View Online

OPINION www.rsc.org/ees | Energy & Environmental Science

Multiple objectives in biofuels sustainability

policy
Jon C. Lovett,*a Sarah Hards,b Joy Clancya and Carolyn Snellb
DOI: 10.1039/c0ee00041h

Sustainability, with its multiple environmental, economic and social objectives, is now
prominent in many national and international policies. These are implemented in a classical
incrementalist approach. We use the example of biofuels to demonstrate the way that multiple
Published on 12 November 2010 on http://pubs.rsc.org | doi:10.1039/C0EE00041H

objectives are developed in energy and environmental policy. Biofuels are promoted as
replacements for transport fuels, but biofuel policy is also geared towards socio-economic
goals such as agricultural subsidy and strategic goals such as security of energy supply. We
discuss examples of multiple objectives and regulatory instruments applied to biofuels with
Downloaded by Universidade do Porto (UP) on 20 April 2011

a focus on the United Kingdom and highlight the difficulties of applying sustainability criteria
under international trade agreements. In conclusion we briefly contrast biofuels policy against
that of fossil fuels.

1. Introduction
The politically acceptable definition of
sustainability is that adopted by the
Report of the World Commission on
Environment and Development (often
called the Brundtland Commission) in
1987.1 This definition states that sustain-
able development meets the needs of the
a
CSTM - Twente Centre for Studies in
Technology and Sustainable Development,
University of Twente, Postbus 217, 7500 AE,
Enschede, Netherlands. E-mail: j.lovett@
utwente.nl; Fax: +31-53-4894850; Tel: +31-53-
4893203
b
Department of Social Policy and Social Work,
University of York, Heslington, York, YO10
5DD
present without compromising the ability
of future generations to meet their own
needs and should encompass environ-
mental, social and economic dimensions.
The concept of meeting the needs of
present generations endorses a business
as usual approach, contrasting with the
notion of limits to growth imposed by
finite natural resource availability2 which
would require marked changes in lifestyle
and so are less likely to receive popular
support. From a public administration
perspective, practical application of
Brundtland sustainability is an example
of what Charles Lindblom called incre-
mentalism; or perhaps more famously,
muddling through.3,4 Policies are made
incrementally because the generational
time perspective and multiple objectives
implicit in sustainability mean that
a calculated balance between inter- and
intra-generational equity, or on
a reasoned analysis of trade-offs between
the three different dimensions, is not
possible.
Biofuels for the transport sector are
particularly interesting in the context of
the multiple objectives of sustainability
policy. Although they have been in use
since the invention of the internal
combustion engine, the recent global push
for increased use has coincided with
a general political acceptance of sustain-
ability as a guiding concept. There are two

Jon Lovett is professor of Sarah Hards is completing

Sustainable Development in a PhD in the Department of
a North South Perspective at the Social Policy and Social Work
University of Twente in the at the University of York. Her
Netherlands and leader of the research focuses on the sustain-
sustainability strategic research able practices of individuals and
orientation in the Institute for their variation over time.
Governance Studies. His main
interest is the institutional
economics of natural resource
management. In 20082009 he
was the Environmental Econo-
mist on the Chief Scientists
Jon C: Lovett team of Natural England and an Sarah Hards
advisor to the 2009 Sustainable
Development in the European Union report prepared by EuroStat.
He works with Joy Clancy on a range of biofuel issues in developing
countries.

This journal is The Royal Society of Chemistry 2011 Energy Environ. Sci., 2011, 4, 261268 | 261
 View Online

additional issues. One is that agricultural
products are used as feedstocks in biofuel
manufacture, which leads to both trade
and substitution complications; and the
other is that biofuels offer the possibility
of supplementing or replacing fossil fuels
with a renewable resource thereby
reducing greenhouse gas emissions and so
mitigating anthropogenically induced
climate change.
Climate change is a global environ-
mental issue attributed, at least in part, to
Published on 12 November 2010 on http://pubs.rsc.org | doi:10.1039/C0EE00041H
Despite the urgency of climate change,
and the apparent need for a leap in policy,
biofuels are subject to incremental poli-
cies with multiple objectives.9 For
example the 2003 European Biofuels
Directive10 contained two major policy
goals in addition to being part of
a package of measures to comply with the
Kyoto Protocol (Article 6). These were
opening a new market for agricultural
products (Article 15) and reduction in
energy import dependency (Article 22).
three ambitious objectives were boldly
declared in the Governments Changing
Patterns report on Sustainable
Consumption and Production:
The challenge is to ensure that we make
progress in parallel on three fronts
economic development, environmental
protection and social cohesion and that
initiatives to promote any one of them do
not undermine either of the other two.11
In order to establish this multiple-
objective approach as valid and achiev-

anthropogenic activity5 and which
warrants immediate coordinated action to
offset the adverse social, economic and
ecological threats to sustainability,6 in
other words more decisive than the
Downloaded by Universidade do Porto (UP) on 20 April 2011
The 2009 European Renewable Energy
Directive (2009/28/EC) on promotion of
the use of energy from renewable
resources went a step further and added
a fourth policy goal of stimulating inno-
able, various frameworks have been
drawn upon by policy-makers. In the
2005 UK Sustainable Development
Strategy, the introduction written by
Tony Blair states that:

normal incremental approach. On taking
up the presidency of the G8 at Gleneagles
in July 2005, the then British Prime
Minister, Tony Blair, stated that climate
change is probably, long-term the single
most important issue we face as a global
community. An initiative of the Gle-
neagles meeting was to propose the launch
of a Global Bio-energy Partnership to
support wider, cost effective, biomass and
biofuels deployment, particularly in
developing countries where biomass use is
prevalent. When the Stern Report on
the economics of climate change was
published in 20067 with estimates that
global warming could cause a 20%
reduction in the global economy but
action taken now would only cost 1% of
global gross domestic product, Tony Blair
said that scientific evidence of global
warming was overwhelming and its
consequences disastrous.8
vation, jobs and economic growth. In this
article we use the example of UK and
European policy to examine multiple
objectives and sustainability. We review
regulatory issues, socio-economic and
environmental implications of biofuels in
the context of multiple, often contradic-
tory, policies. There is also a lack of
consistency between energy policies. We
illustrate this point in the discussion by
showing that other policies related to
fossil fuels are based primarily on
economic criteria with less emphasis on
environmental and social impacts.
2. Multiple objectives and
sustainability in UK policy
The Brundtland approach to sustainable
development is deeply embedded in UK
policy, and government supports its
multiple objectives. For example, in 2003,
.policies to promote better quality
environments also have the capacity to have
long-term social and economic benefits
.Our goals are a strong economy, and
decent homes in places with clean, safe and
green public spaces, where people are able
to lead healthy lives, and enjoy the envi-
ronment around them.12
In this statement, environmental,
economic and social goals are blended
into a single quality of life framework.
This has been a dominant framework in
UK sustainability policy for at least
a decade the UKs 1999 Sustainable
Development Strategy was entitled A
Better Quality of Life.13
Another framework used to reconcile
multiple objectives is that of environ-
mental justice also employed in
Blairs introduction to the Sustainable
Development Strategy, when he argues
that Often those people who are most

Dr Joy Clancy MRSC is Dr Carolyn Snell is a Lecturer in

a Reader (Associate Professor)
in Development Studies special-
izing in Technology Transfer. Dr
Clancys research has focused,
for more than 25 years, on small
scale energy systems for devel-
oping countries, including the
technology transfer process and
the role that energy plays as an
input for small businesses and
the potential it offers entrepre-
neurs through the provision of
Joy Clancy a new infrastructure service. Her
PhD was on alcohol fuels in
stationary engines (University of Reading). She is currently
supervising research on conflict and biofuels in Colombia and actor
networks in biofuel innovations in Indonesia.
Social Policy in the Department
of Social Policy and Social
Work, and a Research Fellow at
the Stockholm Environment
Institute (both at the University
of York). Carolyn specialises in
the links between social policy
and the environment, environ-
mental policy analysis, and the
implementation of sustainable
development.
Carolyn Snell

262 | Energy Environ. Sci., 2011, 4, 261268 This journal is The Royal Society of Chemistry 2011

economically and socially disadvantaged
also live in degraded environments with
fewer jobs, unsafe and ugly streets.12
Blair employed this framework in order
to reinforce his message that environ-
mental goals are intertwined with socio-
economic goals. He also presented
a conceptualization of the local envi-
ronment as a major public service12
a metaphor that makes environmental
goals indistinguishable from socio-
economic ones. The justice position was
Published on 12 November 2010 on http://pubs.rsc.org | doi:10.1039/C0EE00041H
echoed in a statement by Gordon
Brown, who succeeded Blair as Prime
Minister, two weeks before the 2007
UNFCCC Bali meeting in which he
gave three government objectives
Downloaded by Universidade do Porto (UP) on 20 April 2011
including fairness and transforming
economic growth to prosperity . the
role of government from now on is
transformed. Once government objectives
were economic growth and social
cohesion. Now they are prosperity, fair-
ness and environmental care.14
The methods used to reconcile
multiple objectives in sustainability
policy are different when the concept of
environmental limits is involved. Limits
to growth sustainability in the original
1972 Meadows et al. conceptualization2
is very rarely apparent in UK sustain-
ability policy. Indeed, it is flatly rejected
in the UK Sustainable Development
Strategy, which states, Development,
growth, and prosperity need not and
should not be in conflict with sustain-
ability.12 However, the concept of
environmental limits does play a part in
government thinking, as shown by the
existence of reports such as DEFRAs
2007 Perspectives on the Environmental
Limits Concept.15 In May 2007, David
Miliband, then Secretary of State for the
Environment, argued that .if you are
a throw-away society, a wasteful society,
you cant live within environmental
limits.16 Living within environmental
limits even forms one of the UK
Governments Principles of Sustainable
Development. However, there are also
four other principles: a strong, healthy
and just society; a sustainable economy;
sound science and good governance. In
this context, for a policy to be consid-
ered sustainable, it must respect all five
principles.17 So even when environ-
mental limits are acknowledged, the aim
is still to both live within limits and
simultaneously achieve socio-economic
This journal is The Royal Society of Chemistry 2011
goals as summed up in the Changing
Patterns report:
We all have aspirations for better living
standards and we need to find ways of
meeting those expectations, in the UK and
developing world, without the side effects
that undermine the quality of life in other
ways and without breaching environmental
limits.11 of sustainability, and linked to the
In UK policy, the most commonly
proposed means of reconciling these
multiple objectives is the decoupling of
economic growth from environmental
degradation:
Given that there are limits to the
capacity of the Earths ecosystems to
absorb pollution and provide natural
resources, the only way to maintain
economic progress in the long term without
approaching these limits is to decouple
economic growth from environmental
degradation11 (bold font in original).
Decoupling is sometimes presented as
having an almost infinite capacity to bring
about desired outcomes, however ambi-
tious and diverse they may be, as can be
seen in this statement:
The Government seeks to deliver
continuous economic and social progress
that respects the limits of the Earths
ecosystems, and meets the needs and aspi-
rations of everyone for a better quality of
life now and for future generations to come.
This vision will be accomplished by: 1.
Decoupling economic growth and envi-
ronmental degradation..11
Decoupling here means ensuring
environmental degradation does not
automatically grow with the economy to
the extent that environmental limits could
be threatened in the medium term. In
practical terms this means getting more
from less11 (bold font in original). So
the government seems to be suggesting
that the solution to the dilemma of
multiple objectives is, essentially, effi-
ciency. The concept of environmental
limits is absorbed into a technocentric
framework for sustainable development
an optimistic approach that sees
innovation, especially in technology, as
the basis of sustainable development in
keeping with the Brundtland approach.
For example, Tony Blair stated in
a speech on climate change in
September 2004: But there is no doubt
that the time to act is now. It is now that
timely action can avert disaster. Just as
science and technology has given us the
View Online
evidence to measure the danger of climate
change, so it can help us find safety from
it. The potential for innovation, for
scientific discovery and hence, of course
for business investment and growth, is
enormous.18 Reconciliation of economic
growth and environmental limits in this
way is sometimes called a weak form
ecological modernisation paradigm. This
approach has also been adopted inter-
nationally at the World Summit on
Sustainable Development in Johannes-
burg, world leaders committed them-
selves to: . delinking economic growth
and environmental degradation.11
Multiple objectives are apparent in
policy relating specifically to climate
change. The UK Sustainable Develop-
ment Strategy links climate change policy
objectives with socio-economic objectives
in a quality of life framework similar to
that described above:
Although climate change is the most
serious global environmental threat,
promoting new, modern, sustainable ways
of living, working, producing and travelling
also stand to achieve wider benefits to
human health and well being.12
The UK Climate Change Programme
2006 stresses the compatibility of climate-
protection goals and socio-economic
goals, arguing that, emissions reductions
and prosperity can go hand-in-hand and
declaring that, Our approach seeks to
secure steady emissions reductions over
time, through a framework that recognises
the importance of maintaining our
economic competitiveness and our respon-
sibilities to all members of society
particularly those experiencing fuel
poverty.19
Later in 2006, the Stern Review7 argued
strongly that the goal of addressing
climate change and the goal of economic
benefit are not only compatible, but
furthermore that economic goals can only
be met if the goal of addressing climate
change is achieved. In May 2007, David
Miliband, then Secretary of State for the
Environment, reflected this shift in
thinking on climate change when he
argued that,
Climate change is sometimes described
as an environmental issue.But actually
the more you look at it the less you think it
is an environmental issue, the more you
think it is an economic issue, a social issue
and a cultural issue as well.16
Energy Environ. Sci., 2011, 4, 261268 | 263

3. Biofuels and multiple
objectives
Biofuels have been used to promote
multiple objectives at global, regional and
local levels. They have been available for
a long time: initial development of the
internal combustion engine in the early
1900s envisaged ethanol and biodiesel as
the fuels. But technical innovation not
only created cheap engines, it also enabled
mass extraction, processing and
Published on 12 November 2010 on http://pubs.rsc.org | doi:10.1039/C0EE00041H
marketing of fossil fuels which made
biofuels uncompetitive. Rising fossil fuel
costs played a role in serious reconsider-
ation of biofuels and led to development
of an ethanol fuel industry in Brazil20
Downloaded by Universidade do Porto (UP) on 20 April 2011
stimulated by increased oil prices in the
1970s following the 1973 Arab oil
embargo and 1979 regime change in Iran.
Environmental concerns over excessive
fossil oil use were raised in the 1970s due
to localised atmospheric pollution use for
transport in cities and passing of legisla-
tion to create cleaner exhausts21 caused
biofuels to be revisited. However, collapse
of the oil price in the 1980s, Brazils
discovery of oil off-shore (domestic oil
production in Brazil increased from
170,000 b/d in 1970 to 600,000 b/d in
198622) and improved engine emission
controls prevented widespread adoption
of biofuels. More recently, concern over
security of supply together with reform of
support from the European Union to the
agricultural sector and climate change
obligations prompted re-examination of
biofuels for transport fuel. All the more so
because transport is the main driver for
increasing global oil demand.23
European biofuel policy is geared to
simultaneously tackle global environment
problems, enhance regional integration,
stimulate rural economies and provide
strategic fuel supplies. The 2003 Euro-
pean Parliament Directive10 on biofuels
has three different objectives. Firstly
compliance with international measures
to tackle climate change Greater use of
biofuels for transport forms a part of the
package of measures needed to comply
with the Kyoto Protocol. Secondly, to
provide a market for agricultural pro-
ducts Promoting the use of biofuels in
keeping with sustainable farming. could
create new opportunities for sustainable
rural development.; and thirdly for
strategic reasons Promotion of the
production and use of biofuels could
264 | Energy Environ. Sci., 2011, 4, 261268
contribute to a reduction in energy import
dependency. In policy terms, although
the global objective of climate change is
perhaps of overriding environmental
importance, it is the local and regional
objectives which are the decision-making
drivers. For example, Bulgaria and
Romania, which joined the European
Union in 2007, have around 0.7 ha of
agricultural land per capita compared to
an average of 0.4 ha for the other 25 EU
countries. Agricultural production of
biofuels for the European market was
therefore envisaged as a potential way of
enhancing European harmonisation.24
The House of Lords report on the 2006
EU Strategy on Biofuels24 also recognized
the three major motivations for EU policy
in this area as strategic, environmental
and economic. The agricultural economic
objective relates to reform of the
Common Agricultural Policy, with bio-
fuels acting as a possible route through
which farmers can enter this new, compet-
itively-focused, agricultural landscape.25
Entry of biofuels in the agricultural
economy is incrementalist5 as illustrated
by the following quotations from an
interview with Tony Blair about climate
change in New Zealand on 29 March
2006.26 New Zealand formerly had pro-
tected access to UK agricultural markets
under the Commonwealth, but this status
was lost with protection and subsidy of
the European Market when the UK
joined the EU in 1973. New Zealand is
thus interested to know if European
commitment to biofuels will result in
a switch of subsidies from areas such as
meat, wool and dairy products. The New
Zealand interviewer asked .where does
moving. food production across into
production of crops to produce biofuel fit
into the future.?, to which Tony Blair
replied .obviously we in Britain fight
very hard for changes to the agricultural
policy, and the whole question of biomass,
which we are developing in the UK inci-
dentally, is potentially a major future role
for the agriculture industry in the whole of
Europe. Now I think that it would be
unwise of me to promise that agricultural
policy was going to be changed in a very
rapid timescale, but yes it does offer
opportunities to switch from subsidised
production of food to diversifying into
biomass, and that as I say is something we
are trying to encourage in the UK at the
moment. This incremental approach
This journal is The Royal Society of Chemistry 2011
View Online
contrasts with the statements made by
Blair on the seriousness of climate change
and the need for action cited here in the
Introduction.
Motives in other parts of the world are
broadly similar, with the USA, India and
China encouraging biofuel production for
energy security, rural development and
technological innovation.25 In the USA,
by 2005 14.4% of the United States maize
crop was used to produce ethanol and 3%
by volume of US consumption of gasoline
was composed of ethanol.27 Between 1995
and 2003 the US maize sector received
$37.4 billion in subsidies and biodiesel is
used for major government transport
fleets such as the Post Office, Military and
metropolitan transit systems.28 Demand
in developing countries is also rapidly
increasing, India has an indicative target
for both biodiesel and bioethanol of 20%
by 201729 and China has enacted
a Renewable Energy Law of the Peoples
Republic of China to promote biofuel
use.28
Potentially biofuels could be used to
work towards international objectives
such as providing markets for developing
countries that will help meet agreements
for poverty alleviation such as those
formulated in the year 2000 by the United
Nations in the form of Millennium
Development Goals which aim to meet
targets such as Reduce by half the
proportion of people living on less than
a dollar a day; Achieve full and produc-
tive employment and decent work for all,
including women and young people;
Reduce by half the proportion of people
who suffer from hunger by 2015.30
Wealth creation in Africa through
increasing agricultural output was
a central theme in the Blair Commission
for Africa.31 For example, Europe is
unlikely to be able to meet its own
demand for biofuels:23 the total available
agricultural land is about 97 million
hectares of which 17 million hectares
would be needed to meet EU Directive
targets using current technologies.24 Bio-
fuels thus present a major opportunity for
developing countries to supply the certain
and growing European fuel requirements.
4. Biofuels, sustainability and
trade
The implications of adopting sustain-
ability criteria to trade in biofuels can be

illustrated by the case of Germany. In
2007 Germanys primary energy needs
were 13,842 petajoules (PJ) of which 792
PJ (5.7%) were supplied from bioenergy
with a planned rise to 1,309 PJ in 2020.32
Currently, the country produces about 5
million tonnes of biodiesel a year.33 The
2009 European Union Renewable Energy
Directive (2009/28/EC) requires biofuels
to be produced under a range of sustain-
ability criteria in order to be eligible for
financial incentives and contribute to
Published on 12 November 2010 on http://pubs.rsc.org | doi:10.1039/C0EE00041H
national targets for renewable energy use.
Germany is the first member state to put
the directive into national law through
two laws, one for biomass for electricity
generation (BioSt-NachV) and one for
Downloaded by Universidade do Porto (UP) on 20 April 2011
biofuels (Biokraft-NachV). The biofuels
law contains a range of sustainability
criteria that have to be met for biofuels to
be eligible for financial incentives. These
include: greenhouse gas emission savings
must be at least 35%, increasing to at least
50% on January 1, 2017, and 60% from
January 1, 2018, for installations starting
production after December 31, 2016;
biomass must not be obtained from land
with high biodiversity value; biomass
must not be obtained from land with high
carbon stock; biomass must not be
obtained from land that was peat land in
January 2008; and biomass production on
agricultural land in the EU must be in
compliance with council regulation
EC/73/2009.34,35
Imposition of sustainability criteria in
German law could be viewed in two ways.
Firstly it represents an incremental shift
of policy from relatively vague statements
about sustainability to a legal require-
ment. Secondly it represents a potential
barrier to trade as the criteria are difficult
to quantify and ultimately the decision on
compliance is made by the importing
nation. If imported biofuels come from
tropical developing countries with agri-
cultural expansion replacing natural
vegetation then they will be de facto
derived from lands with high biodiversity,
carbon stock and, in some cases, peat
lands. This is because tropical countries
naturally have higher biodiversity than
northern Europe and developing coun-
tries are opening new land for agriculture
whereas in Europe intensive farming
systems are well established. Moreover,
compared to large scale developed
country producers, obtaining sustain-
ability certification can be expensive for
This journal is The Royal Society of Chemistry 2011
developing countries and small scale
producers.36 Sustainability criteria are
hard to quantify and methodology, such
as that for green house gas emissions, is
still under debate.37
Commodities are also often subsidized
by governments or regulated by complex
overlapping international agreements.
Biofuels are particularly complicated
because they are simultaneously an agri-
cultural, energy and industrial chemical
product. For example, under WTO rules
ethanol is classified as an agricultural
product whereas biodiesel is an industrial
chemical.27 The EU has an aid pro-
gramme for energy crops grown on non-
set-aside land28 and Pakistan and Guate-
mala have been cited in a case brought by
industrial ethanol producers for dumping
ethanol on the European market through
an import tariff concession.28 Pakistan
was given preferential import tariffs as
part of a programme to combat narcotics
production and trafficking. India
objected to the WTO because they didnt
qualify for the same programme.
Set against this policy complexity are
environmental and food security
concerns. Environmental concerns rest on
two main issues. Firstly, increasing
demand for biofuels results in land
conversion from natural vegetation to
biofuel plantations. Oil palm in particular
has been criticized as it is a high yielding
oil crop that can be used for biodiesel
production and is undergoing a major
expansion on land that would naturally
be occupied by species rich tropical rain
forest. The main oil palm producing
countries are Indonesia and Malaysia,
which are also home to many rare species,
and oil palm plantations are an order of
magnitude less diverse in birds and
butterflies than primary tropical forest.38
However, the main importers of palm oil
are China and India, and the main use is
cooking oil rather than biofuel. Some
rural villagers who have benefited from
a strong palm oil export market39 while
there are others who have been distinctly
disadvantaged, for example in Latin
America. Moreover, 95% of global bio-
diesel feedstock is from the temperate
crop rape seed with oil palm only
providing 1%40 and palm oil is considered
by the industry to be expensive as a bio-
fuel feedstock in comparison to its value
in the food industry.41 Secondly, from an
environmental perspective, the carbon
View Online
balance of growing crops for biofuels has
been called into question. Production of
biofuels from energy intensive agriculture
such as ethanol from maize does not have
a positive carbon balance42 and land
clearance for planting biofuels creates
a carbon debt from lost carbon in soils
and vegetation,43 particularly in the case
of tropical deforestation.44 Nonetheless, if
land use change is disregarded, some
crops in certain countries, such as oil palm
in South East Asia, sugar cane in Brazil
and sweet sorghum in China perform well
on sustainability indicators.45
Estimating competition between bio-
fuels and food production is more
complicated than assessing impacts from
land use change on biodiversity and
carbon. During the 20052007 increase in
food prices many commentators attri-
buted spiraling costs to diversion of US
maize into ethanol production, with
Jacques Diouf, FAO director-general,
saying ironically at the UN food summit
in June 2008 whilst arguing for increased
levels of funding for combating hunger
Nobody understands how $1112 billion-
a-year subsidies in 2006 and protective
tariff polices have had the effect of divert-
ing 100m tonnes of cereals from human
consumption, mostly to satisfy a thirst for
fuel for vehicles.46 However, at the same
meeting the Brazilian President Luiz
Inacio Lula da Silva attributed food price
increases to . a combination of factors:
soaring oil prices, which affect the cost of
fertilizers and freight; climate change;
speculation in financial markets; falling
world food stocks; growing food consump-
tion in developing countries like China,
India, Brazil and several others; and, above
all, the maintenance of absurdly protec-
tionist farm policies in rich countries.47
Recent analyses suggest that biofuel
production is indeed not strongly linked
to food price increases.48,49
Despite the confusion, diversion of
land and crops into biofuel production
has encouraged investment for a switch
from first generation biofuels derived
directly from food crops into second
generation biofuels produced from
lignocellulose.50 High reliance of modern
society on transport fuels means that
a 10% replacement of fossil fuels with first
generation biofuels in the US, Canada
and the EU would require 3070% of
national crop area.9 However cost
remains a significant factor mitigating
Energy Environ. Sci., 2011, 4, 261268 | 265

against widespread introduction of
second generation biofuels using
dedicated lignocellulosic crops which
potentially have comparatively low envi-
ronmental impacts.51 There are two
methods of biofuel production from
lignocellulose: biochemical using enzymes
to produce ethanol; and thermo-chemical
to produce a synthesis gas which can be
reformed into a range of long chain
carbon fuels. Aviation fuels can only be
made from the latter process. Future cost
Published on 12 November 2010 on http://pubs.rsc.org | doi:10.1039/C0EE00041H
estimates for the biochemical method are
0.80.9 UDS/litre gasoline equivalent and
for the thermo-chemical method 1.01.2
USD/litre gasoline equivalent.52 For these
costs to be competitive against fossil fuels
Downloaded by Universidade do Porto (UP) on 20 April 2011
the crude oil price would need to be 100
130 USD per barrel. Stable prices at this
level are unlikely because alternatives
such as tar sands, of which there are
extensive deposits, compete with crude oil
at 65 USD per barrel.52 To favour second
generation biofuel production over fossil
fuels or first generation biofuels there has
to be substantial policy support in
place.53--55 Important lessons can also be
learnt from preventable failures of early
attempts such as the Arable Biomass
Renewable Energy (ARBRE) in York-
shire which used gasification technology
to produce energy from short-rotation
willow fertilized with sewage but which
foundered due to changes in commercial
strategy of the main company, bank-
ruptcy of the contractor overseeing the
project and technical problems with the
gasification.56
5. Biofuels, sustainability and
regulation in the UK
In the UK, as in Germany, multiple
sustainability objectives have moved from
political rhetoric to statutory instruments
and in the case of biofuels they are part of
the 2007 Renewable Transport Fuel
Obligations (RTFO) Order.57 The RTFO
arose out of the 2003 Sustainable Energy
Act58 and 2004 Energy Act59 with the aim
of helping the UK meet the 5.75%
renewable transport fuels target for 2010
created by the 2003 European Biofuels
Directive and work towards the 10%
target for 2020 in the 2009 European
Renewable Energy Directive.60 Transport
fuel suppliers obtain certificates from the
Renewable Fuels Agency on the basis of
sustainability criteria and potentially, if
266 | Energy Environ. Sci., 2011, 4, 261268
they exceed their targets, can trade their
certificates with other suppliers. The
sustainability criteria of the RTFO are
complex and multi-dimensional involving
carbon emissions, agriculture, other
economic activities, sustainable develop-
ment, or the environment generally
(Article 4). The RTFO has been chal-
lenged. The Gallagher Review61 notes
that the RTFO was formulated before
indirect effects were established and
recommended that it would be unwise to
proceed with introduction of biofuels in this
manner (p. 65).
Translating the RTFO criteria into
practise is being initially achieved through
selecting appropriate existing industry
certification schemes for biofuel feed-
stocks, such as the Round Table on
Sustainable Palm.62 This will develop into
a tighter system of benchmarking which
the Renewable Fuels Agency calls
a meta-standard approach to sustain-
ability. The standards can become quite
complex, for example, the Benchmark of
the Better Sugarcane Initiative (BSI)
Principles and Criteria of November 2009
has five principles, 20 criteria and 46
indicators:63
1 Obey the law (2 criteria);
2 Respect human rights and labour
standards (5 criteria, 13 indicators);
3 Manage input, production and pro-
cessing efficiencies to enhance sustain-
ability (2 criteria, 7 indicators);
4 Actively manage biodiversity and
ecosystem services (2 criteria, 8 indica-
tors);
5 Commit to continuous improvement
in key areas of their business (9 criteria, 18
indicators).
Inevitably the RTFO has imposed
additional costs on the transport fuel
supply industry, estimated as 240m in
capital costs with resource costs being
somewhere between 2806254m for the
period 20092020 more than fossil fuel
costs, the wide range being due to poten-
tial fluctuations in commodity prices.64
Incentives can be put in place to counter
the additional costs, those proposed by
the 2006 EU Strategy for Biofuels24
included: eco-labelling, price differentia-
tion through emission charges and
product levies, environmental quality
promotion through education, tradable
permits, environmental performance
bonds, funds and environmental risk
assessment in banking procedures, tax
This journal is The Royal Society of Chemistry 2011
View Online
exemptions for vehicle fleets and review of
the Common Agricultural Policy. In the
UK there is a progressive incentive
structure based around both pricing and
obligation (Fig. 1). Duty on fossil fuels in
2009 in the UK was 56.19 p/litre
(unleaded petrol and diesel) whereas that
on biodiesel and bioethanol is 36.19p/
litre. With the RTFO certificate scheme in
which 15 p per certificate is transferred
from companies not meeting their obli-
gations to companies that do, which
together with the duty creates a possible
incentive of 35 p per litre.64
However, imposing sustainability
criteria on biofuel imports may be pro-
blematic under current World Trade
Agreements as it represents an imposition
of the laws of one State on the processes
involved in the production of goods in
another State.65 The question here is
whether the product should be considered
separately from the process by which it is
produced, in other words can biofuels
produced without reference to sustain-
ability criteria be considered a like
product under (WTO) agreements with
those which meet the criteria.36 If the
products are essentially the same, then
they should compete equally in inter-
national trade. If there is a trade dispute
the procedures can be lengthy. A case
brought by Argentina involving import of
agricultural biotechnology products into
Europe (WTO Dispute DS293) was initi-
ated in May 2003 and resolved in March
2010 with little more than an agreement to
establish a bilateral dialogue. Moreover,
social sustainability criteria, such as
labour conditions, are problematic as
international indicators. A Ministerial
World Trade Organisation (WTO)
meeting in 1996 agreed: We reject the use
of labour standards for protectionist
purposes, and agree that the comparative
advantage of countries, particularly low-
wage developing countries, must in no way
be put into question.66 In consequence
labour standards cannot be cited as
a reason for restricting trade thereby
eliminating a key social sustainability
criterion.
To make environmental and social
regulation work effectively for biofuels
there needs to be international coopera-
tion over certification on use of land and
working practises.67,68 Some of the
sustainability issues may be overcome
through the introduction of second

Fig. 1 Progression of UK biofuels regulation (from BIS, 2009 p. 1364).
generation biofuel feedstocks and new
technologies69 but there are still major
economic obstacles to surmount due to
the higher cost of processing lignocellu-
lose.
Published on 12 November 2010 on http://pubs.rsc.org | doi:10.1039/C0EE00041H
6. Conclusions
Despite the scientific consensus that
Downloaded by Universidade do Porto (UP) on 20 April 2011
acknowledges dangerous anthropogenic
interference with the climate, the poten-
tial for developing renewable energy
sources that can replace fossil fuels has
some way to go before being realised.
Biofuels are being introduced by incre-
mental policies5 that maintain the status
quo as much as possible70 through aiming
at multiple policy objectives based on
sustainability concepts that require
complex criteria to operationalize and so
increase costs. In terms of practical
implementation, biofuel production costs
are reduced by inclusion in combined heat
and power plants,71,72 and there are major
economies of scale with larger plants
reducing operating costs by 1520%.73
For achieving overall sustainability gains
integrating other energy use consider-
ations into policy could make major
contributions. For example, reducing car
fuel consumption by 30% in Germany
would cause greenhouse emission savings
greater than that achieved by the biofuel
national quota policy.74 But this type of
action requires lifestyle changes which, as
noted in the introduction, can be politi-
cally unpopular.
As final remarks we would like to draw
attention to the policy contrast between
the integrated sustainability approaches
applied biofuels and other related sectors
such as fossil fuel and agriculture for
food. For example the energy and land
intensive oil extraction from tar sands in
Canada, a major supplier of petroleum
products to the USA, has been called The
most destructive project on Earth75 and
Canadas greenhouse gas emissions in
2007 were 26% above 1990 levels instead
of being reduced as agreed in the Kyoto
Protocol. Fossil fuel extraction industries
This journal is The Royal Society of Chemistry 2011
have also attracted criticism for the
human rights records in areas such as the
Niger Delta, Chad and Sudan.7678 Avia-
tion fuel is not taxed and expansion of
airports, such as Heathrow in the UK,79 is
favoured by governments for economic
reasons over both environmental and
human rights considerations.80 For agri-
culture, perhaps the most significant
conclusion from the life cycle analyses
carried out on different cropping systems
for the purpose of biofuel sustainability
assessment is the high energy use of
intensive maize production. Moreover,
concern that biofuel production will
increase per capita use of land, parti-
cularly in industrial nations needs to be
put into the context that altering eating
habits could lower individual land use
footprints for example reducing house-
hold food waste and meat consumption in
Germany could save up to 700 m2 per
capita.74 Application of legal instruments
similar to the RTFO meta-standard
sustainability criteria to fossil fuels and
agricultural products would go a long
way to levelling the playing field for bio-
fuels and making real changes to our
impact on the environment, but consid-
erations of realpolitik mean that this is
unlikely to happen.
Acknowledgements
We are grateful to Dr Rafael Luque for
the invitation to submit this paper. Vicky
Marin and two anonymous reviewers
provided useful and insightful comments.
References
1 Report of the World Commission on
Environment and Development: Our
Common Future Transmitted to the
General Assembly as an Annex to
document A/42/427-Development and
International Co-operation: Environment
http://www.un-documents.net/wced-ocf.htm.
2 D. H. Meadows, D. L. Meadows,
J. Randers, and W. W. Behrens III. The
Limits to Growth, New York: Universe
Books, 1972.
3 C. E. Lindblom, Public Administration Rev.,
1959, 19(2), 7988.
View Online
4 C. E. Lindblom, Public Administration Rev.,
1979, 39(6), 517526.
5 P. A. Stott, N. P. Gillett, G. C. Hegerl,
D. J. Karoly, D. A. Stone, X. Zhang and
F. Zwiers, Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews
Climate Change, 2010, DOI: 10.1002/
wcc.34.
6 IPCC, Climate Change 2007 Impacts,
Adaptation and Vulnerability, Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, 2007.
7 N. Stern, Stern Review on the Economics of
Climate Change, Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge, 2007.
8 BBC News Tuesday, 31 October 2006,
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/6096084.stm.
9 M. B. Charles, R. Ryan, N. Ryan and
R. Oloruntoba, Energy Policy, 2007, 35,
57375746.
10 Directive 2003/30/EC of the European
Parliament and of the Council of 8 May
2003.
11 DEFRA/DTI, Changing Patterns: UK
Government Framework for Sustainable
Consumption and Production, HMSO,
London, 2003.
12 HM Government, Securing the Future: the
UK Sustainable Development Strategy,
HMSO, London, 2005.
13 DETR, A Better Quality of Life: A strategy
for sustainable development for the UK,
HMSO, London, 1999.
14 Speech on Climate Change, 19 November
2007, http://www.number10.gov.uk/
Page13791.
15 R. K. Turner, S. Morse-Jones, and
B. Fisher, Perspectives on the
Environmental Limits Concept: A report
to the Department for Environment, Food
and Rural Affairs, CSERGE, Norwich/
DEFRA, London, 2007.
16 D. Milliband, MP, Speech to the Citizens
Summit on Climate Change, London, 12th
May 2007.
17 UK Government Sustainable Develop-
ment website: http://www.defra.gov.uk/
sustainable/government/what/principles.
htm, accessed 19 April 2010. The principles
date from 6 March 2008.
18 PM speech on climate change 14 September
2004, http://www.number10.gov.uk/
Page6333.
19 UK Government, Climate Change: The UK
Programme, HMSO, London, March 2006
p. iv.
20 J. Goldemberga, S. T. Coelhob,
P. M. Nastaric and O. Lucon, Biomass
Bioenergy, 2004, 26, 301304.
21 R. S. Melnick, Regulation and the
courts: the case of the Clean Air Act,
Brookings Institution, Washington, DC,
1984.
22 J. M. M. Borges, The Brazilian Alcohol
program: Foundations, Results and
Perspectives, Proc. VII int. Symp. Alcohol
Fuels, Paris, 1986.
23 Royal Society, Sustainable biofuels:
prospects and challenges Policy Document
01/08, Royal Society, London, 2008.
24 EU, An EU Strategy for Biofuels 8.2.2006,
Commission of the European
Communities, Brussels 2006.
25 DEFRA/AEA, Review of work on the
environmental sustainability of international
biofuels production and use, HMSO,
London. 2008.
Energy Environ. Sci., 2011, 4, 261268 | 267

26 New Zealand Climate Change Speech, 29th
March 2006 http://www.number10.gov.uk/
Page9260.
27 S. Murphy, The multilateral trade and
investment context for biofuels: issues and
challenges, International Institute for
Environment and Development, London
and Institute for Agriculture and Trade
Policy, Minneapolis, 2008.
28 UNCTAD, The emerging biofuels market:
regulatory, trade and development
implications, United Nations, New York
and Geneva, 2006.
29 Government of India, National Policy on
Biofuels, Ministry of New and Renewable
Energy, New Delhi, 2009.
Published on 12 November 2010 on http://pubs.rsc.org | doi:10.1039/C0EE00041H
30 Millennium Development Goal 1, http://
www.un.org/millenniumgoals/.
31 Commission for Africa, Our Common
Interest, Penguin, London, 2005.
32 BMU, National Biomass Action Plan for
Downloaded by Universidade do Porto (UP) on 20 April 2011
Germany. Biomass and Sustainable Energy
Supply. Bundesministerium f ur Umwelt,
Naturschutz und Reaktorsicherheit,
Berlin, 2009.
33 http://www.ufop.de/english_news.php. Accessed
4 August 2010.
34 Govt. of Germany, Biokraftstoff-
Nachhaltigkeitsverordnung- Biokraft-
NachV. German Federal Gazette, Berlin,
October 5, 2009.
35 S. M. Lieberz, Status of Biomass
Sustainability Certification in Germany.
3/11/2010. USDA Foreign Agricultural
Service, Global Agricultural Network,
2009.
36 UNCTAD. Making Certification Work for
Sustainable Development: The Case of
Biofuels. UNCTAD/DITC/TED/2008/1.
United Nations Conference on Trade and
Development, Geneva, 2008.
37 http://www.globalbioenergy.org/events1/
gbep-events-2010/task-force-on-ghg-2010/
en/ Accessed 4 August 2010.
38 L. P. Koh and D. S. Wilcove, Conserv.
Lett., 2008, 1, 6064.
39 L. P. Koh and D. S. Wilcove, Nature, 2007,
448, 993994.
40 G. Pahl, Biodiesel: growing a new energy
economy, Chelsea Green Publishing, White
River Junction, Vermont, 2005.
41 R. Stone, Science, 2007, 317, 14911512.
42 T. Searchinger, R. Heimlich,
R. A. Houghton, F. Dong, A. Elobeid,
J. Fabiosa, S. Tokgoz, D. Hayes and
T.-H. Yu, Science, 2008, 319, 12381240.
43 J. Fargoine, J. Hill, D. Tilman, S. Polasky
and P. Hawthorne, Science, 2008, 319,
12351238.
44 M. Santilli, P. Moutinho, S. Schwartzman,
D. Nepstad, L. Curran and C. Nobre,
Clim. Change, 2005, 71, 267276.
45 S. C. De Vries, G. W. J van de Ven,
M. K. van Ittersum and K. E. Giller,
268 | Energy Environ. Sci., 2011, 4, 261268
Biomass Bioenergy, 2010, 34, 588, DOI:
10.1016/j.biombioe.2010.01.001.
46 Times Online, 4 June 2008 http://
www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/
article4064650.ece.
47 President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva,
President of the Federative Republic of
Brazil, Statement at the FAO High-Level
Conference on World Food Security: the
Challenges of Climate Change and
Bioenergy, Rome, Italy, June 3, 2008.
48 A. Ajanovic, Biofuels versus food
production: Does biofuels production
increase food prices? Energy, DOI:
10.1016/j.energy.2010.05.019.
49 Z. Zhang, L. Lohr, C. Escalante and
M. Wetzstein, Food versus fuel: What do
prices tell us?, Energy Policy, 2010, 38,
445451.
50 G. P. Robertson, V. H. Dale,
O. C. Doering, S. P. Hamburg,
J. M. Melillo, M. M. Wander,
W. J. Parton, P. R. Adler, J. N. Barney,
R. M. Cruse, C. S. Duke, P. M. Fearnside,
R. F. Follett, H. K. Gibbs,
J. Goldemberg, D. J. Mladenoff,
D. Dennis Ojima, M. W. Palmer,
A. Sharpley, L. Wallace, K. C. Weathers,
J. A. Wiens and W. W. Wilhelm, Science,
2008, 322, 4950.
51 R. L. Rowe, N. R. Street, G. Taylor and
G. Renew Sust, Energ. Rev., 2009, 13,
271290.
52 R. E. H. Sims, W. Mabee, J. N. Saddler and
M. Taylor, Bioresour. Technol., 2010, 101,
15701580.
53 L. K. James, S. M. Swinton and
K. D. Thelen, Agron. J., 2010, 102, 675687.
54 H. Duer and P. O. Christensen, Biomass
Bioenergy, 2010, 34, 237243.
55 E. Gnansounou, Bioresour. Technol., 2010,
101, 48424850.
56 A. Piteroua, S. Shackley, and P. Upham,
Energ. Policy, 36, (6), pp. 20442050.
57 The Renewable Transport Fuel Obligations
Order 2007 No. 3072 http://www.opsi.gov.uk/
si/si2007/uksi_20073072_en_1.
58 HM Government,Sustainable Energy
Act 2003, http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/
acts2003/ukpga_20030030_en_1.
59 HM Government, Energy Act 2004, http://
www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2004/ukpga_
20040020_en_1.
60 EU 2009. Directive 2009/28/EC Of The
European Parliament and of the Council
of 23 April 2009 on the promotion of the
use of energy from renewable sources and
amending and subsequently repealing
Directives 2001/77/EC and 2003/30/EC.
61 Renewable Fuels Agency, The Gallagher
review of the indirect effects of biofuels
production, Renewable Fuels Agency,
St Leonards-on-Sea, East Sussex,
2008.
This journal is The Royal Society of Chemistry 2011
View Online
62 RSPO, RSPO Certification Systems, Final
document approved by RSPO Executive
Board 26 June 2007. Round Table on
Sustainable Palm Oil, 2007. http://
www.rspo.org/.
63 Ecofys, Benchmark of the Better
Sugarcane Initiative (BSI) Principles and
Criteria of November, 2009 http://
www.renewablefuelsagency.gov.uk/sites/
rfa/files/_documents/BSI__version_2__
Benchmark_RTFO.pdf Accessed 16
April 2010.
64 BIS, Reporting under the Renewable Transport
Fuels Obligation (RTFO): Driving transport
fuel suppliers to source more sustainable
biofuels, Department for Business
Innovation and Skills, London, 2009.
65 P. Sands, Principles of international
environmental law 2nd Edition, Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, 2003.
66 Singapore WTO Ministerial Declaration.
WT/MIN(96)/DEC. Article 4. 18
December, 1996.
67 J. C. Escobar, E. S. Lora, O. J. Venturini,
E. E. Yan ~ez, E. F. Castillo and
O. Almazan, Renewable Sustainable
Energy Rev., 2009, 13, 12751287.
68 R. Zah and T. F. Ruddy, J. Clean. Prod.,
2009, 17, S1S3.
69 L. P. Koh and J. Ghazoul, Biol. Conserv.,
2008, 141, 24502460.
70 M. Juntti, D. Russel and J. Turnpenny,
Environ. Sci. Policy, 2009, 12, 207215.
71 Y. Lech on, H. Cabal, C. de la R ua,
N. Caldes, M. Santamara and R. Saez,
Biomass Bioenergy, 2009, 33, 920932.
72 F. Cherubini, N. D. Bird, A. Cowie,
G. Jungmeier, B. Schlamadinger and
S. Woess-Gallasch, Resour., Conserv.
Recycl., 2009, 53, 434447.
73 A. Demirbas, Appl. Energy, 2009, 86,
S108S117.
74 S. Bringezu, H. Sch utz, K. Arnold,
F. Merten, S. Kabasci, P. Borelbach,
C. Michels, G. A. Reinhardt and
N. Rettenmaier, J. Clean. Prod., 2009, 17,
S57S68.
75 C. Hatch, and M. Price, Canadas Tar
Sands. The most destructive project on
Earth. Environmental Defence, Toronto,
2008.
76 I. Okonta, and O. Douglas, Where vultures
feast. Shell, human rights, oil and the Niger
Delta, Verso, London, 2003.
77 G. H. Uriz, Harv. Hum. Rts. J., 2001, 14,
197231.
78 M. E. Chen, Orbis, 2007, 51, 4154.
79 Department for Transport, The Future of
Air Transport, A White Paper, HMSO,
London, December, 2003.
80 ECHR, Case of Hatton and others V. The
United Kingdom (Application no. 36022/
97), Grand Chamber Judgment
Strasbourg 8 July 2003.