Biofuels: Sustainable?
I logged on this evening and saw this article from the Associated Press about the FDA approving the use of a plant called Camelina as a cattle feed. Camelina is grown in the United States and Canada as a source for biofuels currently. The article discusses farmers' reluctance to pursue the plant because it does not currently bring in as much revenue as alternatives such as corn. By allowing farmers to grow Camelina and use it as feed for cattle, the FDA has raised the value of the plant to farmers and, therefore, increasing the likelihood that farmers will have larger crops of it.
I had never heard of Camelina until this moment so I had to do my usual research. (I hate to admit it but I did use Wikipedia to get a quick overview.) According to my source, Camelina requires little water and nitrogen to grow. Nitrogen is one cited pollutant in bodies of water from the overuse of fertilizers. Choosing a plant that requires little chemicals has its obvious benefits. Not only is Camelina low key, it can be used to rotate with other crops and replenishes the soil. Corn, as Professor Dave Tilman from the University of Minnesota lectured in his ecology class, depletes the soil and the push for ethanol from corn is dangerous for the community.
We need to pursue biofuels that come from plants that do not require too much investment and destroy the natural environment, including soil quality, of the area.
