Home > Uncategorized > Food, Fuel, Forests and Climate

Food, Fuel, Forests and Climate

from Greenpeace

Fossil fuels are killing our climate and we need to find alternatives.

It’s a simple message that most people get, but what happens when one of the supposed alternatives also becomes not just a climate killer, but a driver of hunger? Then surely it’s time to stop and rethink?

Yesterday, the European Union (EU) took a tentative step towards solving this problem by changing its previous policy of increasing biofuel use for cars and trucks by proposing to cap it at 5%.

So why the change of heart?

Because the EU has been forced to recognise that growing crops for biofuels mean less crops available for food and likely price hikes as demand increases. The US, EU, China, India and Brazil all have set targets for a sharp increase in the use of biofuels. This resulted in huge additional demand for cereals, grains, sugar and oilseeds, further exacerbating recent increases in food prices compounded also by the impacts of the drought in the US last summer. Currently about 40% of US corn production is devoted to biofuel.

In a recent report, Oxfam concluded that the demand for biofuels has pushed millions of people to poverty through rising food prices. In 2008, when biofuels accounted for 3.5% of transport fuel in the EU, a study commissioned by the EC estimated that 70,000 km² of land was needed to grow biofuel crops and close to half of that area was estimated to be located outside of Europe. If this amount of land had been used to produce wheat and maize instead, it could have fed 127 million people for an entire year.

Increasing the price of food as well as reducing its availability should be enough reasons to suspend biofuel mandates. However, expanding biofuel production also has severe negative climate impacts as it often displaces crop production farther into threatened forests, savannahs and peatland or increase the use of oil-based fertilizers and pesticides. The destruction of ecosystems for biofuel crop production leads to massive greenhouse gas emissions as intact ecosystems are natural carbon sink.

Nevertheless the EU proposal failed to go far enough. It failed to take into account the greenhouse gas emissions from producing biodiesel from vegetable oils. EU countries can still continue to use biofuels that have higher emissions than crude oil. A major re-think of the entire biofuel policy is required if we are to avoid compounding rather than fixing the problem.

Used wisely biofuels can be part of the solutions needed for a fossil-fuel free future. But when the current biofuels policy increases food prices, while making climate change worse through additional deforestation and unsustainable farming practices then the system isn’t working and has to change.

  1. October 22, 2012 at 7:50 pm

    Safe and reliable nuclear energy is the only long term alternative if the energy use per individual continues to rise. The nuclear footprint is very small compared to fossil fuels and water/air/biofuel based alternatives.
    The other option, of course, is to reduce our use of energy and develop sane lifestyles.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.