I spoke in a debate on biofuels during the Green Party Ard Fheis, supporting Mary White’s calls for Carlow to be made a Green Energy town and centre of excellence for biofuels. But first I stressed the global consequences of biofuels and the energy shortfall issue, as did our Energy Spokesperson Eamon Ryan.

I remember being on “The Right Hook” show about three years ago pointing out that while we had to tackle gridlock on the M50 now, public transport was the best way of doing so. One of the arguments I used was that even after widening, the M50 would still be congested, but that in 20 years the road would be much emptier because there wouldn’t be as much fuel to go around.

I was laughed at and some of the texts suggested my sanity was in question.

So forgive me for couching it in optimistic terms. The leaflet I sent around is an adaptation of a nationwide leaflet which also goes into rural areas. Farmers and rural-dwellers will be the ones most affected by the lack of fuel. Yet they are the very ones who have the greatest scope for local production of fuels both for farm machinery and private vehicles.

The “yes they can!!!” (which I didn’t pen) was related to the fact that most farmers are not looking at the alternatives and have a wholly negative view of the Green Party, even though our policies look to keep them on the land and improve their incomes.

Biofuels are only part of the solution in Ireland. It may well be that Ireland will be able to fuel other vehicles through stored electrity (see http://www.theaircar.com), but that is another debate. But thanks again for the comments and the interest shown.

Regards,

Paul Gogarty

It’s funny you should ask that, Merrick. Check out: Biofuels – The fuel of the future

I make a bunch of very optimistic assumptions in favour of biofuels in that piece and arrive at an estimate. It seems that, to fuel the present Irish private automobile fleet (i.e. excluding freight, air, public transport, etc.); if we devote the entire arable area of Ireland (i.e. import all of our food, textiles and other agricultural products) to growing fuelstock we’ll still have to import a staggering 45% of our liquid fuel needs.

For private cars alone, we need 1.45 Irelands.

I’m really not sure that when people promote biofuels, they genuinely understand the scale of the numbers involved.

I agree with Paul‘s statement, above, that biofuels should be examined as a potential way of running public transport. But that’s not the impression being given by Green Party literature (in my view).

You’d need to look at crops suitable to the climate (probably oilseed rape, which yields much less than tropical palm oil and the like).

You’d need the area of land that could possibly be used (not, as some biofuel advocates use, the area of land the country occupies).

Then see what current vehicle fuel consumption levels are.

In the aforementioned Heat, George Monbiot says each European hectare of arable land produces 1.45 tonnes of fuel. This means the UK would need nearly five times its arable land to supply present vehicle usage. You’ve got a smaller population density, but still I’d be surprised if you could supply your present car use.

There are a few other factors too.

If you’re trying to reduce climate change impacts, you’ll be growing more of your food domestically, so the presently available land for fuels will diminish. How much food is presently imported? How much land would it take to grow all your own, and what fuel could be produced on the remainder?

All your proposed windpower will need back-up generators for days when it’s not windy enough (or too windy) to use the turbines. If you’re not going to use nukes or fossils, you are probably looking at burning biomass. Which, if you’re growing it domestically, will take up more land.

And this is all ignoring the fossil intensive agrichemicals that give us the high yields of food and fuel crops.

I’m sure the figures exist to do the maths, and the arithmetic is straightforward. I’d be interested to see the result. I’m willing to bet that an Ireland that’s more or less self-sufficient in food and fuel will not have much in the way of private car use.

Rochenko, you’re dead right about the word sustainability.

It is strikingly similar to what George Orwell talks about with ‘democracy’ in Politics And The English Language.

“In the case of a word like democracy, not only is there no agreed definition, but the attempt to make one is resisted from all sides. It is almost universally felt that when we call a country democratic we are praising it: consequently the defenders of every kind of regime claim that it is a democracy, and fear that they might have to stop using that word if it were tied down to any one meaning. Words of this kind are often used in a consciously dishonest way. That is, the person who uses them has his own private definition, but allows his hearer to think he means something quite different.”

When oil and cement companies are talking about themselves as sustainable, it’s lost its meaning. As I wrote here, it’s become a synonym for profitability.

Unless they get pinned down each and every time they try to bolster their legitimacy in this fashion, the fudging will just go on and on.

On the other hand, there’s very little point in discussing the energy or transport policies of the other parties. Except perhaps as dark comedy (of the “can you believe how absurd human beings can be?” variety). You can’t constructively critique them. They’re heading so fast in all the wrong directions that the best thing to do is torch them and start again from scratch.

It’s also safe to say that the Greens have my vote. As I’ve written before; if nothing else a Green vote is a way of telling the future generations we’re currently screwing over, that some of us wanted to stop the madness… even if most of us didn’t.

Thanks for taking the time to reply, Paul. You’ll have to forgive me if I’m surprised, but I have — sadly — a tendency to be cynical about mainstream politics, and I (unfairly) assumed I’d receive a ‘form letter’ pumped out by an automated system somewhere.

Instead you’ve only gone and provided a reasoned and sensible response that addresses almost all of my criticism. Which, frankly, politicians aren’t supposed to do.

I’m suitably contrite.

BUT (there’s always one) I do still feel that your published material (both online and in print) gives a… I don’t want to say misleading… but perhaps ‘an unjustifiably rosy’ picture of your biofuels policy. When you write (above);
>
> As oil peaks and energy supply becomes scarcer, we need
> to be able to power our future public transport and
> limited private transport through domestic energy
> production.
>
I’m right behind you. In fact, I could easily have written those words myself… biofuels could allow for a sustainable rural public transport infrastructure. But your leaflet asks the question:
>
> Can our cars really run on crops grown on Irish farms?
>
and provides a fairly unequivocal response, “Yes they can!” with none of the sensible caveats you outlined in your email to me.

I feel certain that most people reading that will view it as confirmation that their car usage won’t have to change that much. And perhaps I’m doing you a dis-service, but that does seem to be how it’s pitched.

Again though, many thanks for your response.

I thought I’d save you the hassle of posting my reply. So here goes:

Regards,

Paul Gogarty

Dear Jim,

Many thanks for your response to my recent leaflet.

You are quite correct on biofuels. Used as part of a global solution it will
lead to exploitation of developing countries, will not figure on the climate
change stakes and will of course be quite inefficient.

However the Green Party is promoting biofuels in an Irish context as part of
the solution for us here at home. As oil peaks and energy supply becomes
scarcer, we need to be able to power our future public transport and limited
private transport through domestic energy production. It will not be
available by any other means. Ireland has the capacity to cater for some of
its needs this way and to provide local jobs.

Part of this will be by stored energy through electricity generation using
other renewables, but it is essential we also use biofuels. Not for economic
growth but for basic survival, given the way this country has been planned
up until now.

You raised the issue of political suicide and honesty. If anyone asks me I
will give them an honest answer about what is facing us in the years to
come. But I will also point to the opportunities for Ireland to be
relatively energy secure in the new lower energy future.

The Green Party has consistently pointed out the need to drastically reduce
our energy consumption, but this is a message that the general public is
only getting used to. You have only heard of peak oil in the media here for
the last 18 months. Before, we were dismissed as idiots. The energy leaflet
is a way of introducing the general public to that concept, with a positive
angle.

I would love to be able to afford to drop a copy of George Monbiot’s ‘Heat’
and the “An Inconvenient Truth” DVD in every door, but unfortunately my
budget does not stretch to that.

It is better to focus on the positive side of the story to bring people on
board rather than sounding apocalyptic and turning them off before you even
get their attention. That isn’t dishonest, it is trying to engage. If you
get the time you might tune into RTE on Saturday evening during Trevor
Sargent TD’s address where you will see a delicate balance being struck between
the coming scenario and the positive opportunities.

I have forwarded your comments onto our Energy Spokesperson Eamon Ryan.

Thanks again for taking the time to read the leaflet and provide valuable
input.

Regards,

Paul Gogarty TD

—– Original Message —–
From: “jim ###”
To:
Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2007 6:08 PM
Subject: Green Party support for BioFuels

> Dear Paul,
>
> Edited to remove text of original letter which
> can be read in it’s entirety above.
>
> Yours sincerely,
>
> Jim ###
>
>
> PS: I have published this letter on my website (numero57.net). It’s a very
> low-traffic blog, but I figured you should be aware nonetheless.
>
>