be more acceptable. The risk of GMO propaga-
tion is real, and their use can only be assessed once all the scien-
tific research into their possible dangers has been completed; in
any case, the EU's remaining biodiversity must be preserved.

(1) Platt's Mediterranean CIF High is used for petrol.
(2) Platt's Mediterranean CIF High is used for diesel.

4.25
The Commission estimates that 18 million ha of arable
land would be needed in order to produce the necessary biofuels
within the EU to reach the 10 % target by 2020:

4.29
The Committee considers it essential to step up coop-
eration with international bodies concerned with combating
hunger in the world, especially the FAO and WFP (World Food
Programme), and regrets that
the
Commission decided not to enter into contact with these inter-
national agencies, which are carrying out serious work on the

in its impact assessment,

C 44/42

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

16.2.2008

subject without obscuring all the problems and risks arising
from the development of biofuels, especially in terms of
consumption of water resources.

The European Council

4.30
The Committee notes the conclusions of the Spring
Council of 8 and 9 March 2007, which devoted considerable
attention to the Energy Policy for Europe (EPE), whose three
main objectives are to:

— increase security of supply;

— ensure the competitiveness of European economies and the

availability of affordable energy;

— promote environmental sustainability and combat climate

change.

supports

and adopts

The European Council

4.31
the
Commission's proposals on energy in general, and on biofuels
in particular, although the wording used with respect to the
10 % obligation leaves considerable room for doubt:
‘The
binding character of this target is appropriate subject to produc-
tion being sustainable, second-generation biofuels becoming
commercially available and the Fuel Quality Directive being
amended accordingly to allow for adequate levels of blending’.

4.32
It will be extremely important to understand how these
provisos may be used effectively by the Member States. In par-
ticular, reference to the market availability of second-generation
biofuels currently seems problematic.
It would be extremely
costly to convert existing first-generation biofuel-producing
plants, those in an advanced phase of construction and those
the coming years, as their processes are very
planned for
different to those necessary for second-generation fuels. If these
fuels are not available, the Council decision will not be binding.
As regards sustainability, additional European legislation will be
required alongside the existing directives to ensure that biomass
production responds strictly to fixed requirements and that
biofuel crops are not in competition with human and animal
food crops. As for the necessary changes to the directive on fuel
quality, the procedure is somewhat complex and will require the
full attention of the standards bodies, the CEN in particular, to
analyse the problems relating to technical specifications.

Second-generation biofuels

4.33
For second-generation biofuels, a number of solutions
for ethanol production are already possible, through both a
biological fermentation and distillation process, and a thermo-
chemical biomass gasification process to obtain syngas (H2 and
CO) which, through fermentation, produces ethanol and gener-
ates energy via a combined cycle or cogeneration. An initial
production plant, with a capacity of 180 000 tonnes/annum
will begin operating this year in Porvoo, Finland, with another
planned for the end of 2008 at
the same location. These
processes, however, give very low and in some cases negative

energy yields. This has led to research on the development of
photochemical production processes, using sunlight as an
energy source and appropriate catalysts able to improve proper-
ties. Biobutanol provides one possible solution for new genera-
tion biofuels. It has low vapour pressure and also tolerance to
water contamination in petrol blends,
facilitating its use in
existing petrol supply and distribution channels. Bioethanol can
be mixed with petrol
in higher concentrations than existing
It also offers
biofuels, without the need to modify vehicles.
higher fuel savings than petrol-ethanol blends, thus improving
energy efficiency and reducing consumption per litre. Biobu-
tanol can be produced using bioethanol plants.

4.34
The 7th Framework Programme has earmarked substan-
tial resources for the development of these technologies, which
offer a range of interesting characteristics and produce ‘clean’
biofuels:

— they do not contain sulphur, aromatics or polycyclics;

— they are stable;

— emissions are very low;

— they have a very high cetane number (85-100);

— they exceed the low-temperature thresholds for the use of

some types of biofuels;

— they can be added in very high proportions to normal diesel

(up to 60 %);

— their technical characteristics have already been defined and
included in the list of biofuels in Article 2(2) of Directive
2003/30/EC.

The Committee believes that Europe has to allocate more finan-
cial resources to second-generation biofuel research.

5. Specific comments

The Committee endorses the objectives of the EPE:

5.1
if
they are to be achieved, funding will have to be found for the
necessary investment, bringing in the European financial institu-
tions.

5.2
The Committee believes that particular attention should
focus on research in the biofuels sector, especially for second-
generation fuels, without sacrificing other possibilities such as
those produced by the development of solar hydrogen or
biomass processing.

5.3
The Committee recommends that special attention be
paid to respect for biodiversity and the use of exclusively non-
food crops for biofuels, in order to prevent the risk of competi-
tion between food and fuel when millions of human beings still
lack sufficient food and are starving to death. The conclusions
of the above-mentioned FAO report point out that ‘As many as
854 million people worldwide still remain undernourished,

16.2.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 44/43

reflecting the insufficient progress towards the World Food
Summit target and the Millennium Development Goals. While
many countries, especially in Sub-Saharan Africa show potential
for reducing their numbers of hungry people, this figure still
remains threatened by increasing food prices, potentially tighter
grain markets, conflict, disease and climate change’. According
to American researchers Ford Runge and Benjamin Senauer of
the University of Minnesota,
food cereal price changes give
reason to believe that, rather than falling to 600 million in
2025 as predicted, the number of people going hungry in the
world will double, reaching 1 200 million.

5.4 With a view to achieving the objectives of environmental
protection, reduced greenhouse gas emissions, optimised energy
consumption, the use of alternative energies, energy autonomy
and security of energy supply, the Committee suggests special
treatment
for those
(tax and administrative incentives, etc.)
products which make the most substantial contribution to these
objectives.

5.5
The Committee considers that at their current stage, the
existing technologies demand very heavy consumption of
energy, water and land (yields per hectare are such that if one
third of the entire land surface of Italy were to be devoted to
rapeseed cultivation, the amount of biodiesel obtained would
only be enough to replace 10 % of Italy's total oil consumption,
and 40 % of diesel consumption for vehicles).

The Committee believes that the proposal

for a new
5.6
directive should be accompanied by a major and wide-reaching
process of economic, environmental and social assessment
which, at least at the present stage, does not appear to be struc-
tured in a way commensurate with the importance of the issue.

If the fight against pollution is not to be in vain, it is
5.7
essential
to secure biofuels using ‘zero-mile’ domestic agri-
cultural products. They should not be transported from distant
countries, with the consequent consumption of fossil fuels. The
difficulties in recuperating energy from agrifood residues arise
from their widespread distribution, requiring costly transport to
processing centres, and from their significant water content
implying high volumes
these reasons,
biomass of this kind should preferably be processed in situ.

for processing. For

5.8
The Committee believes support should be given to
research into biofuel cell technologies, i.e. biofuel cells that use
biocatalysts to convert chemical energy into electricity. This
energy-producing process enables the recovery of all the elec-

Brussels, 24 October 2007.

trons accumulated during the photosynthesis process by the
plant from which the biomass is taken (24 electrons for every
molecule of glucose oxidised to CO2 and water).

5.9
The Committee agrees with the views of the European
Parliament which, in the recitals of its resolution on a strategy
for biomass and biofuels, adopted in Strasbourg on 14 December
2006, pointed out that ‘the transport sector is responsible for
more than 20 % of greenhouse gas emissions although this
sector is not included in the emissions trading system …’. The
Committee therefore recommends that the Commission envi-
sage extending the application of the ‘white certificates’ scheme
to the vehicle sector.

5.10
In the same resolution, the European Parliament ‘asks
the Commission to introduce a mandatory and comprehensive
certification scheme allowing the sustainable production of
biofuels at all stages, including standards for the cultivation and
processing phases, as well as for the overall life-cycle greenhouse
gas balance, applicable to biofuels both produced within, and
imported into, the European Union’, and ‘to support the devel-
opment and use of the Global Monitoring for Environment and
Security (GMES) system to monitor land use in the production
of bioethanol so as to prevent the destruction of rainforests and
other negative impacts on the environment’. The Committee
agrees with and supports the European Parliament's proposals.

that

The Committee points out

5.11
the vehicle fleet of
some of the recent Member States is highly obsolete, being
made up of
the least efficient used vehicles from the rich
markets. Per capita income in these countries is rather low, as is
also the case for major sectors of the population in the higher
per capita income countries. Consequently, it is not practicable
to consider imposing obligations and costs on these European
citizens, for whom the private car may be an essential work
tool.

5.12
The Committee believes that, at this stage, biofuels can
lend support to the fuels market, provided production is closely
monitored in order to avoid the environmental and social risks
set out in the present opinion, but cannot provide a structural
the potential
answer to the market's demands.
problems identified in this opinion, the Committee believes that
the Commission should keep the 10 % target under continuing
review, and be ready to propose modifications to it
the
problems cannot be satisfactorily overcome in a sustainable way.

In view of

if

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Dimitris DIMITRIADIS