Search

Abstract: This special issue has presented some of the specific findings of the RE-Impact Project which was commissioned and funded by the EuropeAid Cooperation Office from 2007 until its conclusion in 2010. The project aimed to provide impact assessment frameworks and influence relevant policies through direct involvement in bioenergy projects and policy analysis in South Africa, Uganda, India and China. The papers summarised here have covered issues related to Jatropha curcas and forest-based bioenergy in these countries. Taking an overall look at the project findings we can identify a number of general conclusions relevant for the future of bioenergy and rural development in Africa and Asia. First, only local and context-specific sustainability assessment can identify the risk and responsibilities of the different groups and the exact impact on the environment. Second, many initiatives both in biofuels and forest-based bioenergy are marred by a lack of understanding of the life-cycle financial analysis. Third, careful consideration of local physical and social conditions and the economics of the production chain can identify real opportunities for rural development using bioenergy. The current global impasse in bioenergy policies could actually be advantageous to the development of bioenergy in developing countries. Without the pressure from America and Europe to develop bioenergy systems for climate change mitigation, countries in Africa and Asia may have the breathing room to shape bioenergy systems for their own internal energy supply in an orderly fashion. However, in order to avoid environmental and social impacts it will be necessary to articulate together elements of a number of measures including market-based certification, national policy formulation, national legislation, impact assessments, sustainability planning, land use planning, research, monitoring and evaluation taking into account country and project specific sustainability criteria. Unfortunately, many of the countries in Africa and Asia where bioenergy can play an important role still lack institutional structures able to articulate this sustainable development. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Currently, conventional commercial energy sources — coal, oil, natural gas, nuclear and hydropower - account for 85 % to 90 % of global primary energy consumption; fossil fuels account for approximately 90 % of the conventional commercial energy consumption. Global primary commercial energy consumption has been growing slowly. The trend of growth in global energy consumption is expected to continue in the future - primarily because of the growth in world population and the economic growth in the developing countries. It is likely that the current pattern of energy consumption cannot be sustained in the future because of two major constraints. One of these is the environmental impact of using fossil fuels, particularly climate change, and the other is the depletion of the reserves of fossil fuels, particularly oil. Since the biggest source of greenhouse gas (GHG) emission is the combustion of fossil fuels, one of the most effective approaches to the mitigation of GHG emission would be reducing consumption of these fuels through their substitution by renewable energy. The same approach is also vital for reducing the rate of depletion of fossil fuels. Among the different renewable energy sources, biomass is one of the most promising options for improving and augmenting energy supply over the next three to five decades. One activity of a research project on biomass energy carried out within the framework of a regional research programme funded by the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida) and coordinated by the author was to analyse barriers to biomass energy systems and prevailing policies regarding these systems in six selected Asian countries: India, Malaysia, the People''s Republic of China (PRC), the Philippines, Sri Lanka and Thailand. This paper presents a synthesis of the country studies, which are presented separately in the current issue of this journal, complemented by information available in the open literature and related experience/developments in other Asian countries. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

The rising trend in environmental pollution in current years has elevated the demand for clean energy to reduce environmental stress, and the newly developed biomass energy source is contributing well in this regard. This paper quantifies, if biomass energy consumption is performing as the main driver for economic development and clean energy source to decrease the pollution levels. Associations among carbon emission, economic development, and biomass energy have been estimated by using the Common correlated effects mean group, and Panel vector autoregressive techniques for 38 countries of Asia from 1990 to 2017. Granger causality and Impulse-response functions are also measured. A closer look at the results shows that 1% increase in biomass consumption will increase CO 2 emission by 1.698%. The study also found support for the presence of an N-shaped relationship between per capita income and emission and found trade openness and urbanization as the contributors to environmental pollution. Outcomes provide empirical evidence that there is bidirectional causality between real economic growth to inflation and financial development to inflation in the first model. The second model also showed bidirectional causality between real economic growth to financial development and inflation, and inflation to trade openness. The findings show that biomass energy consumption is acting as the key driver for economic development and performing as a non-clean energy source in decreasing pollution. • Study examines association among emission, economic development and biomass energy. • Nations are solicitous for economic development but inattentive toward environment. • Study does not find biomass energy consumption as an environment-friendly indicator. • There is a positive association between renewable energy consumption and emission. • Economic development cannot be a guarantee to achieve a clean environment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: In Asia, as elsewhere in the world, countries rushed to promote biofuels during the dramatic oil price increases of 2007–2008 as way to enhance energy security, without waiting for the settlement of controversial debates about the environmental effects of biofuels, especially their effects on greenhouse gas emissions, deforestation, biodiversity, and whether biofuels cause a conflict between food and fuel. This paper does not settle this debate, but instead argues that there are straightforward, practical and feasible measures that can be implemented immediately in order to reduce the pressure of biofuels on the environment and food supply, and more generally increase food production. The key is to focus on increasing resource use efficiency in agriculture, especially different forms of energy use. Resource use efficiency in agriculture is low in many parts of Asia. Concrete measures that could be taken include reductions in market-distorting input subsidies and the introduction of resource-conserving technologies. These could be supplemented with greater use of non-fossil fuels in agricultural production, use of agricultural wastes in energy production, inclusion of input use levels in biofuel certification systems, and greater investment in agricultural research, extension systems, and infrastructure development. Biofuel fever has waned since the onset of the global financial crisis in late 2008, but it is likely to return when economic conditions eventually improve, and possible moves to strengthen the European Union biofuel blending requirements could further accelerate it. Much of the debate on biofuel-related impacts in the region has focused on deforestation, with little attention on agricultural input use, which could also have serious consequences for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. In sum, this paper argues that governments can still improve the environmental performance of biofuels while reducing potential conflicts with food security by implementing the straightforward measures suggested here. Though these may appear to be basic textbook suggestions, many governments are still not following them even though the spread of biofuels increases their importance and urgency. The message is that the governments in the region should get back to the basics. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: The purpose of this paper is to provide a broad overview of the social and environmental costs and benefits of biofuels in Asia. The major factors that will determine the impacts of biofuels are: (1) their contribution to land-use change, (2) the feedstocks used, and (3) issues of technology and scale. Biofuels offer economic benefits, and in the right circumstances can reduce emissions and make a small contribution to energy security. Feedstocks that involve the conversion of agricultural land will affect food security and cause indirect land-use change, while those that replace forests, wetlands or natural grasslands will increase emissions and damage biodiversity. Biofuels from cellulose, algae or waste will avoid some of these problems, but come with their own set of uncertainties and risks. In order to ensure net societal benefits of biofuel production, governments, researchers, and companies will need to work together to carry out comprehensive assessments, map suitable and unsuitable areas, and define and apply standards relevant to the different circumstances of each country. The greatest benefits may come from feedstocks produced on a modest scale as co-products of smart technologies developed for phytoremediation, waste disposal and emissions reduction. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Asia’s largest biofuels producers are currently Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Thailand, China and India. This paper first examines the current status of biofuels in these countries, including the national development targets, strategies, incentives and policies. It then identifies the fundamental driving forces behind the development and promotion of these industries and considers their economic, social and environmental impacts. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]