Skip Navigation

Biofuels

News

  • Print
  • Comment
  • | Share

Lack of science means jatropha biofuel 'could fail poor'

Papiya Bhattacharyya

9 August 2010 | EN

<i>Jatropha curcas</i> tree fruit

Jatropha: properly handled, it could be a bounty for small farmers

Flickr\tonrulkens

[BANGALORE] Mass planting of jatropha as a biofuel crop could benefit poor areas as well as combating global warming, but only if a number of scientific and production issues are properly addressed, a review has warned.

Growing jatropha for biofuel on degraded land unsuitable for food and cash crops could help improve the earnings of small farmers and counter poverty, reports the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) in the review published last month.

The plant is an alternative crop for small farmers "particularly in semi-arid, remote areas that have little opportunity for alternative farming strategies, few alternative livelihood options and increasing environmental degradation," notes the FAO.

And biofuels produced in sufficient volume could make a significant impact on global warming, as it is estimated that transport accounts for a fifth of total greenhouse gas emissions.

But, so far, decisions about jatropha "have been made without the backing of sufficient science-based knowledge," the FAO says in the review, which includes case studies from South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa. 

For jatropha planting to meet its 'pro-poor' objectives, international support is needed for research on genetic improvement of varieties, and on cultivation practices such as water conservation and integrated pest and nutrient management, the review recommends.

More research is also needed on oil processing techniques and new oil products to help smallholders reap maximum profits.

The review also notes that, in India, low yields have been reported despite farmers using a range of seed varieties that are available worldwide. But low yields need not be a barrier if other broader objectives are met, such as reclamation of wasteland, job creation and affordable biofuel for the lighting of homes, for  cookers and for operating small milling machines, grinders, irrigation pumps and two-wheeled tractors.

Experts should also ensure that projects to help small farmers grow jatropha can qualify for certification under the clean development mechanism (CDM), which allows organisations to earn credit for reducing emissions of greenhouse gases.

Other jatropha policies could include targeting remote areas with poor transport links and ensuring large-scale plantations do not compete with food crops.

But Balakrishna Gowda, biofuel project coordinator in the southern Indian state of Karnataka, where jatropha is grown, and professor at the University of Agricultural Sciences in Bangalore, said that it would be unrealistic to expect jatropha to reverse poverty "overnight" in developing countries.

"The plant requires water and nutrition like any other plant [even if it grows on degraded land]," he told SciDev.Net. "And it takes at least five to seven years for the plants to mature and grow their first fruit. We can rule out expectations of a great 'overnight' yield." 

Link to full report 'Jatropha: a smallholder bioenergy crop — the potential for pro-poor development'[2.32MB]

Comments (5)

Peter Baker ( United Kingdom )

16 August 2010

It's certainly true that more science is needed, but surely enough is already available to conclude that jatropha is nowhere near an economically viable commercialization, especially for smallholders. See for example the recent excellent GTZ review of jatropha in Kenya (Jatropha Reality Check; Nairobi 2009. Hence your opening statement "Mass planting of jatropha as a biofuel crop could benefit poor areas as well as combating global warming ..." is not justified. We as scientists should resist the temptation to foist new technology on poor people until we have good, repeatable field data that it actually works. And for jatropha, the data available so far suggests strongly that it doesn't.

Jonny ( Weizmann Inst Sci | Israel )

16 August 2010

An oilseed crop that has an exceedingly poisonous meal (it contains curcin, which is half as toxic as ricin) that cannot be used as a feed source for livestock and poultry has no place. Indeed, no crop that has yet to be domesticated, has no place. The many problems with jatropha and how they might be rapidly attacked are summarized in: Transgenics are imperative for biofuel crops. Plant Science 174: 246-263 (2008). Its nice though that the FAO has woken up - their annual report on biofuels extolled jatropha, with nary comment on its drawbacks (see: Is FAO selling biotech short on biofuels? Nature Biotechnology 27:22-23 (2009).

denis murphy ( United Kingdom )

16 August 2010

Peter Baker is correct in saying that jatropha is far from being a viable crop - especially on marginal soils where it will not compete for land with food crops. This is actually stated fairly clearly in the executive summary of the FAO report which talks about: "In terms of its viability as a cash crop, experience with jatropha production in Sub Saharan Africa and South Asia has found that yields are marginal, at best." and "The expectation that jatropha can substitute significantly for oil imports will remain unrealistic unless there is an improvement in the genetic potential of oil yields and in the production practices that can harness the improved potential." I think the SciDev.Net article might have reflected this report more accurately if it has emphasised the undoubted real-life drawbacks of jatropha before mentioning its still far from realised potential as an energy crop. Like many scientists, I am personally fairly sceptical about the jatropha energy-crop bandwagon and the damaging effect it might have for the future credibility of plant breeding for smallholders.

sombat thavorn ( Thailand )

16 August 2010

In 1985 I tried to plant jatropha, using local seeds, and found I could not rely on it for anything. And ever since I dare not try it in my farm in Thailand's Korat.

Jayant Sarnaik ( Applied Environmental Research Foundation(AERF) | India )

10 November 2010

I am wondering why are we not learning from our mistakes/failures regarding jatropha in India. India which is one of the 12 mega diverse countries in the world has more than 300 native oilseed species which occur in the wild and at least 10 out of these have potential for medium scale biodiesel production just through sustainable collection. There is not even a need to start cultivation of these species to understand the feasibility of these species for biofuel production. Had the amount of time, money and resources spent on jatropha to date been utilised for promotion of native oilseed species for biodiesel production in India, we would have gone much ahead in meeting the targets of the biofuel policy. Unfortunately everybody loves controversy and these useless topics (jatropha )become mainstay of international research and government spending. Jayant Sarnaik, India.

Add your comment

This is your network: share your views on any of our articles by adding your comments.

You need to be signed in to post a comment or to email a consenting comment author. Please sign in or sign up.

All comments are subject to approval and we reserve the right to edit comments containing inappropriate/unsuitable language. SciDev.Net holds copyright for all material posted on the website. Please see terms of use for further details.

All SciDev.Net material is free to reproduce providing that the source and author are appropriately credited. For further details see Creative Commons.

Back to News
To the top