The answer to carbon emissions seems to be biomass fuels. The production of bioenergy is closer to being net neutral rather than the presently used fossil fuels. Companies such as Cool Planet are now claiming that they will be able to produce carbon negative fuels.
The problem is going to be when it comes to going commercial, and it is the problem. The land is needed to grow crops for food to feed the ever-growing population, so how can it be justified to take it and grow crops for bioenergy. Tim Lenton and Tom Powell – researchers at Exeter University – raise this question in a paper they have written called Energy and Environmental Science.
READ ALSO: United Airlines Will Start Using BioFuels Between LA and San Francisco
As prosperity increases, meat production needs to increase, and this is land-intensive. Meat and dairy product production will rise to keep the population fed, and according to the researchers, the production of food takes up 40% of the productive surface of the world.
People are consuming more and more meat and dairy products every year. Worldwide meat production is projected to more than double from 229 million tonnes in 1999/2001 to 465 million tonnes in 2050, while milk output is set to climb from 580 to 1043 million tonnes.
As Lenton and Powell have discovered, raising livestock is not in the least bit efficient and managing to make changes to this will benefit many.
More land is needed for food and it needs to be natural. This raises the problem of how to produce the bioenergy crops. Vegetarianism would help, but selling this idea is not going to be easy. Bioenergy production is going to increase but won’t become the leading energy source. Even by 2050, it will still be a small player. While we want to eat, fossil fuels will not be replaced by bioenergy.