The Biofuel Boondoggle: How the US Is Burning Through the Planet’s Wild Places

The notion that biofuels are a clean alternative to fossil fuels has been perpetuated for decades. However, research suggests this assumption is fundamentally flawed. In fact, policies meant to reduce greenhouse gas emissions may be doing more harm than good.

Take, for example, the US Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS), which was expanded significantly under the Trump administration. At first glance, it seems counterintuitive that an administration hostile to green energy would expand this program. However, closer examination reveals that the RFS is less about reducing emissions than about propping up agribusiness interests.

The soy industry has hailed the expansion as a major victory, but it comes with a steep price: more ecological damage than the fuels it’s meant to replace. One of the key issues with biofuels made from food crops is land-use change. When governments mandate large-scale production of these fuels, it creates a demand for massive amounts of cropland. Wild areas are cleared for agriculture, releasing greenhouse gases and disrupting carbon-rich soils in the process.

A 2016 study found that between 2008 and 2016, the RFS caused the conversion of over 4 million acres of natural and seminatural areas into cropland in the US. This is just the tip of the iceberg. The demand for vegetable oils created by crop-based diesel mandates has devastating impacts on wildlands abroad.

As global prices for soybean oil rise, farmers around the world are incentivized to grow more oil crops, often at the expense of tropical forests and grasslands. This creates a vicious cycle: as US policy drives up demand for biofuels, it drives down the very ecosystems we’re trying to protect.

The RFS’s impacts don’t stop at our borders. Similar policies in other countries are contributing to the same problems. A 2023 report found that about 17 percent of global vegetable oil is now diverted to diesel production, further exacerbating deforestation and habitat destruction.

The current approach to biofuels is not only ineffective but also counterproductive. Rather than trying to force-feed biofuels into our fuel supply, we should be focusing on reducing emissions through more targeted measures. This might include investing in carbon capture technology or supporting the development of new, low-carbon fuels.

However, powerful agribusiness interests are perpetuating a boondoggle that prioritizes profits over sustainability. It’s time to confront this reality and rethink our approach to biofuels once and for all. We must prioritize sustainability over short-term gains and acknowledge the devastating impacts of the RFS.

If we continue down this path, we’ll be left with nothing but a barren landscape and a dwindling store of carbon sinks. The fate of our wild places hangs in the balance – will we choose to burn through them for fuel, or find a better way forward?