European Union energy ministers have failed to agree on a compromise deal to limit the use of transport fuels made from food crops.
Critics say the practice pushes up food prices and can do more harm than good to the environment.
EU Energy Commissioner Günther Oettinger said the delay would only damage the EU in its efforts to reduce dependence on imported oil and gas and curb greenhouse gas emissions.
“If we delay and postpone, the winners will be OPEC and Russia,” he said.
Last year in response to warnings about food price inflation and unintended consequences on the environment, the European Commission, the EU’s executive, proposed to cap the bloc’s use of crop-based bio-fuels at five per cent.
That compares with an existing goal to get 10 per cent of transport fuel from renewable sources by 2020, an amount that would be almost entirely derived from food-based fuels.
Politicians in the European Parliament backed a slightly higher cap than the EC proposed of six per cent, stirring opposition from the bio-fuels industry.
The industry has invested on the basis of the original 10 per cent goal and accuses the EC of a U-turn that it said would force plant closures and cost jobs.
EU energy ministers debated a new compromise of seven per cent put forward by Lithuania, holder of the EU presidency.
To encourage the transition to advanced bio-fuels, it also proposed allowing member states to set up a national sub-target within the 10 per cent transport target for renewable energy, but member states were deeply divided.
Some, such as Poland and Hungary, argued a seven per cent cap was too low, while Denmark and Belgium, for instance, said it was too high, while others said it should be accepted on pragmatic grounds.
“There are some good victories for the environment compared to the current directive,” said Ed Davey, Britain’s energy and climate change secretary.
Denmark called for a sub-target to spur new generation bio-fuels made from algae and waste, a cap of five per cent on crop-based bio-fuels in line with the EC proposal, and accounting of factors such as indirect land use change (ILUC) as soon as there was “a solid, scientific basis”.
ILUC refers to the displacement effect bio-fuels can cause as land is cleared for extra food crops, sometimes negating the aim of curbing emissions because it removes trees that serve as carbon sinks.
However, with parliamentary elections in May and the expiry of the current EC in October, a final deal is unlikely before 2015.
While energy and bio-fuel firms oppose a lower limit on first generation bio-fuel, food companies are strong supporters.
“The proposed five per cent cap by the European Commission would have been a significant step towards phasing out the use of food for fuel,” said a letter to the EU energy ministers from Paul Polman, chief executive officer of Unilever, and Peter Brabeck-Letmathe, chairman of the board at Nestle.
