I was reading an article in the Economist called, "Burned by the sun." The article discusses how the European Union has staunchly supported biofuels, despite some of their drawbacks. Just recently, the EU energy ministers endorsed a proposal "that biofules should make up a mandatory 10% of the EU's fuel consumption by 2020; the current voluntary target is 5.75% by 2012." The main issue with biofuels in Europe is that they are costly. To make up the cost, some European nations; Germany requires that refiners to "to blend a certain proportion of biofuels into their wares." England will follow suit by next year. The bigger issue is that biofuels can generate as much pollution as fossil fuels, say when coal is burned to produce the ethanol. Another problem with the pollution aspect is when large amounts of fertilizers are used to produce rapseed for biofuels. Although biofuels produced in poorer but sunny countries can be more environmentally-friendly, European farmers want to protect their own viability in the biodiesel market. Peder Jensen, of the European Environment Agency, states that it would be better to burn crops for fuel instead of turning them into biodiesel. But is this better from a pollution standpoint? I guess you would have to compare the pollution effects of biodiesel production to the crop burning to know for sure.