Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Title:||Do biofuel policies seek to cut emissions by cutting food? Major models should make trade-offs more transparent|
|Authors:||SEARCHINGER TIMOTHY; EDWARDS ROBERT; MULLIGAN DECLAN; HEIMLICH RALPH; PLEVIN RICHARD|
|Citation:||SCIENCE vol. 347 no. 6229 p. 1420-1422|
|Publisher:||AMER ASSOC ADVANCEMENT SCIENCE|
|Type:||Articles in periodicals and books|
|Abstract:||Debates about biofuels tend to focus separately on estimates of adverse effects on food security, poverty, and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions driven by land-use change (LUC) (1–4). These estimates often rely on global agriculture and land-use models. Because models differ substantially in their estimates of each of these adverse effects (2, 3, 5), some argue that each individual effect is too uncertain to influence policy (6, 7). Yet these arguments fail to recognize the trade-offs; much of the uncertainty is only about which adverse effects predominate, not whether adverse effects occur at all. Our analysis of the three major models used to set government policies in the United States and Europe suggests that ethanol policies in effect are relying on decreases in food consumption to generate GHG savings (1).|
|JRC Directorate:||Energy, Transport and Climate|
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
Items in repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.