Biofuels Boom in Africa as British Firms Lead Rush on Land for Plantations _ Environment _ the Guardian

8/2/2019 Biofuels Boom in Africa as British Firms Lead Rush on Land for Plantations _ Environment _ the Guardian

1/20

Biofuels boom in Africa as British firmslead rush on land for plantationsControversial fuel crops linked to rising food prices and hunger, as

well as increased greenhouse gas emissions

Dam ian Carrin gton and Stefano Valentino

guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 31 May 2011 21.00 BST

An Ivory Coast nursery for jatropha, a non-edible plant whose oil-rich seeds can be processed into biodiesel.

Photograph: Kambou Sia/AFP/Getty Images

British firms have acquired more land in Africa for controversial biofuel plantations

than companies from any other country, a Guardian investigation has revealed.

Half of the 3.2m hectares (ha) of biofuel land identified in countries from

Mozambique to Senegal is linked to 11 British companies, more than any other

country.

Liquid fuels made from plants such as bioethanol are hailed by some as

environmentally-friendly replacements for fossil fuels. Because they compete for land

with crop plants, biofuels have also been linked to record food prices and rising hunger.

There are also fears they can increase greenhouse gas emissions.

A market has been created by British and EU laws requiring the blending of rising

els boom in Africa as British firms lead rush on land for plantations |... http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/may/31/biofuel-plan

0 4/3/2012


2/20

amounts of biofuels into petrol and diesel, but the rules were condemned as unethical

and "backfiring badly" in April by a Nuffield Council on Bioethics commission. In the

UK, only 31% of biofuels used meet voluntary environmental standards intended to

protect water supplies, soil quality and carbon stocks in the source country.

There are no central records of land acquisitions in Africa, but research by the Guardian

revealed the scale of the biofuels rush in sub-Saharan Africa 100 projects and 50

companies in more than 20 countries.

Crest Global Green Energy has the largest recorded landholding, 900,000ha in Mali,

Guinea and Senegal. Tom Stuart, the chief executive, said: "It is true in some cases [that

biofuels displace food], but in our projects we 'inter-crop', planting as much food as

biofuel on the marginal land we have brought into agricultural use. There is a large

social element to our projects, with all the local people needing to be in agreement, and

that's normally written into contracts at government level."

Another UK company, Sun Biofuels, leased 8,000ha in Tanzania where it grows

Jatropha curcas, a non-edible plant whose oil-rich seeds can be processed into

biodiesel. "We'll start harvesting and producing in two years," said Peter Auge, office

manager in Tanzania. "The main attraction for us is exporting to Europe."

Claims that J cur casuse prevents biofuels competing with food because it grows easily

on marginal and arid land unsuitable for other agriculture have been challenged even

within the industry. "Growing jatropha in a profitable way on dry lands is a myth. It

needs water, fertilisers and pesticides to provide high yields," Auge said. Jamidu

Katima, at the University of Dar es Salaam, is critical of biofuels guidelines adopted by

Tanzania's government in 2010. "There are no plans to build refineries, nor obligations

for foreign investors to reserve part of their output for the domestic market," he said.

Another risk is that biofuel use could increase carbon emissions by increasing

destruction of forests when displaced local farmers clear land. The Institute of

European Environmental Policy recently said carbon released from deforestation linked

to biofuels could exceed carbon savings by 35% in 2011 rising to 60% in 2018. Currently,

this indirect impact is not considered in European sustainability guidelines.

James Smith, professor of African and Development Studies at Edinburgh University,

said: "Private investment is running far ahead of our knowledge of the impacts of

biofuels, such as land dispossession. This action is eroding the UK's position of

enlightenment on development issues."

Unpublished research by the charity ActionAid, seen by the Guardian, confirms the

picture of scores of projects amassing millions of hectares on the east and west coasts of

Africa. "I suspect the estimates are actually quite conservative," said Smith.


0 4/3/2012


3/20

Norman Baker, the Liberal Democrat junior transport minister, said: "I consider the

sustainability of biofuels to be paramount. No biofuel will count towards our targets

unless it meets certain sustainability requirements. But we are pushing [Europe] to go

further, to reduce the risk of knock-on effects, including deforestation in new areas."

He added: "Only a tiny proportion less that 0.1% - of UK biofuel has come from

Africa."

As oil prices rise, said Jeremy Woods, a lecturer in bioenergy at Imperial College

London, biofuels could boom. "Once oil is over $70 a barrel, conventional and new

generation biofuels become cost competitive. When oil and biofuels are competitive, we

are into a different world."

Expansion of the biofuels industry has been fuelled by capital raised on the Alternative

Investment Market of the London Stock Exchange. In the Guardian survey Italy is the

next biggest player with seven companies, followed by Germany (six), France (six) and

the US (four). Brazil and China have been acquiring land in Africa for biofuels and food

but the investigation identified only a handful of established biofuels projects. The

database of biofuels projects in Africa was compiled with the help of the University of

California Berkeley's Africa Reporting Project.

Some projects provide local benefits through investment, employment and local use of

the produce, but many do not, says Lorenzo Cotula at the International Institute for

Environment and Development, who recently analysed 12 contracts from African land

deals. "Some of the contracts we analysed only contain vague and unenforceable

promises." Some have 100-year leases, at very low or free rent and priority access to

water, he added. "Extensive commercial plantations dislocate rural communities from

their land", said Cotula. "Instead, self-managed biofuels production can offer cheaper

energy and complementary sources of income".

The chief executive of Sun Biofuels, Richard Morgans said: "Our company produces

sustainable and ethical biofuels categorically yes. We would welcome higher

sustainability standards, but you do have to balance this with economic development. If

you are a local [in Tanzania or Mozambique] and need a job, you probably aren't

worried about whether the orangutans sleep at night. It's also insulting to say African

governments can't run their own affairs."

A community-based approach is embraced by a few investors. "Our farmers in

Mozambique are given seedlings to grow jatropha on their own land with the option to

sell the seeds back to us," says Chris Hunter, of UK-based Viridesco. "We help smaller

plantations that cater to the developing world markets, as opposed to big monocultures

that service the developed world's energy needs".


0 4/3/2012


4/20

Staff

Contributor

Ads by Google

New Business Opportunity

Run Your Own Energy Saving Business

Complete Start-Up Pack from $14k

www.Enigin.net/BusinessOpportunity

Coffee Making Machines

Italy's favourite coffee machines &

capsules in India. Know more now!

Fresh-Honest.com

Yeast for Fuel Ethanol

alcohol active dry yeast for both starch

and Saccharine bio energy

en.angelyeast.com/

Comments90 comments, displaying first

UK companies were the first into Africa in 2005, but this has not been without

problems. D1 Oils froze its export plans and started supplying locally in Malawi and

Zambia, following the failure in 2009 of its joint-venture with BP, which doubted

jatropha's market potential. Last year GEM Biofuels, operating in Madagascar,

suspended its LSE quotation for four months.

The revelation of the central role of UK companies in biofuels coincides with a report

from Oxfam forecasting that the price of staple foods will more than double in the next

20 years. The report identifies biofuels as a factor and demands that western

governments end biofuel policies that divert food to fuel for cars. "We are sleepwalking

towards an age of avoidable crisis," said Oxfam's chief executive, Barbara Stocking.

"One in seven people on the planet go hungry every day despite the fact that the world

is capable of feeding everyone. The food system must be overhauled."

Biofuels grown inAfrican countries

COUNTRYOF ORIGIN

NUMBER OFCOMPANIES

COUNTRIESWITH LANDCONCESSIONS

UK 11 Ghana, Guinea,Liberia,Madagascar,Malawi, Mali,Mozambique,Namibia,Senegal,Tanzania,Zambia

Italy 7 CongoBrazzaville,Ethiopia,Ghana, Guinea,Kenya,Senegal,

Germany 6 Ethiopia,Ghana,Madagascar,Mali, Kenya,

Tanzania,Zambia,

France 6 Benin, BurkinaFaso,Cameroon,Guinea, Mali,MozambiqueSenegal, Togo


0 4/3/2012


5/20

COUNTRYOF ORIGIN

NUMBER OFCOMPANIES


USA 4 Burkina Faso,Ethiopia, Mali,Mozambique,Kenya,Tanzania, Sierra

Leone, Togo,Uganda

Canada 4 DR CongoMalawi,Mozambique,Kenya, Zambia

Scandinaviancountries

4 Ghana,Tanzania

Belgium 3 Cameroon,Ethiopia,Tanzania

Switzerland 3 Malawi, Kenya,Sierra Leone

Netherlands 2 Tanzania

Cyprus 1 Ghana, IvoryCoast

UKCOMPANY

LANDCONCESSION


Crest Global

GreenEnergy

900000 Guinea, Mali,

Senegal

Gem Biofuels 452500 Madagascar

EquatorialBiofuels plc

80000 Liberia

KavangoBioenergyLtd

70000 Namibia

Jatrophaafrica

50000 Ghana

Cams Group 20000 Tanzania

Principleenergy

20000 Mozambique

Sun Biofuels 13000 Mozambique,Tanzania

D1 Oils 5000 Malawi, Zambia

Viridesco 175 Mozambique


0 4/3/2012


6/20

blairsnemesis

31 May 2011 9:18PM

Oh not again. British companies leading the way to rape other

countries of their land so they can make vast profits back home.

You can be certain the indigenous population will gain next to

nothing but the corporate executives and shareholders must be

creaming themselves with excitement at the prospects of

pocketing more money.

And more land taken away from food production which could

help lower food prices.

These companies disgust me at every level.

Clip | Link

Recommend (226)

Responses (0)

Report

ThinkOrDie

31 May 2011 9:20PM

Who's keeping tabs on corporate activity, governments? Don't

make me laugh.

We, hell, the world needs some kind of incorruptable watchdog...

It's not funny anymore.

Clip | Link

Recommend (97)

Responses (0)

Report

Comments on this page are now closed.

COUNTRYOF ORIGIN

NUMBER OFCOMPANIES


SustainableAgroenergy

n.a. Senegal

Source: dataresearch, notincludingunverifiedprojects

Remark:concessionsinclude allnegotiatedland, whetherit is onlyagreed,formallyleased or

already used


0 4/3/2012


7/20

slumpy

31 May 2011 9:24PM

Am I right in thinking we are converting land that should be

feeding people into land that would be producing the most

disgusting, polluting fuel "diesel" "Priorities must be put in

order" of usefulness to the people who matter. Us.

Clip | Link

Recommend (55)

Responses (0)

Report

ThinkOrDie

31 May 2011 9:26PM

Here's another question: who is selling this land to these

companies? Whoever it is is betraying their own people. Clip | Link

Recommend (90)

Responses (0)

Report

Shellshocked

31 May 2011 9:28PM

Jatropha is a disaster - probably the biggest mistake since the

groundnuts scheme of the 50s. Shell Oil have already pulled out

and other companies are going to lose their shirts.

Even with the best conditions the yields are simply not good

enough, the energy gain is always going to be very small. Even

hoped for employment for locals has not been good.

Now in India Jatropha is getting hit by a Phytopthora disease

that has wiped out whole plantations.

This is a perfect case of the political- industrial combine

triumphing over common sense. How did this ever happen?

How did it get taken up so quickly into EU law? Why were not

proper studies done before such major decisions were taken?

And how did the science fail us? I'll answer the last one, becausescientists are not free to falsify stupid ideas like this, instead they

get paid by industry to tell them what they want to hear.

Clip | Link

Recommend (73)

Responses (0)

Report

CarlosCortiglia

31 May 2011 9:32PM

The news does not surprise me. Much of the Amazon Rainforest

Recommend (76)

Responses (0)

Report


0 4/3/2012


8/20

is being destroyed every year to produce bio-fuel crops. So now

we see the consequences in Africa. With a world population

expected to reach 9 billion by 2025, this could become a massive

tragedy with starvation leading to military conflict and genocides

several times bigger than what happened in Rwanda as a

consequence of ethnic conflicts. Bio-fuels are not a green

solution. We cannot pretend to save the planet by condemningillions to death by starvation. Many oceanic areas have been

almost completely depleted of life and now we are facing the

prospect of erradicating entire inland habitats.

Clip | Linkdanpan

31 May 2011 10:01PM

Move along, nothing to see here. Business as usual, only the

naive and ignorant need pretend to be shocked or remotely

surprised and only 'conspiracy theorists' should see any ulterior

motives. Governments, big business and their 'scientist' shills

know best, and it's not for any of us to question them.

Clip | Link

Recommend (25)

Responses (0)

Report

LucyQ

31 May 2011 10:02PM

Hey I thought we claimed to quit doing the bad, bad things in the

developing world that are banned in ours. Clip | Link

Recommend (20)

Responses (0)

Report

sparclear

31 May 2011 10:10PM

Timely, informative article - thanks.

Everyone whose investments are tangled up in the biofuel

industry needs to read it. In the Guardian might it be possible to

get journalists writing about who the investors are.

Clip | Link

Recommend (52)

Responses (0)

Report

LaNausea

31 May 2011 10:29PM

What an absurd system we live in. So basically, we can drive to

Tesco and pay less per litre and yet when we arrive, the produce

will cost more per kilo?

Clip | Link

Recommend (36)

Responses (0)

Report

standardstrio

31 May 2011 10:31PM

Big corporation, sovereign wealth funds from asia and the

middle east are locking down land access with 100 year leases

ought for much less than the land is worth. Often they need to

make a show of commercialising the land to keep control of it (or

risk having the leases revoked by governments). But the real

motivation may be to retain control for the future. Land is going

Clip | Link

Recommend (21)Responses (0)

Report


0 4/3/2012


9/20

to be worth much more than it is now. And, yes, as others have

pointed out - jatropha is not even close to viable commercially

right now....when oil hits 200 dollars a barrel, however....

ikesolem

31 May 2011 10:32PM

If African farmers use biofuel production to eliminate their own

reliance on fossil fuels (for operating farm machinery, etc.) while

continuing to produce a variety of crops for local consumption,

iofuels are a good thing.

If African farmers are driven off their land and into poverty as

international speculators move in with an export crop-based

economic model, be it for soybeans, biofuel crops, cattle or

anything else, then it will be detrimental to the local

communities and their livelihoods.

Fossil fuel corporations hate biofuels for an entirely different

reason: even though biofuel production would only ever amount

to 5-10% of current fossil fuel production rates, that's enough to

undermine market control, deflate prices, and so on. Since "new"

fossil fuels are ridiculously expensive (tar sands, liquefied

natural gas, coal-sourced gasoline, shale gas and deepwater oil

are wildly expensive to produce), prices must be controlled and

kept high for these 'unconventional' fossil fuel sources to be

profitable. When hit pieces on biofuels are published over and

over again, while the Guardian ignores issues like the

Chad-Cameroon oil pipeline or the costs of oil development inAfrica, one has to wonder if this isn't the real agenda that the

paper is serving here.

Of course, the Guardian's expose of Carter-Ruck and Trafigura's

shady oil deals in the Ivory Coast, and the resulting super-

injunction put out by the British Government, doesn't exactly

argue in favor of this hypothesis. Nevertheless, the difference

etween export biofuels (commodity speculation) and local

iofuels (energy independence) should be highlighted.

In reality, biofuels - especially algal biofuels - can meet a wide

variety of local energy needs in the developing world - but the

export model for biofuels to the industrialized countries is highly

problematic.

Clip | Link

Recommend (23)

Responses (0)

Report

remoteviewer Recommend (12)


0 4/3/2012


10/20

31 May 2011 10:34PM

Bio corporates dislodge people from their land & we pick up the

tab in foreign aid?Clip | Link

Responses (0)

Report

swiss3

31 May 2011 10:40PM

Sun Biofuels: " If you are a local [in Tanzania or Mozambique]

and need a job, you probably aren't worried about whether the

orangutans sleep at night"

shows the level of brains these people hav- show me the

orangutans n Africa?!

these people r out t make profits, the local people they consider

as gorillas, mean little or nothing, theyd hand these people the

education & technology t themselves design Apple computers &

medical devices or somthing valuabl they could truly compete

ack with & pay off the 'friendly loans' the rich countrys offered

them if they gave a damn

a 'percentage' on some oily seeds & with rent free '100 year

leases' coughed up aint gonna help much, but it will likely

degrade the land n the push fr quick profits, & expose these

people t toxic agricultural chemicals n the water & on thr bodys

We also hav t consider that all this biofuel is gonna discourage

etter planning so people conserve energy, revamp urban &

rural planning, reduce commuting distances or use alternativs

like walking, cycling, subways, & trains, design cars smaller &with better efficiencys... etc

The rich lands show thr true 'bio-ethics' these days! Keep those

ig cars with thr fat garages, & instead of building nuclear plants

n ur own backyard t power them, dose the foreigners with ag

chems & buy all thr land up fr nothing t satisfy ur machines!

pathetic

On the other hand, the severe crash this disorganized world

system is carreening towards, may b the best thing. Thr is an

emergency strategy of diverse peoples organizing & reducing

waste, improving ethics, spreading education & equality, making

deals on the tough issues of population expansion & racism... etc

Thr is another strategy, of letting things collapse or go slowly, so

that people of the future hav more natural resources t work with

after they hav developed better technology!

Clip | Link

Recommend (36)

Responses (0)

Report


20 4/3/2012


11/20

Waterlizard

31 May 2011 10:41PM

Africa is still for sale... This state of affairs is a disgusting

shambles.

Someone, very quickly, needs to re-write the hideous EU biofuel

policy.

Clip | Link

Recommend (63)

Responses (0)

Report

davidsouthafrican

31 May 2011 10:41PM

African land already occupied by biodiversity is being converted

into biofuel farms,

large mammal numbers in Africa are plummetting.

This is another aspect of the anthropogenic mass extinction

underway

Clip | Link

Recommend (42)

Responses (0)

Report

ikesolem

31 May 2011 10:42PM

@CarlosC: "The news does not surprise me. Much of the Amazon

Rainforest is being destroyed every year to produce bio-fuelcrops."

This is a classic example of misinformation. The chief export

crops from the Amazon are soybeans and cattle, most of it going

directly to European, American and Japanese markets, with the

profits squirreled away to Wall Street and from there, on to

offshore banking accounts in the Caymans, Switzerland, etc.

The Brazilian biofuel crop is sugarcane, grown in the southern

grasslands region of Brazil. The sugarcane goes towards sugar

production and ethanol production, with the split dependent

mostly on global commodity prices for sugar and ethanol. It's all

grown on established farmland, not on newly cleared rainforest.

The U.S. fossil fuel industry is so concerned about ethanol

undercutting gasoline prices that they've gotten the U.S.

government to keep a massive tariff in place for decades,

Clip | Link

Recommend (9)

Responses (0)

Report


20 4/3/2012


12/20

locking the import into the U.S. Somehow, I doubt this tariff

was established due to the environmental concerns of the oil

companies.

Please note also that if environmental regulations were used to

an fossil fuel imports from tar sands projects and similarly

polluting fossil fuel sources, their would be a wild outcry from

the fossil fuel sector.

M atthewJB

31 May 2011 10:49PM

Africa is full of cash crops, it really doesn't matter if the cash

crop is food or fuel, the local people will still go hungry.

It makes absolutely no difference what is grown on these farms,

the only important things are who owns the farms and how

much the workers are being paid.

Clip | Link

Recommend (19)

Responses (0)

Report

salvaggio

31 May 2011 11:08PM

Does not surprise me at all. The epitome of Britishness.

Clip | Link

Recommend (15)

Responses (0)

Report

Winhill

31 May 2011 11:12PM

Biofuels are just a technology. All of the serious research

suggests that whether they are pro-poor or anti-poor depends on

the political and economic framework under which they are

grown, processed and used.

Biofuels grown in an exploitative fashion are anti-poor. That is

happening in some parts of Africa. Biofuels grown by local

people with fair contracts can be pro-poor - helping rural people

out of povery. That is also happening.

Africa is not currently using most of its food production

potential, mostly because of poverty. There does not have to be a

conflict between food and fuel. However there will be if you just

leave it to the market and don't regulate to ensure against it.

The others side of blaming technologies is failing to blame

politicians. The idea that technologies fatalisticly determine

economic and political outcomes is just another form of TINA

(there is no alternative) who is the first lady of the market

fundamentalists. It is rubbish: we can regulate if we want to. We

are not the passive playthings of technologies.

Clip | Link

Recommend (11)

Responses (0)

Report


20 4/3/2012


13/20

dorlomin

31 May 2011 11:12PM

davidsouthafrican

This is another aspect of the anthropogenic mass

extinction underway

The irony is that it is hitting our cradle, Africa, last. Humans

litzkrieged there way through the large fauna of Europe, Asia,

Oceana and the Americas with stone spears and there cats, dogs

and rats. The second wave began when the Columbine exchage

got underway with sail and gunpowder. Now its tractors,

chainsaws, fire and klashnikovs for bushmeat that are picking up

phase three.

The West African black rhino is thought to have gone extinctaround 2006 (still not officially listing it as such though, just in

case one or two are still around). A fate awaiting many animals

on the continent soon if something is not done.

Clip | Link

Recommend (20)

Responses (0)

Report

Jacksavage

31 May 2011 11:15PM

Well Greenpeace can hardly come out and condemn this, given

their stance on biofuels.

Or has this been conveniently forgotten now?

Clip | Link

Recommend (18)

Responses (0)

Report

Winhill

31 May 2011 11:19PM

@ ThinkOrDie "Here's another question: who is selling this land

to these companies? Whoever it is is betraying their own

people".

Starting to privatise the land in parts of Africa was a World Bank/ IMF conditionality under structural adjustment. It was dictated

y western economists.

If they didn't cut and privatise they didn't get the loans, to pay

off the banks, who had engaged in predatory sub-prime lending.

Sounds kinda familiar doesn't it.

Clip | Link

Recommend (26)

Responses (0)

Report

GerardArduaine

31 May 2011 11:23PM

I wonder if some of the worst impacts of biofuels could be

avoided by insisting they be consumed in the country where the

feedstock is grown.

As it stands, biofuels are an acute case of the inequities of

globalisation.

Clip | Link

Recommend (6)

Responses (0)

Report

Neverlander

31 May 2011 11:24PM

Maybe this explains why our foreign aid budget is being

protected.

Kick africans off their land for corporate profit but send aid

instead. Don't it make yer proud?

Clip | Link

Recommend (20)

Responses (0)

Report


20 4/3/2012


14/20

octopus8

31 May 2011 11:31PM

I want to be able to buy "Bio-Free" fuel. Like I can buy lead-free.

Clip | Link

Recommend (6)

Responses (0)

Report

dorlomin

31 May 2011 11:31PM

4 March, 2001

oh dearClip | Link

Recommend (3)

Responses (0)

Report

dorlomin

31 May 2011 11:33PM

Neverlander

Maybe this explains why our foreign aid budget is

being protected.

'Foreign aid' budgets tend to just be nice little earners for UK

companies pretending to do something humanitarian where the

dark skinned people live. UK consulting, engineering,

agricultural and the like firms getting UK government money for

a hopelessly expensive aid project in the developing world.

Clip | Link

Recommend (18)

Responses (0)Report

octopus8

31 May 2011 11:36PM

Jacksavage

Well Greenpeace can hardly come out and condemn

this, given their stance on biofuels.

Or has this been conveniently forgotten now?

Jack. No one I know has taken Greenpeace seriously for years.

And I speak as a greenie. The page you link to is 2001. Seriously

sharp greenies gave up bio by 1996 - when we stopped putting

Asda value cooking oil 50/50 with Shell in our tanks.

Clip | Link

Recommend (7)

Responses (0)

Report


20 4/3/2012


15/20

Bluebird8

31 May 2011 11:47PM

ThinkOrDie

Here's another question: who is selling this land to

these companies? Whoever it is is betraying their own

people.

Puppet dictators and juntas are selling this land......mostly

controlled by the States and or western European countries..or

increasingly China. Just look at all the corrupt leaders in these

countries over the years...all made millions while their

population paid in blood or starved...eg Batista, Papa Doc,

Pinochet, Somoza, not to mention Africa.

Pure exploitation

Clip | Link

Recommend (11)

Responses (0)

Report

Polymorph

31 May 2011 11:54PM

There will always be someone willing to stoop low in the pursuit

of profit. They can be stopped by not buying the product but that

requires a degree of education (in the sense of knowing and

learning about the downside of the product) and self control that

many consumers won't bother with if it is cheap. Spreading the

word about this exploitation may help but making better choices

and setting an example gets tougher when goods like bio-fuels

are mixed in with conventional fuels and the resulting cocktail

marketed as a more ethical choice or sold with the ingredients

tucked away in the small print.

Thanks for the article - at least information like this helps in

making informed purchases at some level. Using less fuel

altogether would seem to be the easiest way to slow down

development of these misguided crops.

Clip | Link

Recommend (8)

Responses (0)

Report

engineman

1 June 2011 12:13AM

cost effective, in other words it means they can make a profit,

these companies are not there to save the planet with 'greenerfuel' they are there to make a profit to line the shareholders

pockets. There is no end to this head long rush to destruction,

2010 saw the biggest emissions of man made Co2 since records

egan. We are doomed boy doomed

Clip | Link

Recommend (3)

Responses (0)

Report

bckagn

1 June 2011 12:14AM

"One in seven people on the planet go hungry every

day despite the fact that the world is capable of

feeding everyone. The food system must be

overhauled."

So if we overhaul the population to reduce it by one in seven

then everyone's happy? Seems like biofuels might do the job.

Win-win.

Clip | Link

Recommend (5)

Responses (0)

Report


20 4/3/2012


16/20

Mass contraception would have a much bigger effect on how

many hungry people there are than bio fuels, but that wouldn't

give the Grauniadistas anyone to rage against.

dorlomin

1 June 2011 12:29AM

They are going to Africa with its inherent instablity because

Cargil, Nestle and ADM got most of South America sown up

already.

Clip | Link

Recommend (6)

Responses (0)

Report

straighttalkingjack

1 June 2011 12:45AM

The sugarcane goes towards sugar production and

ethanol production, with the split dependent mostly

on global commodity prices for sugar and ethanol. It's

all grown on established farmland, not on newly

cleared rainforest.

@Ikesolom

Some very interesting comments but I think you underestimate

the damage that sugar cane production does in Brazil. A lot of

relatively unstable soils are rapidly depleted and it is necessary

to move to new areas. This is causing the destruction of the

Cerrado biome which contains great biodiversity. In fact, much

of this "grassland" you speak of is also cleared forest - more than

90% of the Atlantic Forest, for example, has already been

destroyed since Europenas arrived. As food prices rise and

informal settlement occurs more and more wihin forests and

forest margins, the tendency to clear for cultivation and

habitation increases. Much sugar cane land could also be used

for growing food crops but relentless soil degradation and

degradation of hydrolgical systems applies a relentless pressure.

Clip | Link

Recommend (9)

Responses (0)

Report

M onitor20 10

1 June 2011 12:46AM

Because they compete for land with crop plants,

biofuels have also been linked to record food prices

and rising hunger.

That is why the price of corn has doubled in the last 2-3 years!

Clip | Link

Recommend (5)

Responses (0)

Report


20 4/3/2012


17/20

Back then you could purchase a corn cob for 25-30p but today

you'll be luck to get it for 50-60p.

Likewise sugar has increased in price to 90p+ a Kilo for 40-55p

a few years ago!!!

Both are in direct competition for biofuels.

straighttalkingjack

1 June 2011 12:49AM

@IkeSolom

Another thing Id perhaps question is the complete opposition

that fossil fuel companies have towards biofuels. Biofuels are an

excellent way to keep the internal combustion engine viable.

They are treading a line - hence the idea of these controlled

percentages. In Brazil, for example, many cars run on pure

ethanol - thatd be a step too far Europe for example!

Clip | Link

Recommend (0)

Responses (0)

Report

M indymac

1 June 2011 12:52AM

Hasn't this been known for years?

Clip | Link

Recommend (5)

Responses (0)

Report

jockyscot

1 June 2011 1:09AM

I bet they get subsidies and tax breaks. Global corporate

capitalism is a marvel of the modern age. Clip | Link

Recommend (4)

Responses (0)

Report

goto

1 June 2011 2:40AM

A community-based approach is embraced by a few

investors. "Our farmers in Mozambique are given

seedlings to grow jatropha on their own land with the

option to sell the seeds back to us," says Chris

Hunter, of UK-based Viridesco. "We help smaller

plantations that cater to the developing world

markets, as opposed to big monocultures that service

the developed world's energy needs".

Is this spin? Does Viridesco sell the seeds to the monocultures?

Can G find out?

Clip | Link

Recommend (1)

Responses (0)

Report

M indYerBeak Recommend (4)


20 4/3/2012


18/20

1 June 2011 3:03AM

Mother Nature made one dradful mistake: she created greedy

people. Maybe it would be a good idea if she got rid of us and

started over again. It would teach the new humans a valuable

lesson.

Clip | Link

Responses (0)

Report

Zhubajie

1 June 2011 3:29AM

"Bio corporates dislodge people from their land & we pick up the

tab in foreign aid?"

Where do you think all those African immigrants come from?

Clip | Link

Recommend (6)

Responses (0)

Report

croyal

1 June 2011 3:33AM

This article shows the ignorance and idiocy of some biofuels

companies and their pretend ethics and sustainability

greenwash. Richard Morgans from Sun Biofuels has such a

limited knowledge of ecology and science it is almost funny, if it

wasnt so sad. I would love to see him find the Orang Utans in

Africa. If he means other primates such as gorillas and

chimpanzees, two of the most critically endangered species on

the planet, I doubt he would find any, sleeping or otherwise, they

are so rare due to forest encroachment and habitat destruction.

Pathetic education and knowledge for a CEO.

It is also not insulting to say that Africa cant run its own affairs,

if those affairs are heavily influenced by profit-making firms

offering them money for a quick, unsustainable and unethicalreturn. Parts of Africa are so poor that they simply cannot

exclude any type of offer for money, regardless of the

consequence...I have seen this first hand in Uganda, Rwanda,

Tanzania, Kenya, Madagascar and many other countries. Some

officials are, by and large, also not sufficiently educated to

understand the long-term consequences of habitat destruction,

much like biofuel company executives it seems.

I hope these companies fail massively and at the very least, some

of this land returns to food growth. As crazy as it sounds, it is still

less destructive to burn fossil fuels and push for a more

sustainable solution to our energy needs, rather than

marginalising and starving the poor to provide fuel for the rich.

Clip | Link

Recommend (19)

Responses (0)

Report

Zhubajie

1 June 2011 3:36AM

Recommend (10)

Responses (0)


20 4/3/2012


19/20

"Mother Nature made one dradful mistake: she created greedy

people."

Lots of earlier civilizations have destroyed themselves by

destroying their environments. We're not a bit smarter than

Mesopotamians in Late Antiquity or the Classic Mayans.

Clip | Link

Reportenvironmentalsanity

1 June 2011 4:02AM

This comment was removed by a moderator because it didn't

abide by our community standards. Replies may also be deleted.

For more detail see our FAQs.

svarga

1 June 2011 4:52AM

Just yesterday BBC post article on it site about food prices in

nearest 20 years. It'll grow double. One of the main reason why -

ecause governments are stimulate biofuel agriculture in the

world. So, don't be surprised one day.

Clip | Link

Recommend (3)

Responses (0)

Report

mayhope

1 June 2011 4:54AM

I wonder why more waste materials can't be used as biofuel?

Instead of the corn, the husk, instead of the cane, the leaf? Clip | Link

Recommend (1)

Responses (0)

Report

ironingboard

1 June 2011 5:01AM

So environmentalsanity, having screwed big time with biofuels,

and developed pretty sloping shoulders when it comes to

accepting responsibility, the green movement should, according

to you, now be targeting the really fragile ecosystems.

Clip | Link

Recommend (6)

Responses (0)

Report

swiss3

1 June 2011 5:33AM

som biofuel projects i can jump on board with... but not most

such as biofuel producing algae growing n human waste systems,

or other projects such as recycling of used cooking oil, that dont

displace agricultural, forest, ocean, or productiv wildlands

thr is serious money t b made perfecting the growth of oil

producing algae n urban wastewater too dangerous t grow

Clip | Link

Recommend (1)

Responses (0)

Report


20 4/3/2012


20/20

products fr human consumption, thr r 1000s of citys & millions

of towns that could use this t power a modest handful of buses &

such n each locale t reduce air toxicity n crowded areas, altho thr

r arguments t made that evn this source of biofuels could instead

used as soil amendments on paper crops fr instance

recycled cooking oil isnt easily used as a soil amendment, so it

may b justified t burn it as fuel, but this could only account fr a

modest fleet of vehicles, that could b especially useful again, n

crowded areas fr better air quality

cropland produced biofuel is nice t know the science &

technique, but its hard t advocate on any large scale beyond

research plots, not only does it reduce the amount of food,

medicine, & clothes we can grow, people must remember that

cropland isnt an entirely renewabl source of products, it takes

non-renewabl inputs t grow things, & very few farms hav a true

level of sustainability on any permanent scale

M elKelly

1 June 2011 6:37AM

Biofuel laws were introduced as a method of guaranteeing to

push up food prices.

Any land used to grow biofuels should be reclaimed by the

relevant government and food grown instead (but then that

won't suit Monsanto and all the other

GM crop growers who want to create a monoply on food.

Clip | Link

Recommend (2)

Responses (0)

Report

Comments on this page are now closed.

2012 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved.


Documents

Biofuels Boom in Africa as British Firms Lead Rush on Land for Plantations _ Environment _ the Guardian