Continued: Dispute over biofuels has a middle ground

House Agriculture Committee Chairman Collin Peterson has been lambasted by editorial pages and some environmentalists for threatening to block progress on national climate legislation over a dispute concerning biofuels. But the all-or-nothing approach of both Peterson and his critics does not serve biofuels, agriculture or the fight against global warming.

Peterson introduced legislation in May to entirely undo the Environmental Protection Agency's decision to include something called indirect land use change, or ILUC, in a revised renewable-fuels standard. ILUC calculations attempt to quantify ethanol-related emissions beyond the direct emissions associated with where and how the corn is grown, the refinery where it's processed and how the fuel is used. When American farmers sell their corn to ethanol plants, bypassing international food and feed markets, ILUC models estimate that land somewhere else -- including rainforest and grasslands -- gets plowed under to fill the gap. This releases carbon stored in forests and soils into the air, increasing global warming. ILUC science is in its infancy; it's easy to imagine how difficult it is to account for other factors that affect land use around the world, including global crop yields, weather conditions, tariffs and taxes, market developments, urbanization, and political upheaval.

Why is the ILUC estimate important? Because it affects the extent to which corn-based ethanol or any agricultural biofuel will meet renewable-fuels standard criteria. Ultimately, it could have a huge impact on the industry.

We, as representatives of Minnesota-based agriculture and environmental organizations, think that Peterson's concerns have merit, although his proposals go too far. Indirect land use change is real, but ILUC calculations need more research and development before they are used in policy. We need to better understand the links between what happens here in the Corn Belt and what happens in the rainforest, and we must figure out how to quantify indirect effects. Combining a commitment to do this research with a commitment to account for these emissions would be a better approach.

That work requires an international understanding much broader than biofuels or the renewable-fuels standard. We know that our agriculture, forestry, energy and trade policies are global in nature and that they can cause harmful effects beyond our borders. For years, U.S. farm commodities routinely were sold abroad for less than it cost to grow them. This had devastating effects on both developing countries' food security and the livelihoods of farmers in poor countries. It is safe to say that in this globalized economy, demand for biofuels or bioenergy in industrialized countries will have some effect on what is grown in the developing world.

The problems associated with ILUC -- the loss of biodiversity and carbon sinks through deforestation and grassland destruction, as well as the exploitation of small-scale farmers and workers -- are pressing and require a comprehensive international solution. An effective response to ILUC will need to involve those most affected on the ground, must support global agriculture and land use practices that are fair, must meet production goals, and must protect and conserve natural resources like soils, water, forests and biodiversity.

The challenge we face is how to develop the bioenergy sector as part of the solution to climate change and energy independence without inadvertently making the climate less stable and the world less secure. To accomplish this, our bioenergy policies must be on track toward a fair accounting of ILUC emissions.

Minnesota, through its innovative, farmer-owned biofuels sector, has been a leader in making biofuels more environmentally and economically beneficial on a local scale. Farmers and producers here and abroad must continue to strive toward the next generation of biofuels by moving away from corn and toward perennial feedstocks and lower carbon practices. We can aid this transition through continuing policy support for the introduction and establishment of these new crops and conversion technologies.

Ultimately, the climate crisis is too big to solve without farmers and environmental advocates coming together. Most of us share a vision that includes low-carbon renewable fuel production that can only be achieved through local and global support for sustainable agricultural systems and land uses. With so much to agree on, we cannot afford to let divisions around indirect land use halt our progress.

Jim Harkness represents the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy of Minneapolis; Michael Noble, Fresh Energy of St. Paul, and Patrick Moore, Clean Up The River Environment of Montevideo, Minn.

Recent Commentary stories

D.J. Tice: It's easy to pounce on that political football - June 13, 2009

D.J. Tice: It's easy to pounce on that political football - The tougher issues involve the cost of the Minnesota Sex Offender Program -- and whether it is a just endeavor to begin with. More

Comment on this story | Read all 2 comments | Hide reader comments

New ideas for the public sector

THERE'S NEVER BEEN A BETTER TIME to create a more efficient Minnesota. Facing large budget deficits at the state, county and local levels, Minnesotans are seeing with new clarity that the public sector must adapt to new economic realities. Only the smartest, most strategic reinvention will ensure that our tax dollars are spent on the best programs and services. Read more

About Opinion Exchange

Opinion Exchange is produced by the Editorial Department, which is dedicated to hosting the discussion on a range of issues of interest to Star Tribune readers online and in print. In its new format, it's our hope that Opinion Exhange will create a more dynamic dialogue between Star Tribune readers and the Editorial Board. Many individual posts will be written and signed by members of the Editorial Board and will reflect their own opinions. Daily editorials will continue to represent the institutional voice of the newspaper and be researched and written by the Editorial Department, which is independent of the newsroom.

Subscribe to RSS|Learn more about RSS