Nov. 12: A noted university professor’s attempt to set the record straight with Science magazine when it comes to carbon emissions and biofuels was summarily rejected without explanation by the magazine, even though it clearly points to major flaws in the previously published work.

Dr. Bruce Dale, a professor of chemical engineering at Michigan State University, took environmental lawyer Tim Searchinger to task for a paper he and other wrote that significantly exaggerated the carbon impacts of corn and biofuel production. Dale noted that the carbon use in biofuels is part of a cycle that does not increase atmospheric carbon dioxide levels.

“The cycle is continued as crops are replanted and regrown,” Dale writes. “Using this carbon for fuel therefore does not increase atmospheric carbon dioxide levels. The short life cycle of ‘biogenic’ carbon is the reason why the Kyoto Protocol and other climate policies correctly do not count the carbon dioxide emitted by bioenergy use.”

Further, he noted, Searchinger’s work emphasizes inaccurate assessments of indirect impacts for biofuels while ignoring it for petroleum-based fuels.

“Obviously, there are significant unintended consequences of maintaining the status quo: continued dependence on oil,” Dale writes. “If we are going to make wise choices between our energy alternatives, then we must also include the indirect effects of continued dependence on oil. Assessing indirect effects against bioenergy only is bad accounting and even worse public policy.”

Click here for a copy of Dale’s rejected letter to Science magazine.