According to the NY Times,
"The studies' authors say that some ethanol sources wood wastes, or grasses planted on previously degraded land -- could yield net benefits in terms of greenhouse gas emissions. Still, they are one more reminder that regulators will have to design the tightest possible standards for ethanol production. And Congress, which is responsible for this huge mandate, will have to ensure that they do."
It is true that biofuels are no silver bullet, but they are part of the climate change solution. However, it is critical that in implementing these new climate change standards for biofuels that we not deny the country a powerful tool to mitigate climate change.
The editorial from the Washington Post, is quick to jump and say,
"biofuels are not a silver bullet in the battle against global warming. In fact they could make things worse."
At best this is jumping the gun, at worst it's fear mongering. Assertations that U.S. biofuel production will result in rainforest destruction and starvation in underdeveloped countries present a nightmare "what if" scenario. There is an alternative and far more likely scenario that biotechnology can help produce cost effective biofuels from crop residues and energy crops, while simultaneously helping all countries increase crop yields to meet needs for food, animal feed and fuel.