environment

News Commentary // The Environment

Professor: Cezary Marcinkiewicz

Section: 008

Name:

Date:

Do biofuel policies seek to cut emissions by cutting food?

Section One

 Summary: This article is about how government biofuel policies are

reducing the amount of food grown in order to have greenhouse

gas savings. The study looked at three different models from the U.S.

and Europe. The government agencies are using land for biofuels

instead of growing food and then not replacing the crops to plant

more food. The decrease in food production causes increase in

prices and can cause hard times for the poor that are hit by this

increase in price. Experts say without the decline in food, there

would be more biofuels emissions than gasoline. If there is not food

reduction the ethanol emissions would be significantly higher

compared to gasoline.

 Environmental Issue involved: The environmental issue that is

involved is that food production is being decreased because the

space is being used for biofuels. Thus, causing the price of food to

increase. Also, there is debate whether gasoline or ethanol causes

more carbon dioxide emissions.

o Who: The people that are involved in this issue are all human

beings that eat food. It also has an effect on the earth from

the emissions.

o What: The harmful effects of the emissions and also the

increase in price from decline in food production.

o Where: This issue is taking place in the United States and in

Europe, but could eventually be effect the whole world.

o When: This is a present issue being studied, however if

something isn’t done about it, it can become a major

problem for many years to come.

o Why: Using space for biofuels can be harmful to people’s

wallet and health. People will have to pay more money for

food instead of using it on leisure activities. Also, the emissions

could cause health problems from the greenhouse gases.

 Published Date of Article: March 27th, 2015

Source: Sciencedaily.com

Princeton University

News Commentary // The Environment

Professor: Cezary Marcinkiewicz

Section: 008

Name:

Date:

Section Two

 Impact of the environmental issue: The impact of the environmental

issue is very big. In order to create less emissions, food production

must be decreased. Now this is one part good and another part

bad. It is a good thing that emissions of carbon dioxide will be

decreased, but will then cause the rising in food prices. Without

decreasing food production, the use of ethanol would be worse

than the emissions from the gasoline. So either way there is always a

problem.

 Possible Outcomes: The possible outcome for this situation is not

going to be good for either side. One outcome would be the food

production would be decreased and prices would increase

dramatically and would therefore cause fewer emissions. Another

outcome would be for the food production to stay where it is and

prices would stay the same, but then the emissions would increase.

There is really no happy medium for this issue right now.

 Why should we be aware of the situation: We should be aware of

this situation because this will affect people’s income or health. This

problem will eventually affect the majority of the people in the

world because everyone eats in their lifetime and must pay for their

food. If food production is constant then the emissions will pose

health problem dealing with emissions of either carbon dioxide or

ethanol.

 What are solutions or considerations for the future: The solutions or

considerations for the future of this issue are not really practical.

One solution could be that people could stop eating so much,

however that would cause nutritional levels to decrease. Another

solution is that people could grow their own food in their own

backyards, but then that is not practical for urban environments.

The last solution would be for scientists to find a way for ethanol

emissions not to be higher than gasoline, while still having the same

amount of food production and constant prices.

 How did your opinion change because of reading this article: My

opinion really didn’t change after reading this article. My opinion of

greenhouse gases has always been that we should find a way to

decrease emissions, but not in this way. I don’t believe that making

News Commentary // The Environment

Professor: Cezary Marcinkiewicz

Section: 008

Name:

Date:

food prices higher or taking away crop space is a good way to go

about decreasing emissions for the atmosphere. Increasing food

prices would hit families very hard and would maybe even cause

more people to become homeless and hungry. There must be

another solution out there than food reduction to decrease

emissions.

 Do you recommend that others read this article: I highly

recommend that other people read this article and become

educated about this issue. This issue is not something that just

impacts a small percentage of the world. It will affect human

beings across the globe eventually and if it isn’t paid attention to

more it will become a bigger problem than it already is right now.

Summary of scoring: 1. Clarity of presentation 2/2 2. Answering required questions 2/2 3. Grammar 2/2 4. Formatting 2/2 5. Topic selection 2/2 Total scoring 10/10

News Commentary // The Environment

Professor: Cezary Marcinkiewicz

Section: 008

Name:

Date:

(http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/03/150327201710.htm)

Do biofuel policies seek to cut emissions by cutting food?

Date:

March 27, 2015

Source:

Princeton University

Summary:

A new study found that government biofuel policies rely on reductions in

food consumption to generate greenhouse gas savings.

A study published today in the journal Science found that government

biofuel policies rely on reductions in food consumption to generate

greenhouse gas savings.

Shrinking the amount of food that people and livestock eat decreases the

amount of carbon dioxide that they breathe out or excrete as waste. The

reduction in food available for consumption, rather than any inherent fuel

efficiency, drives the decline in carbon dioxide emissions in government

models, the researchers found.

"Without reduced food consumption, each of the models would estimate

that biofuels generate more emissions than gasoline," said Timothy

Searchinger, first author on the paper and a research scholar at Princeton

University's Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs and

the Program in Science, Technology, and Environmental Policy.

Searchinger's co-authors were Robert Edwards and Declan Mulligan of

the Joint Research Center at the European Commission; Ralph Heimlich of

the consulting practice Agricultural Conservation Economics; and Richard

Plevin of the University of California-Davis.

The study looked at three models used by U.S. and European agencies,

and found that all three estimate that some of the crops diverted from

News Commentary // The Environment

Professor: Cezary Marcinkiewicz

Section: 008

Name:

Date:

food to biofuels are not replaced by planting crops elsewhere. About 20

percent to 50 percent of the net calories diverted to make ethanol are

not replaced through the planting of additional crops, the study found.

The result is that less food is available, and, according to the study, these

missing calories are not simply extras enjoyed in resource-rich countries.

Instead, when less food is available, prices go up. "The impacts on food

consumption result not from a tailored tax on excess consumption but

from broad global price increases that will disproportionately affect some

of the world's poor," Searchinger said.

The emissions reductions from switching from gasoline to ethanol have

been debated for several years. Automobiles that run on ethanol emit less

carbon dioxide, but this is offset by the fact that making ethanol from corn

or wheat requires energy that is usually derived from traditional

greenhouse gas-emitting sources, such as natural gas.

Both the models used by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and

the California Air Resources Board indicate that ethanol made from corn

and wheat generates modestly fewer emissions than gasoline. The fact

that these lowered emissions come from reductions in food production is

buried in the methodology and not explicitly stated, the study found.

The European Commission's model found an even greater reduction in

emissions. It includes reductions in both quantity and overall food quality

due to the replacement of oils and vegetables by corn and wheat, which

are of lesser nutritional value. "Without these reductions in food quantity

and quality, the [European] model would estimate that wheat ethanol

generates 46% higher emissions than gasoline and corn ethanol 68%

higher emissions," Searching said.

The paper recommends that modelers try to show their results more

transparently so that policymakers can decide if they wish to seek

greenhouse gas reductions from food reductions. "The key lesson is the

trade-offs implicit in the models," Searchinger said.

Story Source:

The above story is based on materials provided by Princeton

University. Note: Materials may be edited for content and length.

Journal Reference:

1. T. Searchinger, R. Edwards, D. Mulligan, R. Heimlich, R. Plevin. Do biofuel

policies seek to cut emissions by cutting food? Science, 2015; 347

(6229): 1420 DOI: 10.1126/science.1261221

News Commentary // The Environment

Professor: Cezary Marcinkiewicz

Section: 008

Name:

Date:

Cite this page:

Princeton University. "Do biofuel policies seek to cut emissions by cutting

food?." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 27 March 2015.

<www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/03/150327201710.htm>.