Environment

To overcome dwindling oil supplies and to reduce greenhouse gases, we can derive our transportation fuels from plants. But environmentalists argue biofuels encourage unsustainable agriculture and sacrifice food for fuel. So, are biofuels really the green saviour?

Discussion: What would it take to unlock the full potential of biofuels?

Related Content:

Live debate - De-carbonised transport: with or without biofuels?

Live Debate - The future of biofuels

Live Debate - The new challenges of sustainable agriculture

As the European Commission is in the process of finalising its new transport white paper, a strategic document that will set the tone of EU transport policy for a decade, controversy about the sustainability of biofuels remains.

One of the goals of future EU policy will be to decarbonise the transport sector by 2050. Whereas electricity is seen to be the future of urban and short distance mobility, liquid fuels are likely to remain an essential part of rural and long-distance mobility. Biofuels have long been perceived to have an important role to play in the transition towards low-carbon transport. However, doubts have been cast about the carbon footprint of biofuels, in particular when it comes to conventional biofuels made from corn, wheat, sugar and palm oil. The potential impact of biofuels on food security is a further point of debate.

The uncertainty about the contribution of biofuels to reducing CO2 emissions was reflected in the agreement on the directive on the promotion of renewable energy. EU leaders originally intended to include a target of 10% of biofuels in transport by 2020. However the final text only mentioned 10% of ‘energy from renewable sources’ in transport.

One of the main elements of the Directive was the inclusion of mandatory sustainability criteria for biofuels in order to protect forests, wetlands and other areas of high conservation value. It allows for a voluntary certification scheme for biofuels, which would also apply to imports.

The directive also foresees that the Commission should review the impact of indirect land use change – that is, the notion that biofuels production can displace existing agricultural activities, creating indirect emissions elsewhere. The Commission is required to report the European Parliament and Council by the end of 2010, reviewing the impact of indirect land use change effects on greenhouse gas emissions of biofuels and addressing ways to minimise that impact.

The question of indirect land use change (iLUC) remains a divisive issue, over which Commission departments have not been able to agree. There is evidence that iLUC risks can be mitigated by introducing better agricultural practices. Others actors are calling for iLUC penalty factors to be added to the greenhouse gas calculations for biofuel feedstocks to reflect iLUC risk. The Commission launched a public consultation in July 2010, to get external feedback on the studies it has carried out or commissioned thus far.

What will be the place of biofuels in the future energy mix of Europe’s transport sector? Can a transition to low-carbon transport happen without biofuels? What can be done to prevent or mitigate the negative impacts of indirect land use change?

* * *

Timing

18.00-18.30 Welcome of participants and registration

18.30-18.35 Introduction of participants by Jennifer Rankin, energy and environment reporter, European Voice

18.35-19.05 Panel discussion

•    Jens Rohde MEP, coordinator of the ALDE group on the ITRE committee
•    Hans van Steen, head of unit, regulatory policy and promotion of renewable energies, DG energy, European Commission
•    Thomas Gameson, director government and public affairs Europe, Abengoa Bioenergy
•    Jos Dings, director, Transport & Environment
•   Jeremy Woods, lecturer in bioenergy, Imperial College London

19.05-19.55 Debate (audience participation strongly encouraged)

19.55-20.00 Conclusions by Luis Scoffone, vice-president, alternative energies, Shell

20.00 Networking reception

Discussion:

Related Content:

None...

The seas and oceans are one of this planet’s greatest resources. The movement of
waves and tides are a naturally occurring phenomenon and, like the sun and wind, can be harnessed to produce vast amounts of electrical energy. Marine energy has not, thus far, attracted the investment that the former have done, though its potential is slowly being recognised. Comment Visions October programme interviews Peter Fraenkel, Technical Director of Marine Current Turbines. Peter Fraenkel is the engineer behind  Seagen, the world’s first commercial electrical turbine that uses the tides to generate 1.2 megawatts
of electricity in Strangford Lough, Northern Ireland. Seagen will be tested in the Pentland Firth project in Scotland where Marine Current Turbines is planning to use its technology to produce up to 300 Mw by 2020.

Discussion: Is lack of investment the only challenge holding back wave and tidal energy?

Related Content:

Live Debate -- Global Warming and Lifestyle Changes

The world will continue to rely on fossil fuel to supply the bulk of its energy for decades to come. So, finding ways to reduce the carbon emissions that come from burning these fuels is a major challenge that must be addressed.
An important opportunity for reducing these emissions is through the introduction of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) technology.

How can we?
There are various technologies already in use to capture the CO2, however implementing CCS on a global scale presents significant challenges in its own right.

Speeding up installation, reducing cost, creating an effective transport infrastructure and overcoming community resistance to local storage facilities are all priorities that need to be addressed.

If adoption of Carbon Capture and Storage is urgent, then why isn’t it happening faster?

Discussion: If adoption of Carbon Capture and Storage is urgent, then why isn't it happening faster?

Related Content:

Live Debate - Can Europe win public acceptance for low-carbon infrastructure projects

Live Debate - Putting carbon capture and storage into motion

Live Debate - Can carbon capture and storage help the world deal with climate change?

The 2010 European Business Summit was 30 June - 1 July and included the Presidents' Debate, a high-level energy panel, and a gala dinner.Read more

We are in Freiburg, a city of around 220,000 people, a city which committed itself to green energy 20 years ago. What do the city fathers think will be the future of energy in the next 20 years? Freiburg has already reduced its GHG emissions by a substantial amount. Freiburg encourages the use of solar and methane gas which generates base load electricity  (which is on all the time). The suburb of Vauban is vehicle free, people willingly have given up their cars for bicycles. How could Freiburg become a model of energy efficiency that every city in the world can learn from.

Discussion: By how much should we expect renewables to replace fossil fuels over the next 20 years?

Related Content:

Programme: Energy: the Next 20 Years Part 1.

Live Debate: After Copenhagen: the next steps

Recent developments in the gas sector in the US have the potential to change radically the energy situation in Europe. New technology has made unconventional gas resources available at competitive cost.

In North America, this sudden expansion of available gas has contributed to keeping gas prices low, despite ever rising demand. It has also helped the US to pursue its strategic objective of reducing its dependence on gas imports. Furthermore, the boom in unconventional gas in the US has changed the dynamics of markets for liquefied natural gas (LNG), with some supplies originally intended for the US being diverted to other markets including some in Europe.

As some European regions, particularly in Northern Europe, have similar geological structures to ones where unconventional gas has been found in North America, there are hopes that unconventional gas could offer the European Union a huge increase in domestic supplies. Energy companies have been rushing to explore the possibilities in these regions, leading to talk of a new ‘gas rush’.

For countries such as Poland, which are heavily dependent on Russian gas imports and rely on coal for most of their domestic energy production, unconventional gas could open a new chapter in energy policy. It would make domestic energy supply more secure, and reduce CO2 emissions since burning gas emits significantly less CO2 than burning coal.

A boom in unconventional gas would also have considerable implications for the EU’s energy policy. Abundant gas supplies – through increased domestic production or cheaper LNG imports – would make it easier to reach CO2 reduction targets and to electrify transport. It could also lower incentives to invest in some costly infrastructure projects, and make some technologies less attractive.

Sceptics warn of exaggerated enthusiasm, stressing that in a more densely populated continent than the US, public acceptance of projects that are likely to have heavy environmental consequences cannot be taken for granted. Unconventional gas extracted from European territory is not expected to come to market for at least a decade.

This event looked at the potential of unconventional gas to transform the European energy supply situation. It addressed the technological and economic challenges unconventional gas faces as well as the questions of public acceptance.

Feedback Form: Fill out the event feedback form here

Related Content:

Programme: The road to global energy security

Presentation: Unconventional Gas by Alan Riley

Feedback Form: Fill out the event feedback form here

Discussion: To what extent should we encourage the growth of wind energy in our future energy mix?

Related Content:

None...

Discussion: If the transition to electric vehicles is so important, then why isn’t it happening faster?

Related Content:

Live Debate: Can Europe de-carbonise transport?

Discussion: As well as seeking alternative fuels, should we be changing our entire transportation culture?

Related Content:

Live Debate: Can Europe de-carbonise transport?