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
Jan. 1 marks a decade since China repealed its one-child policy. Just 10 days before, Peng Peiyun (彭珮雲), who long oversaw the often-brutal enforcement of China’s family-planning rules, died at the age of 96, having never been held accountable for her actions. Obituaries praised Peng for being “reform-minded,” even though, in practice, she only perpetuated an utterly inhumane policy, whose consequences have barely begun to materialize. It was Vice Premier Chen Muhua (陳慕華) who first proposed the one-child policy in 1979, with the endorsement of China’s then-top leaders, Chen Yun (陳雲) and Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平), as a means of avoiding the
As the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) races toward its 2027 modernization goals, most analysts fixate on ship counts, missile ranges and artificial intelligence. Those metrics matter — but they obscure a deeper vulnerability. The true future of the PLA, and by extension Taiwan’s security, might hinge less on hardware than on whether the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) can preserve ideological loyalty inside its own armed forces. Iran’s 1979 revolution demonstrated how even a technologically advanced military can collapse when the social environment surrounding it shifts. That lesson has renewed relevance as fresh unrest shakes Iran today — and it should
The last foreign delegation Nicolas Maduro met before he went to bed Friday night (January 2) was led by China’s top Latin America diplomat. “I had a pleasant meeting with Qiu Xiaoqi (邱小琪), Special Envoy of President Xi Jinping (習近平),” Venezuela’s soon-to-be ex-president tweeted on Telegram, “and we reaffirmed our commitment to the strategic relationship that is progressing and strengthening in various areas for building a multipolar world of development and peace.” Judging by how minutely the Central Intelligence Agency was monitoring Maduro’s every move on Friday, President Trump himself was certainly aware of Maduro’s felicitations to his Chinese guest. Just
In the US’ National Security Strategy (NSS) report released last month, US President Donald Trump offered his interpretation of the Monroe Doctrine. The “Trump Corollary,” presented on page 15, is a distinctly aggressive rebranding of the more than 200-year-old foreign policy position. Beyond reasserting the sovereignty of the western hemisphere against foreign intervention, the document centers on energy and strategic assets, and attempts to redraw the map of the geopolitical landscape more broadly. It is clear that Trump no longer sees the western hemisphere as a peaceful backyard, but rather as the frontier of a new Cold War. In particular,
RSS