YOU SAY BIOFUELS, I SAY AGROFUELS

U.C. Berkeley recently entered into a research agreement with oil multinational BP to develop next generation biofuels technology. Many see the agreement as a deal made by the University with the devil. Others see it as a practical way to fund advanced and therefore expensive research on important, relevant topics. (See CARBON ALLEY: NEW ENERGY’S CUTTING EDGE)

Remember that old Gershwin song?

"You like potAto and I like potAAto,
You like tomAto and I like tomAAto,
potAto, potAAto,
tomAto, tomAAto
Let's call the whole thing off."

Seems like U.C. Berkeley's got some of that going on. Fertile ground (so to speak) for a fight on the biofuels controversy.

The abstract question is whether a public university can accept funding from private corporations and retain its integrity. A recent panel discussion did not hinge on the abstract. Possibly fueled by such underlying tensions, top university thinkers clashed over the concrete question of whether biofuels are a legitimate answer to current energy issues.

The fireworks reportedly started when Tad Patzek, professor of geo-engineering, asked if anybody in the audience believed 2 + 2 equals 22.

Patzek: "That would make you biofuel enthusiasts…You have money and media access, and now everybody believes that 2 + 2 = 22."

Among the questions Patzek raised about biofuels was that of quantities. He said it would take food for 36 billion people (6 times Earth’s population) to make enough ethanol for every American car.

Chris Sommerville, head of the U.C. Berkeley Energy Biosciences Institute (EBI) that is funded by a $500 million grant from BP, argued that EBI is looking not at food crop-based fuels (AGROfuels) but at second generation cellulosic biofuels. He said cellulosics can meet world transportation fuel needs with just 1 percent of the Earth's surface and on lands not needed for crops.

Sommerville also stressed the importance of doing scientific research on the subject.

J. Keith Gilless, dean, U.C. Berkley College of Natural Resources, demonstrated the meaning of the title “moderator” by enumerating the questions that would moderate the debate. He pointed out that the future of biofuels rests on choices: whether consumers will take up new vehicle technologies, whether new fuel infrastructures can be developed, how farmers navigate between AGROfuels and biofuels. “There are costs and benefits to all these decisions,” he concluded.

Sounds like they’re still using the free speech a bunch of wild kids fought so hard for on that campus almost half a century ago. And they’re using that free speech for an important argument.

Too bad there isn’t some way to get Congress off that meaningless bickering about oil drilling and on to some equally meaningful debate.

See also The Intersection of Energy and Agriculture: Biofuel and New Technology

click to enlarge

UC Berkeley Experts clash over viability of biofuels, alternative energy
Heather Knight, August 3, 2008 (SF Chronicle)

WHO
Pre-eminent UC Berkeley scholars (Tad Patzek, biofuels industry critic/professor of geo-engineering; Chris Somerville, head, UC Berkeley Energy Biosciences Institute (EBI); Doug Dickson, vice president of ag products, Pacific Ethanol Inc.; Anastasios Melis, professor of plant and microbial biology, UC Berkeley; J. Keith Gilless, dean, College of Natural Resources/moderator)

WHAT
"The Future of Biofuels?" was a panel discussion hosted by the U.C. Berkeley College of Natural Resources that erupted into a clash over whether biofuels are a fool’s errand or can be a solution to the energy crisis.

click to enlarge

WHEN
The panel discussion was August 2.

WHERE
The panel discussion took place on the UC Berkeley campus.

WHY
- Tad Patzek, outspoken biofuels critic, argued that world production of staples (wheat, rice, barley, potatoes, rye) is not growing with the population because farmers are turning to AGROfuels crops (corn, sugarcane, soybeans). The result is less food and higher food prices.
- Patzek contended the imbalance between food crops and fuel crops will grow.
- EBI, which Sommerville heads, is funded by a $500 million grant from BP.
- Sommerville argued that cellulosic biofuels (cell fibers of any plant material, including grass trimmings, food waste, fallen trees and fast-growing, low maintenance native plants) can be grown on the 1 percent of the Earth's surface not needed for food crops.
- He said the strategy would also substantially reduce greenhouse gases.

click to enlarge

QUOTES
- Patzek: "Call me cold-shower Tad…You have to start using less energy."
- Sommerville: "We're not advocating anything…We're advocating research on the subject. We're not picking winners."