When biomass is used for powering transport, there are benefits to burning this in power plants for electric traction. Upward impact on food prices and negative im­pacts on biodiversity thereof will be lower per unit of energy output than in the case of the conversion of biomass to transport biofuels for internal combustion en­gines. Also, net greenhouse gas emissions may be relatively low. As pointed out in Sect. 1.6, use of this option depends on a much-increased social acceptability of electric traction in car transport. As pointed out in the same section, opinions on the ease with which such increased acceptability may be achieved vary greatly. If the moderate pessimists are right in this respect, government intervention to create incentives for electric cars may be useful.

Problems with the impacts of biofuel production on food prices may further­more be considerably reduced when biofuel production can be restricted to currently abandoned and fallow agricultural lands and land that currently sequesters little C. As pointed out in Sect. 6.4, this probably cannot be achieved without major govern­ment intervention. In the case of drylands, which currently sequester little C, large government investments may be needed in improved water management and con­servation practices (Thomas 2008). Such investments are also conducive to an in­creased resilience against climate change (Thomas 2008). In the case of abandoned agricultural land, incentives should be given that compensate for the financial dis­advantages if compared with the cultivation of good agricultural land. Government intervention may focus on limiting the cultivation of biofuel crops to marginal and abandoned agricultural lands or go one step further and establish government-owned companies that grow such crops. Such intervention is not a mission impossible. For instance, the government of Taiwan has focused its support for biodiesel on feed­stocks from polluted and fallow agricultural land (Huang and Wu 2008).

Limited use of organic wastes may also be useful in limiting negative side effects of transport biofuel use. In view of current prices for such biofuels (see Chap. 1), government intervention will often be needed to stimulate the production thereof. An evident priority is the improvement of technologies for the conversion of wastes into transport biofuels. As pointed out in Chap. 1, such technologies seem to offer much scope for lowering costs and improving conversion efficiencies. A mandate such as in the Energy Independence and Security Act 2007 of the USA for phase-in of lignocellulosic ethanol may also be helpful. Furthermore, to establish an environ­mental benefit, criteria have to be established which restrict marketing to biofuels that at least have a predefined benefit. Both the EU and the USA have restrictions in place for the life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of transport biofuels. It would seem useful to extend such criteria, for instance to safeguard soil organic matter and nutrient stocks and to limit negative effects on biodiversity.