 |  | ||||||||||||
 |
|
 | |||||||||||
 |  |
Bio Fuels Come Under Fire
ROME (AFP) - Biofuels, once seen as a key factor in curbing greenhouse gas emissions, are behind the current global food crisis, major oil producers and consumers charged at an energy forum here on Monday.
"A conflict (is) emerging between foodstuffs and fuel ... with disastrous social conflicts and dubious environmental results," outgoing Italian Prime Minister Romano Prodi told the International Energy Forum here as rising food prices worldwide raise the spectre of famine in some countries.
"We have to examine very closely subsidy policies so as to avoid distortions in the allocation of resources," Prodi insisted.
Agricultural prices were not only being driven by rising demand but also by increased cultivation of biofuels, "creating strong tensions in a number of countries," he said.
Biofuels were developed as part of plans to limit and reduce greenhouse gas emissions, held responsible for global warming, but since they take up land that would otherwise be used for food production, they have been increasingly blamed for soaring food prices.
Qatari Energy Minister Abdullah bin Hamad al Attiyah said the world would have to choose "what its priority is going to be -- driving or eating."
He rejected suggestions that high oil prices were behind the food crisis.
"It's not oil that should be questioned, it's biofuels, which are at the root of the problem," al Attiyah said.
The food crisis was due to food shortages and not to high oil prices, he argued.
"Even the big rice exporters such as India, Bangladesh and Thailand are in the process of reducing their exports," he said. "
Venezuelan Energy Minister Rafael Ramirez said that biofuels were having a negligible impact on the oil markets.
"But look at the impact (they have) had on food prices. It's madness," he said, adding: "All the countries of Latin America have been hit by the surge in food prices."
Lawrence Eagles, chief analyst at the International Energy Agency (IEA) which represents the interests of the oil consuming countries, said he believed biofuels were "part of the equation" but it would be "wrong to focus solely" on just one element.
Rising food prices were due primarily to "very strong demand" for agricultural products in emerging countries, he said.
The IEA supported the use of second-generation biofuels, which used non-food plants as their base, Eagles argued.
"The second generation has its place in the palette of energy products," he said.
Meanwhile the head of Royal Dutch Shell, Jeroen van der Veer, said that too much importance was being attached to biofuels. Biofuels "will play a role" but were only one of a number of energy components in the mix, he said.
Copyright © 2007 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The information contained in the AFP News report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without the prior written authority of Agence France Presse.
Getting savvy about standby power
By Noah Buhayar, Fellow, Rocky Mountain Institute (www.rmi.org) | Posted Fri Nov 2, 2007 2:47pm PDT
Ever wonder how much electricity your household appliances use when they're supposedly off—in "standby" or "ready" mode? Think of the clock on your microwave, your DVD player that's on but not playing a movie, or the little sensor on the bottom of your TV that waits for a signal from your remote control.
It turns out that these "vampire" loads are gradually sucking away power—a lot of power.
An estimated 13 percent of household electricity use, according to a recent study published by the California Energy Commission, is from appliances in low-power mode (which is to say, not performing any of their primary functions).
Standby mode, the least amount of energy an appliance can use without powering down, is just one example. Many appliances have multiple low-power modes.
A DVD player, for instance, may have both a standby and sleep mode. Computers, as well, often save power by shutting down one or more components without turning completely off.
What it costs
The costs of these low-power modes are enormous. Standby power alone accounts for 5 of that 13 percent of household electricity use.
In 2000, a group of researchers from Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory estimated that each year Americans spend about $4 billion just on standby power.
Generating that electricity puts roughly 27 million tons of CO2-equivalent emissions into the atmosphere (more than 3.7 million cars' worth) every year.
While the amount of low-power mode energy required by most new appliances is going down, the number of appliances (from washing machines to air conditioners) with continual power needs is increasing—eclipsing those savings. The U.S. Department of Energy estimates that standby power could consume as much as 20 percent of household electricity by 2010.
Worse yet, some of our electronics never go into low-power mode because they're hooked to networks that require constant feedback. Most desktop computers are left on all the time for just this reason—drawing (on average) a steady 70-watt current. The monitor may be off, but the processor, fan, and other hardware may still be running.
Your cable box, too, is perpetually drawing current as it talks to the network. Have an Internet phone? That, as well, is always on, ready to take a message.
Energy-efficiency experts are busy identifying ways that manufacturers can reduce the amount of energy required to maintain a network presence, hold a channel, or answer the phone when you're not there. Some promising work can be found here.
Why we don't sacrifice convenience?
If the net impact of all our leaky appliances is so huge, why aren't we compelled to change our habits—or do without a little convenience?
A colleague of mine here at Rocky Mountain Institute shares a useful anecdote. His home A/V system (TV, cable box, DVD player) and communications system (cable modem, WiFi router, Internet phone, and cordless phone with answering machine) uses about 45 watts of electricity continuously.
Even though he'd like to save that energy, he leaves the system on all the time. If he turns off the power bar that links everything to the wall, his phone won't take messages and he'll lose Internet connectivity.
What's the cost of this convenience? He estimates about $40 dollars a year.
What you can do
If you're looking to reduce your energy use and tread more lightly on the planet, changing your habits is a good starting point:
Shut your computer and printer down (all the way) when not in use. Some people find it useful to plug all their IT equipment into one power bar, then flip the switch once they've shut down.
If you have an A/V system that can be turned off entirely without sacrificing performance, do so.
Keep cell phone chargers out of the wall when you're not charging the phone. Those little power bricks often draw a little current—even when you're phone's not connected.
Making informed choices
Most importantly, educate yourself. The U.S. government's Energy Star program rates appliances and often has information about their standby (or low-power) mode energy use. For home electronics, low standby power use is a key criterion for qualifying products.
In 2006 alone, the program saved some $14 billion on Americans' utility bills and helped avoid more than 35,000 megawatts of peak power demand (equivalent to the capacity of 70 new power plants).
These small changes may not make a huge dent in your monthly electricity bill, but they can add up.
Noah Buhayar is a fellow at Rocky Mountain Institute