THE IDEA that a nation could significantly reduce its reliance on fossil fuels by converting biomass into fuel is an attractive one especially if the use of these biofuels contributes to a reduction in green house gases. With little reflection and even less independent research, politicians in countries around the globe, supported by special interest groups, trumpeted the production and consumption of biofuels and justified the billions spent on subsidies in terms of tackling the problem of climate change. In Accountability Denied: The Global Biofuel Blunder, author Doug Auld methodically examines the case for the production and consumption of major biofuels and concludes that the annual global cost exceeding $40 billion (U.S.) provides very little benefit in terms of energy security or a reduction in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Not all is doom and gloom. Auld's review of the research on biogas production from manure suggests that there are significant gains in GHG reductions and subsidies in this case are justified. The promise of cellulosic ethanol which can be developed from a wide variety of paper, wood and agriculture waste products warrants public funding to support research and development.