Question:

As a retired engineer interested in energy, I was a little bit disappointed with your article on biofuels (Alternatives, no. 16), although the title of the article rightly points out that the future is fraught with uncertainty.

I would make the following comments: 

- First, these fuels are now increasingly referred to as “agrofuels” to reflect the fact that production rarely meets “organic” criteria. Chemical fertilizers and pesticides are used systematically in grain production and deforestation continues in Brazil!

- Your article does not mention second-generation agrofuels, which have the advantage of using the entire plant. This technology may still be in its infancy, but it could be a promising area for research and development in Europe, rather than mimicking Brazil or the United States in the case of ethanol.

- Another possibility for replacing fossil fuels is often overlooked: biogas!

Answer:

First, thank you for your acute analysis. The debate has evolved considerably since we published our article on biofuels two months ago. Second-generation biofuels that use more diversified resources are now on the top of the agenda. Several research areas have been identified. The first would be to produce synthetic biodiesel from vegetable oil or animal fat. A second, parallel path would be to produce biodiesel from ligno-cellulose biomass from plants, i.e. from stalks and trunks. Biogas is produced by fermentation of organic waste in anaerobic conditions. It is possible to use household waste, green plant waste, sludge from sewage treatment stations, animal waste such as pig slurry, and agribusiness waste. Biogas is approximately 65% methane and 35% carbon dioxide. It can be used as fuel to produce heat or electricity or as motor fuel. We will discuss these new technologies in an upcoming issue.