The biofuel debate would benefit from more balance and less bias, NFU president Peter Kendall told the Sentry Farming Conference this week.
He said that while biofuels were in no means a solution for global renewable energy needs, they could and should have a key role to play.
“Biofuels have become the whipping boy of choice for the chattering classes and even for some within the farming community,” Kendall said. “Never a week goes past without their being blamed for everything from destroying the environment to starvation in the developing world.
“Most of the criticism is exaggerated or just plain wrong,” he added. “For example, 98 per cent of the palm oil production which is widely blamed for the destruction of the Malasyian rainforest and the orang-utans that live there is used for food and cosmetics, not biofuels.
“What is needed in this debate is a bit more balance and a bit less bias.”
Kendell said that as the leader of an organisation that represents all types of framers in a country where sustainability is at the top of the agenda, he did not have any interest in promoting a technology that would not be environmentally sustainable.
“The characterisation of this debate as food versus fuel is typical of the misrepresentation that has been at work. Every tonne of wheat grown for biofuels produces a third of a tonne of bioethanol and a third of a tonne of animal feed. Our crops are more than capable of producing food and fuel.
“We will deny ourselves the opportunity of benefiting from future technologies if, as some are demanding, we opt out from developing the industry now,” he added.
No comments yet