Biofuel, for or against?

I get arguments from the horse's mouth, from both sides. For, from the president of Petrobras' new biofuel company, Petrobras Biocombustivel; against, from ecology professors from the best research centres in the country... And what am I to make of it?

Mr Kardec, the president of Petrobras Biocombustivel, a student of mine, tells me that the world needs biofuel to diversify its energy sources, fight against CO2 emissions and global warming. But that only a few countries in the world have the space and the climate to grow biofuel crops, like Brazil, for example. Here, biofuel crops will not take the place of food crops, or of the forest, or of indigenous people he says. There's a need, there's a market and Brazil has the potential to grow into a sizeable competitor. Biofuel crops are diversified - the oil isn't only produced from sugar cane here, but also from sunflower, mamona (see pic), soya, and others. And Brazil's Science and Technology Research council has just released R$4.5 billion for research into biofuel, including research into the use of microalgae to produce energy... So the race is on and Brazil has already jumped off the starting blocks.

Now what do the ecologists say to all this? Well. Biofuel is not a totally clean energy, because producing it produces carbon emissions. "The amount depends on the crop used, the cleanests being sunflower and ethanol" tells me Mr Kardec. For my ecologists friends from the Fiocruz Foundation, biofuel crops are only trouble. They are against. Acres and acres of monocultures are a disaster for biodiversity. For the soil. For the workers too - they work in near slavery conditions for a miserable salary.

I need more to make up my mind really... But my gutfeeling tells me biofuel is far from being all bad.

I will investigate more.