Back in 2004/2005 a lot of publicity was given to Jatropha curcas. The ugly, dwarfish little tree with toxic seeds was proclaimed as the answer to the biofuel problem, because:
(a) it could be grown in marginal agricultural conditions and
(b) there was no other use for it, except firewood, so there weren’t competing claims on it as a resource.
All this added up to a wonder scenario: grow jatropha on the world’s drought-ridden impoverished soils so that it didn’t take up space otherwise used for corn and soya which both have dual use as food/biofuel resources, lock up carbon as the trees grew and then use their seeds to meet the global demand for fuel. Sounded too good to be true …and it was.
Local use good – global trading market bad
The central American tree does indeed grow in marginal lands, but when planted in poor soil, it produces poor seed crops, and that means that without agricultural inputs, the outputs are nothing like anybody had hoped. Despite the fact that China, Brazil, Burma and Malaysia have all invested in jatropha plantations in their poorer agricultural reasons, the return on their investment is looking highly limited.
Part of the problem is that the assessment made of the productivity of the tree necessarily used trees that had survived to maturity, rather than new plantation trees. This means that the inputs to the tree (fertiliser, rain or other water, mulch or other nutrients) may have varied over time and the trees that were measured may have been given much more support, whether by farmers or by nature, than was originally factored in to the equation. Much of the world’s drought-land has become highly impoverished over the past two or three decades but may have been richer in food and water for plants in the past.
This discovery leads to the same dilemma that emerges with all other biofuels – it becomes a food versus fuel debate about whether scarce resources should be used to support food crops or crops that can be sold to produce energy.
Burma fails to deliver on biofuel initiative
In Burma, the military junta ordered the population to plant jatropha, and as a result, plantations, rice paddies and even home gardens were dug up and turned over to jatropha, in part out of fear that failure to carry out the edict could lead to fines or maybe even imprisonment. But because there is no international market, nor an established infrastructure to mill and store the oil, much of the crop grown in Burma simply rots.
However, in India, a different approach might lead to a partial answer to the dilemma. Following the example of Mali, the Indian government intends to turn 27 million acres of marginal agricultural land over to jatropha, which will then be milled locally to make lamp oil and fuel for cooking stoves, as well as providing an easily portable fertiliser made from the remnants of the crushed seed, which can be used to enrich croplands as the toxicity inherent in the tree can be broken down by micro-organisms in the soil.
Researchers are trying to improve the yield of the crop, and because jatropha has a higher energy content per gallon than other biofuels, this could be part of the answer too. But both partial answers: community use and agricultural improvement, are long-term projects: jatropha, despite the hype, will not be a contributor to fuel security on the planet in the near, or even the middle future.
Jatropha courtesy of Edwardyanquen at Flickr under a creative commons licence
Seriously for those of us our finger on the pulse of this industry this article is humorous. Firstly jatropha curcas is in high demand cerified seed is in very high demand and CJO (Crude Jatropha Oil) is now a highly prized comodity. I have orders for 30,000 tons a month and 15,000 tons a month repectively with two of my largest customers at 800 USD per Ton FOB. I'm selling every drop I get and madly looking for more. It seems that corporate America is the last to catch on that it is actually working for the farmers and the industry. The down turn shifted the focus off evironmental projects and onto survival for some of us. This is mostly due to the first generation biofuel technologies that the USA invested in so heavily. The cost to move to 2nd generation is just too great for most to bear in this current environment. Australian, Eupropean and Indian companies however have started by taking America's lead and moved on 2nd gen straight off the bat. As such they are having an easier time of it. Eviendence of a fast follower strategy's effectiveness in this case. As for Burma well its clear that it is the Junta not Jatropha that is soley to blame for the atrosities there. Trafficing in burmese CJO is similar to the blood diamond trade in nearly all minds of the industry leaders. Lets hope that a sustainable fuel energy is choosen by its merits not by the opinions of "green media".
Kindest Regards,
Tyson Bennett
R&D Director
tyson@BioSynergyFuels.com
Actually, Tyson, I don't think there's any disagreement between my position and yours.
Burma's problem is clearly one of political coercion and nothing to do with Jatropha as a product, but as I say, in India and Mali the biofuel is working brilliantly for local markets, what isn't working is the posited claim that biofuels like Jatropha can be grown on marginal land with no inputs AND contribute to the global demand for high quality internationally traded fuel. The first is achievable, possibly even achieved, but the second isn't – without inputs that are scarce and high value (water, fertiliser, labour) no biofuel can solve the problem alone, that requires a change in policy and fuel use, not a wonder-fuel.
In Kenya, we have a very high number of our your men looking for work. If we can do nothing but find work for 10,000 of our young people to tend the jatropha fields, and get enough out of the returns, we would have justified the investment. The country imports 100% of its petroleum products. Any offset to this will be highly welcome.
We would look at jatropha production from a very different set of eyes. We also understand that, yes, one has to provide inputs for a healthy plant. If we can get anyone out there with the know how, we have access to 25,000-50,000 acres for the planting of the crop, and for oil and electricity production.
Kisabuli
Kisabuli, I think that is again, a very justifiable point, although whether there could be enough economic return from Jatropha, as the market is currently constituted, to pay young people a fair wage is another matter. Using suitable biofuels to break dependency on oil imports is a highly valuable step on the way to breaking petroleum's stranglehold.