Once seen as a promising solution in the battle against global warming, biomass energy is now being blamed for recent food shortages. This illustrates the fact that energy, resources and the environment are closely interrelated and that equal emphasis must be placed on each.
With more farmers growing corn to meet the demand for ethanol for car fuel, there is less corn being grown for either animal feed or to feed humans and the poor people are suffering as a result.
Although grain-converted biomass energy is a type of green energy that can reduce carbon dioxide emissions, its conversion costs are far higher than oil production costs.
Even if the world’s oil supply were completely used up, it is unclear just how much grain could be grown from the limited supply of arable land.
Moreover, if the energy produced turns out to meet only a fraction of the world’s overall needs, we would experience much pain before seeing any benefits.
A recent World Bank report stated that producing biomass energy was a “crime against humanity” as it threatens food supplies and could lead to social instability in some countries.
It is regrettable that the reputation of biomass energy, which was originally trumpeted as natural and environmentally friendly, has been blackened in this way.
However, this is not surprising given that everyone — locally and internationally, from the academic to the corporate world — jumped on the bioethanol bandwagon in their rush toward new technologies to be researched and business opportunities to be exploited.
Back in the 1970s, the idea of biomass energy was not limited to planting crops to produce energy. It was using the anaerobic fermentation of pig manure and all sorts of organic waste to produce methane for burning or power generation.
This method, which both reduced pollution and recycled energy, was more popular than wind and solar power and was seen as the most economically efficient form of reusable energy. The technology was quite mature and its application was commonplace.
Unfortunately, in comparison with ethanol and other kinds of biofuels, it hardly registers now in terms of overall attention or government efforts at promotion and financial support.
Academic and research circles see this as old technology. Nobody appears interested in exploring this field further to fix key application problems. Instead, everyone is attracted to the latest fad.
However, with their effectiveness unproven and their lower economic benefits, the focus seems to be misplaced.
Local sources of organic waste material that can produce methane biomass energy include kitchen waste, pig manure, fruit and vegetable waste, sewer waste and garbage dumps.
My calculations show that potential methane production from such sources would be nearly 500 million cubic meters, which could produce 800 million kilowatt hours.
This would reduce carbon dioxide emissions by approximately 600,000 tonnes, which is no mean feat.
Unfortunately, methane easily disperses and is difficult to collect, and so much of it is wasted and causes serious pollution.
However, if a systematic method of collection could be set up for these waste materials to be collected for energy production, it would not only be far more efficient than allocating valuable land resources for energy crops, but also more humane.
Chen Wen-ching is an environmental technical consultant for the Pingtung County Government.
TRANSLATED BY JAMES CHEN
Eating at a breakfast shop the other day, I turned to an old man sitting at the table next to mine. “Hey, did you hear that the Legislative Yuan passed a bill to give everyone NT$10,000 [US$340]?” I said, pointing to a newspaper headline. The old man cursed, then said: “Yeah, the Chinese Nationalist Party [KMT] canceled the NT$100 billion subsidy for Taiwan Power Co and announced they would give everyone NT$10,000 instead. “Nice. Now they are saying that if electricity prices go up, we can just use that cash to pay for it,” he said. “I have no time for drivel like
A failure by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to respond to Israel’s brilliant 12-day (June 12-23) bombing and special operations war against Iran, topped by US President Donald Trump’s ordering the June 21 bombing of Iranian deep underground nuclear weapons fuel processing sites, has been noted by some as demonstrating a profound lack of resolve, even “impotence,” by China. However, this would be a dangerous underestimation of CCP ambitions and its broader and more profound military response to the Trump Administration — a challenge that includes an acceleration of its strategies to assist nuclear proxy states, and developing a wide array
Young supporters of former Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) were detained for posting the names and photographs of judges and prosecutors believed to be overseeing the Core Pacific City redevelopment corruption case. The supporters should be held responsible for their actions. As for Ko’s successor, TPP Chairman Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌), he should reflect on whether his own comments are provocative and whether his statements might be misunderstood. Huang needs to apologize to the public and the judiciary. In the article, “Why does sorry seem to be the hardest word?” the late political commentator Nan Fang Shuo (南方朔) wrote
Chinese Minister of Foreign Affairs Wang Yi (王毅) reportedly told the EU’s top diplomat that China does not want Russia to lose in Ukraine, because the US could shift its focus to countering Beijing. Wang made the comment while meeting with EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Kaja Kallas on July 2 at the 13th China-EU High-Level Strategic Dialogue in Brussels, the South China Morning Post and CNN reported. Although contrary to China’s claim of neutrality in the Russia-Ukraine conflict, such a frank remark suggests Beijing might prefer a protracted war to keep the US from focusing on
RSS