Fuelling our future

Globally, there is everything to gain from creating a free and open global market for ethanol. It makes as much sense for motorists in the US and Europe to import their liquid fuel from progressive and democratic countries in the tropical parts of the world that are developing fast - such as Brazil or India or even Australia - as it does to import oil that props up Middle East regimes.

But the US imposes an import tariff of 54c per gallon on ethanol - imposed at the behest of the corn belt producers (and largely to the benefit of the big blenders such as Archer Daniels Midland (ADM). Australia too imposes a high tariff against imported ethanol, apparently linked to the Manildra incident. It is imperative that it be removed - and a free market for energy in Australia be introduced.

What about all the furphies put about by the motor industry in Australia regarding ethanol and engine damage. Suffice to say that almost everyone is driving Flex Fuel Vehicles now in Brazil, and that Detroit is promoting the idea heavily.

Biodiesel is another promising product that has far more future in the tropical countries than in temperate Europe or the US. India is experimenting with new sources such as Jatropha cursus (grown by the Japanese military during the war to produce aviation fuel) and the Brazilians are sowing soybean and other fast-growing vegetable oil sources on lands left degraded after cattle grazing.

Australia too could generate a very successful biofuels industry, based on vegetable oils. At the moment companies are building the business - such as the Australian Biodiesel Group - based on animal oils. These are fine, but cannot be scaled up very far. Heavy users of diesel in Australia - such as mining contractors like Leighton Holdings - are potentially extremely important customers for such biodiesel.

Beyond ethanol from sugar cane, and biodiesel, there is cellulosic ethanol produced from wood pulp and biowastes with the aid of new cocktails of digestive enzymes. This the experimental front of biofuels that has most promise. I agree with Adam Fenderson (New Matilda - log in required) that this is where Australia could reap huge advantages in developing fast-growing forest plantations for fuel use.

The usual case against biofuels is that proposals for their serious scaling up would destroy forests, create vast areas of arid land through overcropping and monoculture, and drive up food prices. But again these objections are Eurocentric and US-centric, and ignore the possibilities available in tropical countries - and in Australia.

There is a conventional wisdom based on developed country perspectives that biofuels cannot possibly pick up the full burden of transport fuel supplies. “All renewables suffer from low areal densities” is the opinion of Professor Hoffert and his colleagues, writing in the premier journal Science. Hoffert et al go on to comment: “… photosynthesis has too low a power density (~0.6 W/m2) for biofuels to contribute significantly to climate stabilization. PV and wind energy (~15 W/m2) need less land, but other materials can be limiting” (2002: 984).

These illustrious authors, having dismissed so cavalierly in a couple of lines the terrestrial efforts to make up for fossil fuel deficiencies with biofuels, solar and wind energy, then go on to devote paragraphs to an untried and speculative description of a space-based solar array as part of a star wars initiative.

The reality is rather different, especially for developing countries where sunshine and desolate landscapes are not in short supply. In India for example there are now several major investment programs underway in ethanol and biodiesel production, utilising vast areas of degraded or under-utilised land. These projects can also capture latecomer advantages through utilising the latest in biorefinery technology - as recognised in a more recent article in Science.

Let’s be realistic about the land. Brazil produces its current output of just over 14,000 ML of ethanol from 2.66 million hectares - or 26,600 square kilometers. Australia could match that with just a strip of land 50 km deep and 500 km long. We have the land, either in Queensland’s interior or in the northwest, where regular monsoon rains water a 50km coastal belt and are simply washed back to the sea by rivers such as the Daly.

Still, the key to the transition is the role of government in rolling back the subsidies enjoyed by fossil fuels and in creating demand - as well as forcing the shift in infrastructure needed by mandating supplies of ethanol-petrol blends in service stations around the country. This is the part that is conspicuously lacking in Australia. But it can’t be allowed to continue, because the oil companies and the automotive companies are singing a very different tune in countries like Brazil.

The issue is not entirely dead. If you only read the mainstream press, you’d be forgiven for remaining ignorant of these matters in Australia. Who is aware that there is a Senate inquiry currently underway into “Australia's future oil supply and alternative transport fuels”? There is - and you should be adding your voice to the debate.