Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:


Or use your Academic/Social account:


You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.


Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message


Verify Password:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Mohr, Alison; Raman, Sujatha (2013)
Publisher: Elsevier
Journal: Energy Policy
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects: Energy(all), Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law, Whole system, Biofuels, Sustainability, Article
The emergence of second generation (2G) biofuels is widely seen as a sustainable response to the\ud increasing controversy surrounding the first generation (1G). Yet, sustainability credentials of 2G biofuels\ud are also being questioned. Drawing on work in Science and Technology Studies, we argue that controversies\ud help focus attention on key, often value-related questions that need to be posed to address broader societal\ud concerns. This paper examines lessons drawn from the 1G controversy to assess implications for the\ud sustainability appraisal of 2G biofuels.\ud We present an overview of key 1G sustainability challenges, assess their relevance for 2G, and\ud highlight the challenges for policy in managing the transition. We address limitations of existing\ud sustainability assessments by exploring where challenges might emerge across the whole system of\ud bioenergy and the wider context of the social system in which bioenergy research and policy are done.\ud Key lessons arising from 1G are potentially relevant to the sustainability appraisal of 2G\ud biofuels depending on the particular circumstances or conditions under which 2G is introduced. We\ud conclude that sustainability challenges commonly categorised as either economic, environmental or social\ud are, in reality, more complexly interconnected (so that an artificial separation of these categories is\ud problematic).
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • AEA/NNFCC, 2010. Closing the loop: optimising food, feed, fuel and energy production oppportunities in the UK. 〈http://www.nnfcc.co.uk/tools/closing-th e-loop-optimising-food-feed-fuel-energy-production-opportunities-in-the-ukspreadsheet-tool-nnfcc-10-015〉.
    • Action Aid, 2010. Meals per gallon, Action Aid, London. 〈http://www.actionaid.org. uk/doc_lib/meals_per_gallon_final.pdf〉.
    • Barker, A.M., Riddington, C., 2003. Attitudes to Renewable Energy, MVA Project Number C32906, COI Communications, DTI, London. 〈www.dti.gov.uk/renew ables/renew_1.2.1.4a.htm〉.
    • Black, M.J., Whittaker, C., Hosseini, S.A., Diaz-Chavez, R., Woods, J., Murphy, R.J., 2011. Life cycle assessment and sustainability methodologies for assessing industrial crops, processes and end products. Industrial Crops and Products 34, 1332-1339.
    • Bryman, A., 2012. Social Research Methods, fourth ed. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
    • Cambrosio, A., Limoges, C., 1991. Controversies as governing processes in technology assessment. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management 3 (4), 377-396.
    • Carbon Cycles and Sinks Network, 2011. The costs and benefits of moving out of beef and into biofuel. 〈http://www.feasta.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/ Biovsbeef_report.pdf〉.
    • Centre for Alternative Technology, 2010. Zero Carbon Britain 2030. 〈http://www. zerocarbonbritain.org/〉.
    • Charles, M.B., Ryan, R., Ryan, N., Oloruntoba, R., 2007. Public policy and biofuels: the way forward? Energy Policy 35, 5737-5746.
    • Clift, R., Mulugetta, Y., 2007. A plea for common sense (and biomass). The Chemical Engineer. October, pp. 24-26.
    • Copeland, J., Turley, D., 2008. National and Regional Supply/Demand Balance for Agricultural Straw in Great Britain. 〈http://www.nnfcc.co.uk/tools/national-an d-regional-supply-demand-balance-for-agricultural-straw-in-great-britain〉.
    • De Fraiture, C., Giordano, M., Liao, Y., 2008. Biofuels and implications for agricultural water use: blue impacts of green energy. Water Policy 10 (S1), 67-81.
    • Devine-Wright, P., 2008. Reconsidering public acceptance of renewable energy technologies: a critical review. In: Grubb, M., Jamasb, T., Pollitt, M.G. (Eds.), Delivering a Low-Carbon Electricity System: Technologies, Economics and Policy. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 443-461.
    • Doornbosch, R., Steenblik, R., 2007. Biofuels: is the cure worse than the disease? 〈http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/15/46/39348696.pdf〉.
    • Elghali, L., Clift, R., Sinclair, P., Panoutsou, C., Bauen, A., 2007. Developing a sustainability framework for the assessment of bioenergy systems. Energy Policy 35, 6075-6083.
    • Fargione, J., Hill, J., Tilman, D., Polasky, S., Hawthorne, P., 2008. Land clearing and the biofuel carbon debt. Science 319, 1235-1238.
    • Friends of the Earth, 2007. Biofuels-a big green con? 〈http://www.foe.co.uk/news/ biofuels.html〉.
    • Gaffney, J.S., Marley, N.A., 2009. The impacts of combustion emissions on air quality and climate-from coal to biofuels and beyond. Atmospheric Environment 43 (2009), 23-36.
    • Gamborg, C., Millar, K., Shortall, O., Sandøe, P., 2012. Bioenergy and land use: framing the ethical debate. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 25, 909-925.
    • Gibson, R.B., 2006. Beyond the pillars: sustainability assessment as a framework for effective integration of social, economic and ecological considerations in significant decision-making. Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management 8 (3), 259-280.
    • Gross, M., 2011. New directions in crop protection. Current Biology 21, R641-R643.
    • Hall, D.O., 1991. Biomass energy. Energy Policy 19 (8), 711-737.
    • Haughton, A.J., Bond, A.J., Lovett, A.A., Dockerty, T., Sünnenberg, G., Clark, S.J., Bohan, D. A., Sage, R.B., Mallott, M.D., Mallott, V.E., Cunningham, M.D, Riche, A.B., Shield, I.F., Finch, J.W., Turner, M.M., Karp, A., 2009. A novel, integrated approach to assessing social, economic and environmental implications of changing rural land-use: a case study of perennial biomass crops. Journal of Applied Ecology 46, 323-333.
    • Havlík, P., Schneider, U.A., Schmid, E., Böttcher, H., Fritz, S., Skalský, R., Aoki, K., De Cara, S., Kindermann, G., Kraxner, F., Leduc, S., McCallum, I., Mosnier, A., Sauer, T., Obersteiner, M., 2010. Global land-use implications of first and second generation biofuel targets. Energy Policy 39, 5690-5702.
    • House of Commons Environmental Audit Committee, 2008. Are biofuels sustainable? 〈http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200708/cmselect/cmen vaud/76/76.pdf〉.
    • IATP, 2009. Fueling Resistance? Antibiotics in Ethanol Production. Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy. 〈http://www.iatp.org/documents/fueling-resistance-antibiotics-in-ethanol-production〉.
    • IEA, 2010. Sustainable Production of Second-Generation Biofuels. Potential and perspectives in major economies and developing countries. 〈http://www.iea. org/publications/freepublications/publication/biofuels_exec_summary.pdf〉.
    • Jefferies, D., Muñoz, I., Hodges, J., King, V.J., Aldaya, M., Ercin, A.E., Milà i Canals, L., Hoekstra, A.Y., 2012. Water footprint and life cycle assessment as approaches to assess potential impacts of products on water consumption. Key learning points from pilot studies on tea and margarine. Journal of Cleaner Production 33 (2012), 155-166.
    • Karp, A., Haughton, A.J., Bohan, D.A., Lovett, A.A., Bond, A.J., Dockerty, T., Sünnenberg, G., Finch, J.W., Sage, R.B., Appleton, K.J., Riche, A.B., Mallott, M.D., Mallott, V.E., Cunningham, M.D., Clark, S.J., Turner, M.M., 2009. Perennial energy crops: implications and potential. In: Winter, M., Lobley, M. (Eds.), What is Land For? The Food, Fuel and Climate Change Debate. Earthscan, London, pp. 47-72.
    • Karp, A., Richter, G.M., 2011. Meeting the challenge of food and energy security. Journal of Experimental Botany 62, 3263-3271.
    • Levidow, L., Carr, S., 2009. GM Food on Trial: Testing European Democracy. Genomics and Society, Routledge, New York/London.
    • Levidow, L., Paul, H., 2008. Land-use, Bioenergy and Agro-biotechnology. WBGU, Berlin.
    • Markeviĉius, A., Katinas, V., Perednis, E., Tamaŝauskienė, M., 2010. Trends and sustainability criteria of the production and use of liquid biofuels. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 14 (9), 3226-3231.
    • Murphy, R., Woods, J., Black, M., McManus, M., 2011. Global developments in the competition for land from biofuels. Food Policy 36, S52-S61.
    • Muthaiyan, A., Limayem, A., Ricke, S.C., 2011. Antimicrobial strategies for limiting bacterial contaminants in fuel bioethanol fermentations. Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 37, 351-370.
    • Nuffield Council on Bioethics, 2011. Biofuels: ethical issues. 〈http://www.nuffield bioethics.org/biofuels〉.
    • OECD/FAO, 2007. OECD-FAO Agricultural Outlook 2007-2016. OECD Publications, Paris.
    • Oxfam, 2007. Bio-fuelling poverty-why the EU renewable-fuel target may be disastrous for poor people. Oxfam Briefing Note. 〈http://www.oxfam.org.nz/ imgs/pdf/biofuels%20briefing%20note.pdf〉.
    • Pilgrim, S., Harvey, M., 2010. Battles over biofuels in Europe: NGOs and the politics of markets. Sociological Research Online, 15 〈http://www.socresonline.org.uk/ 15/3/4.html〉.
    • Quadrelli, R., Peterson, S., 2007. The energy-climate challenge: recent trends in CO2 emissions from fuel combustion. Energy Policy 35 (11), 5938-5952.
    • Raman, S., Mohr, A.. Biofuels and the role of space in sustainable innovation journeys. Journal of Cleaner Production, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro. 2013.07.057, in press.
    • Rip, A., 1986. Controversies as informal technology assessment. Knowledge 8 (2), 349-371.
    • Romijn, H.A., Caniëls, M.C.J., 2011. The Jatropha biofuels sector inTanzania 2005-2009: evolution towards sustainability? Research Policy 40 (4), 618-636.
    • RCEP, 2000. Energy-The changing climate. Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution, 22nd Report, London.
    • Sanderson, K., 2011. Lignocellulose: a chewy problem. Nature 474, S12-S14.
    • Scharlemann, J.P.W., Laurance, W.F., 2008. Supporting Online Material for How Green Are Biofuels? 〈www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/319/5859/43/DC1〉.
    • Schubert, C., 2006. Can biofuels finally take center stage? Nature Biotechnology 24, 771-784.
    • Searchinger, T., 2011. How Biofuels Contribute to the Food Crisis. Washington Post.
    • Sengers, F., Raven, R.P.J.M., Van Venrooij, A., 2010. From riches to rags: biofuels, media discourses, and resistance to sustainable energy technologies. Energy Policy 38, 5013-5027.
    • Sims, R.E.H., Mabee, W., Saddler, J.N., Taylor, M., 2010. An overview of second generation biofuel technologies. Bioresource Technology 101, 1570-1580.
    • Sinclair, T.R., Purcell, L.C., Sneller, C.H., 2004. Crop transformation and the challenge to increase yield potential. Trends in Plant Science 9 (2), 70-75.
    • Singh, A., Pant, D., Korres, N.E., Nizami, A.S., Prasad, S., Murphy, J.D., 2010. Key issues in life cycle assessment of ethanol production from lignocellulosic biomass: challenges and perspectives. Bioresource Technology 101, 5003-5012.
    • Stirling, A., 2003. Renewables, sustainability and precaution: beyond environmental cost-benefit and risk analysis. Issues in Environmental Science and Technology 19, 113-134.
    • Stirling, A., 2013. Why all the fuss about GM food? Other innovations are available. Political Science Blog, The Guardian, 〈http://www.theguardian.com/science/ political-science/2013/jun/28/gm-food〉.
    • Swyngedouw, E., 2007. Impossible 'sustainability' and the postpolitical condition. In: Krueger, R., Gibbs, D. (Eds.), The Sustainable Development Paradox: Urban Political Economy in the United State and Europe. Guildford Press, New York, pp. 13-40.
    • Thornley, P., Gilbert, P., 2013. Biofuels: balancing risks and rewards. Interface Focus 3 (1), 2042-8901.
    • Thornley, P., Upham, P., Tomei, J., 2009. Sustainability constraints on UK bioenergy development. Energy Policy 37, 5623-5635.
    • Tomei, J., Upham, P., 2009. Argentinean soy-based biodiesel: an introduction to production and impacts. Energy Policy 37 (10), 3890-3898.
    • Upham, P., 2009. Applying environmental-behaviour concepts to renewable energy siting controversy: reflections on a longitudinal bioenergy case study. Energy Policy 37, 4273-4283.
    • Upham, P., Shackley, S., Waterman, H., 2007. Public and stakeholder perceptions of 2030 bioenergy scenarios for the Yorkshire and Humber region. Energy Policy 35 (9), 4403-4412.
    • van der Horst, D., Vermeylen, S., 2011. Spatial scale and social impacts of biofuel production. Biomass and Bioenergy 35, 2435-2443.
    • van Eijck, J., Romijn, H., 2008. Prospects for Jatropha biofuels in Tanzania: an analysis with strategic Niche management. Energy Policy 36 (1), 311-325.
    • Wassenaar, T., Kay, S., 2008. Biofuels: one of many claims to resources. Science 321, 201.
    • Whittaker, C., McManus, M., Hammond, G.P., 2011. Greenhouse gas reporting for biofuels: a comparison between the RED, RTFO and PAS2050 methodologies. Energy Policy 39 (2011), 5950-5960.
    • Whittaker, C., McManus, M., Smith, P., 2013. A comparison of carbon accounting tools for arable crops in the United Kingdom. Environmental Modelling and Software 46 (2013), 228-239.
    • Zhu, J.Y., Pan, X.J., 2009. Woody biomass pretreatment for cellulosic ethanol production: technology and energy consumption evaluation. Bioresource Technology 101, 4992-5002.
    • Zilberman, D., Hochman, G., 2010. Indirect land use change: a second-best solution to a first-class problem. Fuel 13, 382-390.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Funded by projects

  • RCUK | BBSRC Centre For Sustainab...

Cite this article