BIOENERGY FOR EUROPE: WHICH ONES FIT BEST?

90 6 Conclusions and recommendations
Regarding the categories for which reliable values were obtained, the results are summarised below (see
also Table 6-1). The full results are given in the Chapters 4.1 (for Europe) and 7.1 (for each country).
The main conclusions are generally similar between the various countries and Europe:
Use of fossil fuels: all biofuels have, to a greater or lesser extent, advantages over their fossil equivalents
regarding this category. This is due to the fact that through the production and use of biofuels the
utilisation of fossil fuels is reduced.
Greenhouse effect: this factor is causally connected to the use of fossil fuels (which leads to the emission
of greenhouse gasses) and therefore gives very similar results, i. e. always to the advantage of the
biofuels.
Acidification: most biofuels show disadvantages for this category as well, with the exception of triticale
and traditional firewood.
Eutrophication: again the biofuels compare unfavourably against their fossil equivalents. The only
exceptions are RME and SME in certain countries, which receive credits for co-products that make up
for the impacts caused by the biofuel production and utilisation. The large differences for the cultivated
crops are due to the utilisation of fertiliser and its inevitable partial escape into water bodies.
Summer smog: most biofuels have (relatively small) advantages over the fossil fuels, with the exception
of the transport fuels where the results cannot be regarded as significant.
Table 6-1 Results of the European comparisons between biofuels and fossil fuels
Biofuel Use of
fossil
fuels
Greenhouse
effect
Acidification
Eutrophication
Summer
smog
Triticale + + +/- - +
Willow + + - - +
Miscanthus + + - - +
Rape seed oil methyl ester (RME) + + - - +/-
Sunflower oil methyl ester (SME) + + - +/- +/-
ETBE from sugar beet + + - - +/-
Traditional firewood + + +/- - +
Wheat straw + + - - +
Biogas from swine excrements + + - - +
+ advantage for biofuel; - advantage for fossil fuel; +/- insignificant or ambiguous result
The following categories/parameters yielded results which – for various reasons explained in each section
– are less reliable than those discussed above:
Nitrous oxide: all biofuels have higher emission values than the fossil fuels. The large differences for
the cultivated crops are due to the utilisation of fertiliser in agricultural production. Since however the
net effect of nitrous oxide regarding ozone depletion is not yet ascertained, the results should not form a
part of a final assessment.
Human toxicity: this category assesses human toxicity via air. Depending on the comparison the results
showed either very small differences or else were in favour of the fossil fuels. Due to a lack of data
however, the results have a high uncertainty and should therefore not form a part of a final assessment.
Ecotoxicity and persistent toxicity: these categories assess acute and persistent toxicity towards humans
and ecosystems. It was decided not to include these results in the graphs because of a lack of data
and more specifically inconsistencies in data quality for the two compared systems: for biofuels, pesticides
were assessed on a very detailed level, whereas the same level of detail was not obtained for the
fossil fuels. Due to these differences, it was not possible to draw any conclusions, but the data on biofuels
serve as a good basis for further work on the subject.