With our industry often viewed as one of the worst polluters, running cleaner, greener vehicles has become a major focus for many operators. Many have begun trialling the use of biofuels, while others are already running a proportion of their fleet on biodiesel.
However, the findings of last month's government-commissioned Gallagher Review
on the indirect effects of biofuels have sown the seeds of doubt as to whether biofuels are really the panacea first assumed.
The report by Professor Ed Gallagher, head of the Renewable Fuels Agency (RFA), claims that biofuel production has played a significant role in accelerating deforestation and pushing up food prices.
The report also addresses doubts about climate benefits. It claims that the use of biofuels has displaced food production and changed the use of land which in turn has resulted in a loss of biodiversity and could actually push up emissions of greenhouse gases instead of reducing them.
Gallagher states that the introduction of biofuels should be slowed until effective controls are in place to prevent land use change and higher food prices.
The review proposes that the current Renewable
Transport Fuel Obligation (RTFO) target for 2008/09 (of 2.5% by volume) be retained, but the proposed rate of increase in biofuels be reduced to 0.5% per annum, rising to a maximum of 5% by volume by 2013/14. This compares with the RTFO's current target of 5% by 2010.
However, Gallagher is keen that the government doesn't "abandon" biofuels completely, but warns that "we cannot continue producing biofuels that are ultimately more environmentally and socially damaging than the fossil fuels they seek to replace".
Overall, the report claims there is a future for a sustainable biofuels industry, but creating the right policy framework is "challenging and will take time". So, in the meantime, should operators halt any plans they have to invest in the adoption of biofuels, or carry on regardless?
Chris Malins, RFA communications officer, tells MT: "The review found that when biofuel crops are grown on existing farm land, there is a significant risk they could cause carbon emissions by displacing existing production onto new land.
"We would encourage any haulage firm considering a switch to biodiesel for environmental reasons to look carefully at the sustainability of the fuel they buy, and where the feedstock was grown, as the review recommends that biofuel crops should be grown on land that was previously idle or marginal."
Asked which types of biofuel the RFA would advise operators to use, Malins says: "A great example of an environmentally friendly biofuel is biodiesel made from used cooking oil. This provides excellent greenhouse gas savings of 85%, and does not cause any of the potential problems due to displacing land use identified in the review.
"For biofuels produced from unused oil, sustainability has to be looked at on a case-by-case basis. No 'type' can be guaranteed to avoid causing the indirect effects identified in the review, unless you can show that the crop has not displaced food production."
JPM Eco Logistics, the haulage company that was featured on TV show Dragons' Den, thinks a lot of the points raised in the Gallagher Review are scaremongering. Director Paul Merker says: "There is a lot of land out there and I don't believe the production of biofuels has displaced food production or pushed up food prices.
"The biodiesel we use comes from virgin rapeseed oil or once-used rapeseed, and we will continue to run our entire fleet on a 100% biodiesel mix.".
Food service specialist 3663 can rest easy at night as its biodiesel comes from its customer KFC's used cooking oil. It began using a 5% blend five years ago and switched to a 30% blend 12 months ago.
However, supply could become a problem in the future. Graham Rennie, 3663's director of fleet, says: "Two years ago, you'd have been able to take the waste oil off customers' hands for free, but now they've got wise to it and realise that waste oil has a value, so we have to buy the cooking oil from our customers.
"Unfortunately, a lot of used cooking oil is being sent overseas, as they will pay more for it, so it could get harder to secure the required volumes."
Currently 3663 collects enough waste oil to run 50% of its fleet on the 30% blend. Asked about the cost savings associated with using biodiesel, Rennie explains: "For us, it was never done as a way to save money - it was always done for the environmental benefit. As long as it remains cost-neutral to produce, then we'll continue to stick with it."
Meanwhile, Owens Road Services has put on hold its plans to increase its use of biodiesel, which it mooted last November. Ian Jarman, environmental and legislation manager at Owens, tells MT: "We were considering doing trials, but kept getting varying feedback from other operators – some good, some bad.
Then the Freight Transport Association (FTA) told us that as of April 2009, the government will not differentiate between the duty on biodiesel and standard diesel so it won't be a financial benefit to increase our mix of biodiesel, just a green one. I think if the government hadn't announced this, then we may have pushed it harder."
Another potential barrier for operators considering running a higher blend is the truck manufacturers' warranties. A lot won't allow more than a 30% blend.
Tony Pain, marketing director at Daf, says: "We will allow up to a 100% blend on heavy trucks, but only if the operator does a few key things, such as fitting a water separator and halving its service intervals. On smaller engines we only allow a 5% mix. The problem with biodiesel is that it attracts water and dust so it can denature over a period of time and thicken, which isn't ideal for the engine.
"We were getting a lot of enquiries from operators interested in running their trucks on biodiesel, but the calls seem to have dried up now."
Reed Business Information Limited.©2009
