Mar
2
Food VS Fuel
March 2, 2008 | | Leave a Comment
by Rachael
On 24 February 2008, a partially biofueled Virgin Atlantic Boeing 747, set off from London and landed safely on Amsterdam. It should have been some good news that ways to substitute diesels are seen and carbon emissions could be lowered. However, scientists and environmental groups are skeptical about the move. They expressed the concern that biofuels could do more harm than good. Mass scale of biofuel production from energy crops could destroy natural forests that actually store carbon, and lead to rising food prices as well as violate basic human rights’ access to food.
Biofuels were originally meant to be an interim solution to rising oil price due to energy shortage and soaring greenhouse gas emissions. Regan Suzuki of the U.N.’s Food and Agriculture Organization acknowledged that biofuels could secure energy supply for many countries, yet, countries converting millions of acres of forest to palm oil and sugarcane plantation for biofuels production introduced increasing competition for agricultural land. Not only that rise in corn prices are seen in the United States and Mexico because of this, but also deforestation in Asia like Indonesia and Malaysia and food shortages in developing countries. “After Oil, it’s food shortages“. Governments’ subsidies for biofuels eliminate the stock of crops available for eating, which made some Middle East countries even re-introduce food ration cards. Growing petroleum prices last year was another reason for increasing demand for biofuels. The food system and fuel system are so much interconnected.
Before we are hurraying for biofueled vehicles, let’s think more about how much loafs of bread we are taking away from a poor family in another corner of the world.
