Review of Searchinger's Land Use CHanges article - devastating criticism by Bruce Dale professor of

[JohnWxy]

Chemical Engineering - MIchigan State University


www.cbd.int/cms/ui/forums/attachment.aspx?id=55

at the lilnk is a review of Searchinger's article (I wouldn't call it a study) and that of Tillman by Bruce E. Dale, University Distinguished Professor of Chemical Engineering, Michigan State University.

It's also a lecture on the standards to be met to be considered an adequate LCA study. Here are a few excerpts:

"EISA 2007: renewable fuels must meet certain “lifecycle greenhouse gas” emission reductions --

Some Life Cycle Analysis Standards: In Plain English

Use the most recent/most accurate data possible

If models are used to generate “data”, have the models been sufficiently tested & verified?

Select the reference system/functional unit: what exactly are we comparing?
Make it easy for others to check your data and methods= transparency (difficult for complex models)

Set clear system boundaries (physical & temporal)—must be equal or comparable for reference system and/or reference product of interest

Multi-product systems must allocate environmental costs among all products

Perform sensitivity analysis: how much do results vary if assumptions or data change?

~~
~~

Do the two ILUC studies (February 2008 Science papers) meet commonly accepted LCA standards and thereby satisfy the policy requirements or do they not meet these standards?


Let’s Examine the Recent Papers in Science using these Criteria


Use the most recent/most accurate data possible
If models are used to generate “data”, have the models been sufficiently tested & verified?
Select the reference system/functional unit: what exactly are we comparing?
Make it easy for others to check your data and methods= transparency (difficult for complex models)
Set clear system boundaries (physical & temporal)—must be equal or comparable for reference system and/or reference product of interest
Multi-product systems must allocate environmental costs among all products
Perform sensitivity analysis: how much do results vary if assumptions or data change?


Do the 2008 Science Papers Meet LCA Criteria?


Data quality. Use the most recent/most accurate data possible? No. Models may be valid but that was not proven. Literature on causes of land use change ignored?
Select the reference system/functional unit: what exactly are we comparing? Marginal.
Make it easy for others to check your data and methods= transparency Acceptable

Set clear system boundaries—must be equal or comparable for reference system and/or reference product of interest No. Temporal boundaries & physical boundaries are not comparable for ethanol & gasoline
Multi-product systems must allocate environmental costs among all products No. No apparent or stated allocation of these costs among animal feed and biofuels
Perform sensitivity analysis: how much do results vary if assumptions or data change? No. Sensitivity analysis lacked appropriate range of variables, especially for allocation
No apparent stakeholder involvement



So What is My Bottom Line?


GHG effects of direct land use change for biofuels (supply chain oriented) can and have been studied by LCA. Robust conclusions by LCA standards (+/- 30%)

GHG effects of indirect land use change (market oriented) have not yet been successfully studied by LCA. Science papers are not (and probably were not intended to be) LCA studies.

Existing ILUC papers do not meet the standards for “life cycle” studies. It is simply incorrect to use them as such.

The system is so complex that it may never be possible to apply recognized LCA standards to ILUC (but that shouldn’t stop us from trying)