Sign In
New User? Register
jatropha · Say No To Jatropha
? Already a member? Sign in to Yahoo!

Yahoo! Groups Tips

Did you know...
You can set the sort order of messages? Just click on the link in the date column. Your preferences will be remembered, so you don't have to do it again when you return.

Messages

  Messages Help
Advanced
Messages 581 - 610 of 893   Newest  |  < Newer  |  Older >  |  Oldest
Messages: Show Message Summaries   (Group by Topic) Sort by Date v  
#610 From: "Kanchi Kohli" <kanchikohli@...>
Date:: Thu May 1, 2008 5:00 pm
Subject:: FW: [forestrights] CULTIVATION OF BIOFUELS IN ORISSA
kanchikohli
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
 

 

 


From: forestrights@yahoogroups.com [mailto:forestrights@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Madhu Sarin
Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 9:16 PM
To: forestrights
Subject: [forestrights] CULTIVATION OF BIOFUELS IN ORISSA

 

 

 

Monday, April 28, 2008

Ministry of New and Renewable Energy

 

 

 

CULTIVATION OF BIOFUELS IN ORISSA


 

16:18 IST

 

RAJYA SABHA

Orissa Renewable Energy Development Agency (OREDA) have take several initiatives for cultivation of biofuels in the State. Jatropha and Pomgambia will be grown in the KBK and other districts of the state. They include enumeration of Oil Seed Bearing trees in all KBK districts to assess the available potential, plantation of saplings in certain districts and other promotional and awareness raising activities including organizing workshops, demonstration of bio diesel production units etc.

The State Government has announced policy guidelines for this in August 2007. Funds are available from the State plans as well as Government of India.

This information was given by the Minister of State for New and Renewable Energy, Shri Vilas Muttemwar in a written reply to a question by Shri B.J. Panda in the Rajya Sabha today .

KP/Hb


#609 From: "Pankaj Oudhia" <pankajoudhia@...>
Date:: Fri Apr 25, 2008 6:21 pm
Subject:: FW: Jatropha can be harmful, expert warns
pankajoudhia
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
 
Jatropha can be harmful, expert warns

By Conrad M. Carińo, Senior Desk Editor

A top biotechnologist in the country said the government should not
encourage marginalized farmers to plant jatropha on a massive scale
because that would put them at a disadvantage.

Dr. Saturnina Halos, chairman of the Department of
Agriculture-Biotechnology Advisory Team, told The Manila Times that
farmers would be at the receiving end if they plant jatropha because
the only big market for that crop is biodiesel.

Halos said jatropha is "toxic" to the soil, and may contain a
neurotoxin that can harm or kill humans.

"The farmers will be placed at a disadvantage, because the only big
market for jatropha is biodiesel. What if that market suddenly
disappears … the farmer would be left in a pitiful state," she added.

While jatropha planting is encouraged along lands where rice cannot be
planted, Halos said the biofuel crops that the government should
propagate should also have a market for food. Among these are coconut,
malunggay, cassava, sweet sorghum, and sugarcane.

She added that there is no need to devote so much land for biofuel
crops, as far as complying with the Biofuels Law is concerned.

Halos said her son, Ari Halos, a former professor at University of the
Philippines-Los Bańos, undertook a study in 2007 on the planting
requirements of the Philippines to comply with the Biofuels Law. The
study showed the country needs to devote only 60,000 hectares of lands
for planting bioethanol crops, particularly sweet sorghum.

Bioethanol refers to the plant additive for gasoline, while biodiesel
is for diesel.

Halos said her son's study showed that there may be no need to devote
new areas to plant biodiesel crops, because the Philippines already
has 324 million coconut trees, and 16 million more trees will be
planted through a program of the Philippine Coconut Authority.

While coconut is also a source of food additives such as cooking oil
and condiments, she agreed that the biodiesel market will provide
opportunities for poor coconut farmers to earn more, because they will
have an alternative market for their products.

Halos said the findings of her son's studies showed that biofuel
production for domestic demand will not have a negative impact on
farmland planted to food crops, because there is no need to devote
millions of hectares to plant biofuel crops.

"If we need to export biofuel stocks, then that might need the
planting of biofuel crops in more lands. What I have heard is
California is now looking at the Philippines for biofuel [stocks],"
she added.

The country has 10 to 11 million hectares of lands planted mostly to
food crops, with another two to four million hectares available for
planting new crops.

Other biofuel crops Halos strongly recommends are malunggay and sweet
sorghum, which can be planted in rice farms after two seasons of
planting rice.

Malunggay, like coconut, she revealed, can be planted even in areas
near the seashore, where traditional food crops cannot be cultivated.
Also, malunggay oil, like coconut oil, is now being used in the
manufacture of processed foods, cosmetics, and pharmaceuticals.

Another versatile biofuel crop is sweet sorghum. Halos said this crop
can be planted in rice fields after two croppings of rice, since sweet
sorghum needs less water to grow.

"Usually after two croppings of rice, there is little water left to
plant [rice]. So farmers can plant sweet sorghum [for the third
cropping], she added.

Fortunately, unlike other government agencies, the Agriculture
department is not encouraging the mass propagation of jatropha.

http://www.manilatimes.net/national/2008/apr/25/yehey/top_stories/20080425top5.h\
tml

#608 From: "Pankaj Oudhia" <pankajoudhia@...>
Date:: Thu Apr 24, 2008 6:49 am
Subject:: Re: FW: Meerut admn asks residents to destroy Jatropha plants
pankajoudhia
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
 
Dear Group Members,

     We must appreciate the step taken by Meerut Administration.
Biofuel at the cost of children's lives is not acceptable. In many
parts of India including in Chhattisgarh farmers are already uprooting
this poisonous plant. Now I feel that its time for mass movement to
destroy this toxic plant from everywhere like once many organisations
burnt Bt cotton in India.

Seeing the increasing cases of Jatropha poisoning I am sure
administarion of all parts of the world will take this firm decision.
Last week I met eight children in Chhattisgarh facing mental troubles
after consumption of Jatropha seeds. It was very painful experience.

regards

Pankaj Oudhia

--- In jatropha@..., "Pankaj Oudhia" <pankajoudhia@...>
wrote:
>
> Meerut admn asks residents to destroy Jatropha plants
>
>
> Meerut, April 22 The government may be promoting jatropha plantation
> to meet the fuel need of the country. But with 50 children falling
> sick in Meerut last week after eating jatropha seeds, the
> administration has issued a public notice asking people to destroy the
> plants.
>
> According to District Magistrate Kamini Chauhan, a large number of
> children reported to the District Hospital with similar symptoms last
> Friday. After investigations, the reason was found to be the jatropha
> seed, she says.
>
> A public notice issued by Chief Conservator of Forests, Meerut, Dr R P
> Bharti, says: “Some people have planted jatropha trees for economic
> gains, but it is the duty of the people to give priority to the human
> life over economic gains.”
>
> Jatropha seeds are poisonous. Its leaves look like those of grape
> plants, and the seeds taste sweet. Several people have died in the
> state in the past after consuming the seeds.
>
> Teams of Forest and Horticulture departments â€" the agencies designated
> by the government for jatropha promotion â€" are now scouting for
> jatropha trees and destroying them.
>
> The notice directs all planters to destroy the trees and asks teachers
> and parents to create awareness among the children about the
> ill-effects of consuming jatropha seeds. “If any untoward incident
> happens after the issuance of the public notice, jatropha growers can
> be penalised,” it adds.
>
> Officials in the Forest and Horticulture departments, however, are not
> sure under what law can they penalise the planters.
>
> “It’s not illegal to grow jatropha,” admits the Chief
Conservator of
> Forests, “but the notice was issued in the interest of the safety of
> children. There have been three incidents of jatropha poisoning in
> Meerut alone.”
>
> Deputy Director, Horticulture, Arjun Prasad Tiwari, says: “We are only
> trying to see that there are no such trees near schools and other
> vulnerable areas.”
>
> An official policy, on the other hand, encourages jatropha plantation.
>
> Not just landowners, self-help groups can also cultivate jatropha on
> land belonging to the village panchayat or the state government after
> entering into a revenue sharing arrangement.
>
> “The jatropha system creates a positive reciprocity between raw
> material, energy production and environment,” says a government
> publication on Jatropha Mission in UP. Targets are fixed for jatropha
> cultivation and the government is promoting what it calls P4 model â€"
> Public-Private-Panchayat Partnership â€" for jatropha cultivation.
>
> The only restriction is that it should not be planted on fertile
> agricultural land.
>
>
http://www.expressindia.com/latest-news/Meerut-admn-asks-residents-to-destroy-Ja\
tropha-plants/300467/
>

#607 From: "Pankaj Oudhia" <pankajoudhia@...>
Date:: Wed Apr 23, 2008 2:10 pm
Subject:: FW: Kasla poisons ten children
pankajoudhia
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
 
Kasla poisons
ten children
BY PATRICK PANGILINAN

Help for the families of the 10 children in Cansilayan, Murcia, who
were allegedly poisoned by the Jatropha Curcas or Kasla seeds they ate
Sunday has been ordered by Mayor Esteban Coscolluela of Murcia town,
Negros Occidental, yesterday.

Reports said the children, aged 3 to 14, were brought to the Corazon
Locsin Montelibano Memorial Regional Hospital after suffering fits of
vomiting Sunday afternoon.

The children had eaten the seeds of the kasla fruits they took from
the compound of a school in Cansilayan, the reports added.

Provincial Health Officer, Dr. Luisa Efren would not be reached for
comment up to press time last night.

Kasla is being planted as a source of biodiesel.*PP

http://www.visayandailystar.com/2008/April/22/topstory9.htm

#606 From: "Pankaj Oudhia" <pankajoudhia@...>
Date:: Wed Apr 23, 2008 2:08 pm
Subject:: FW: Meerut admn asks residents to destroy Jatropha plants
pankajoudhia
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
 
Meerut admn asks residents to destroy Jatropha plants


Meerut, April 22 The government may be promoting jatropha plantation
to meet the fuel need of the country. But with 50 children falling
sick in Meerut last week after eating jatropha seeds, the
administration has issued a public notice asking people to destroy the
plants.

According to District Magistrate Kamini Chauhan, a large number of
children reported to the District Hospital with similar symptoms last
Friday. After investigations, the reason was found to be the jatropha
seed, she says.

A public notice issued by Chief Conservator of Forests, Meerut, Dr R P
Bharti, says: “Some people have planted jatropha trees for economic
gains, but it is the duty of the people to give priority to the human
life over economic gains.”

Jatropha seeds are poisonous. Its leaves look like those of grape
plants, and the seeds taste sweet. Several people have died in the
state in the past after consuming the seeds.

Teams of Forest and Horticulture departments â€" the agencies designated
by the government for jatropha promotion â€" are now scouting for
jatropha trees and destroying them.

The notice directs all planters to destroy the trees and asks teachers
and parents to create awareness among the children about the
ill-effects of consuming jatropha seeds. “If any untoward incident
happens after the issuance of the public notice, jatropha growers can
be penalised,” it adds.

Officials in the Forest and Horticulture departments, however, are not
sure under what law can they penalise the planters.

“It’s not illegal to grow jatropha,” admits the Chief Conservator of
Forests, “but the notice was issued in the interest of the safety of
children. There have been three incidents of jatropha poisoning in
Meerut alone.”

Deputy Director, Horticulture, Arjun Prasad Tiwari, says: “We are only
trying to see that there are no such trees near schools and other
vulnerable areas.”

An official policy, on the other hand, encourages jatropha plantation.

Not just landowners, self-help groups can also cultivate jatropha on
land belonging to the village panchayat or the state government after
entering into a revenue sharing arrangement.

“The jatropha system creates a positive reciprocity between raw
material, energy production and environment,” says a government
publication on Jatropha Mission in UP. Targets are fixed for jatropha
cultivation and the government is promoting what it calls P4 model â€"
Public-Private-Panchayat Partnership â€" for jatropha cultivation.

The only restriction is that it should not be planted on fertile
agricultural land.

http://www.expressindia.com/latest-news/Meerut-admn-asks-residents-to-destroy-Ja\
tropha-plants/300467/

#605 From: "Pankaj Oudhia" <pankajoudhia@...>
Date:: Tue Apr 22, 2008 9:04 am
Subject:: Jatropha and Termite
pankajoudhia
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
 
Dear Group Members,

        Few days back I was in Rajim region of Indian state
Chhattisgarh where Jatropha was planted along with road. During this
visit I found hardly one or two plants. Natives informed that Termites
attacked this population and so-called insect resistant Jatropha
destroyed.

In almost all plantations Termite attack is visible. It is resulting
in poor performance and early death of plants. Jatropha in farmers
fields is also under attack. Farmers are using pesticides but they are
in deep worry. Every new input is increasing cost of cultivation. They
have already invested must for pest management.

Here is photo album of pest (including insect, diseases and weeds)
infestation in Jatropha in Indian state Chhattisgarh. I will add new
pictures time to time in this album as over 3000 pictures are in wait
list.

http://ecoport.org/ep?SearchType=pdb&Keyword=jatrophapestcg&Thumbnails=Only


regards

Pankaj Oudhia

'Say No To Jatropha' campaign

#604 From: "Pankaj Oudhia" <pankajoudhia@...>
Date:: Sun Apr 20, 2008 7:45 am
Subject:: FW: Doubts over the future of D1 Oils
pankajoudhia
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
 
Doubts over the future of D1 Oils
Small caps
Robert Lindsay

D1 Oils, the grower of Jatropha plants for biofuel, which is scrapping
its expensive British refinery, fell 2p to close at 35˝p as worries
over its future gathered weight.

Deep in its results last week, which were overshadowed by the terms of
a deeply discounted rights issue, it said that it was writing off some
of its Jatropha plantations because of poor management and the failure
of seeds to germinate. Goldman Sachs calculates that the company is
removing about 50,000 hectares from its books.

D1, founded by Karl Watkin, who left it recently, is also cutting its
yield per hectare prediction by about 20 per cent. Goldman still has a
"buy" rating, but D1's credibility, already low, can only be damaged
even further.

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/markets/article3776661.ece

#603 From: "Pankaj Oudhia" <pankajoudhia@...>
Date:: Sat Apr 19, 2008 11:14 am
Subject:: Hindi Article- Andho ki Ratanjot
pankajoudhia
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
 
Here is link to Hindi article written by famous writer Shri Prabhas
Joshi in Jansatta.

http://visfot.com/index.php?news=112

#602 From: "Pankaj Oudhia" <pankajoudhia@...>
Date:: Sat Apr 19, 2008 7:17 am
Subject:: If you are coming for Jatropha impact study
pankajoudhia
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
 
Dear Group Members,

      In few months dozens of researchers around the world visited my
state Chhattisgarh for studying impact of Jatropha. They stay is same
hotel sponsored by state authorities. Visit to fixed farmers and
Jatropha promoters and with gifts return to Delhi where they launch
report in star hotels. I know how much they expense in the name of
Jatropha study. After reaching to Delhi they contact me with sorry
that they were unable to meet during state visit and now want 'few
lines' against Jatropha to 'balance' the report. It is common trend
and without hesitation I am saying that they are wasting resources and
money of their countries and also wasting papers to present false report.

For real ground level report one must

1. Meet the farmers who have uprooted this plant from their fields.
2. See the impact of Jatropha on native flora.
3. See insect infested Jatropha fields waiting for remedial measures.
4. Interact with hundreds of children affected by Jatropha and get
proof of their mental status after consuming poisonous Jatropha.
5. Interact with common people of the state to get real picture. Every
one from rural to urban region will tell you how authorities fooled
them. and lots of more information on different aspects--

I was invited to attend one such launch of Jatropha report. They have
written that you have to come at your expense to Delhi. There will be
brain storming session. Total duration of program is 5 hours. In five
hours what they are going to do we know it. It is mere wastage of
resources.


regards
Pankaj Oudhia

#601 From: Felix Padel <felixorisa@...>
Date:: Thu Apr 17, 2008 12:34 pm
Subject:: At last a sanity reaction on biofuels....?
felixorisa
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
 
Note: forwarded message attached.



      
________________________________________________________________________________\
____
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now. 
http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
biofuelwatch

Messages In This Digest (15 Messages)

Messages

1.

NY Times front page: Fuel Choices, Food Crises and Finger-Pointing

Posted by: "Brian Tokar" briant@...   briantinvt

Wed Apr 16, 2008 6:39 am (PDT)

The New York Times
April 15, 2008
News Analysis
Fuel Choices, Food Crises and Finger-Pointing
By ANDREW MARTIN

The idea of turning farms into fuel plants seemed, for a time, like
one of the answers to high global oil prices and supply worries. That
strategy seemed to reach a high point last year when Congress
mandated a fivefold increase in the use of biofuels.

But now a reaction is building against policies in the United States
and Europe to promote ethanol and similar fuels, with political
leaders from poor countries contending that these fuels are driving
up food prices and starving poor people. Biofuels are fast becoming a
new flash point in global diplomacy, putting pressure on Western
politicians to reconsider their policies, even as they argue that
biofuels are only one factor in the seemingly inexorable rise in food
prices.

In some countries, the higher prices are leading to riots, political
instability and growing worries about feeding the poorest people.
Food riots contributed to the dismissal of Haiti’s prime minister
last week, and leaders in some other countries are nervously trying
to calm anxious consumers.

At a weekend conference in Washington, finance ministers and central
bankers of seven leading industrial nations called for urgent action
to deal with the price spikes, and several of them demanded a
reconsideration of biofuel policies adopted recently in the West.

Many specialists in food policy consider government mandates for
biofuels to be ill advised, agreeing that the diversion of crops like
corn into fuel production has contributed to the higher prices. But
other factors have played big roles, including droughts that have
limited output and rapid global economic growth that has created
higher demand for food.

That growth, much faster over the last four years than the historical
norm, is lifting millions of people out of destitution and giving
them access to better diets. But farmers are having trouble keeping
up with the surge in demand.

While there is agreement that the growth of biofuels has contributed
to higher food prices, the amount is disputed.

Work by the International Food Policy Research Institute in
Washington suggests that biofuel production accounts for a quarter to
a third of the recent increase in global commodity prices. The Food
and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations predicted late
last year that biofuel production, assuming that current mandates
continue, would increase food costs by 10 to 15 percent.

Ethanol supporters maintain that any increase caused by biofuels is
relatively small and that energy costs and soaring demand for meat in
developing countries have had a greater impact. “There’s no question
that they are a factor, but they are really a smaller factor than
other things that are driving up prices,” said Ron Litterer, an Iowa
farmer who is president of the National Corn Growers Association.

He said biofuels were an “easy culprit to blame” because their
popularity had grown so rapidly in the last two or three years.

Senator Charles E. Grassley, Republican of Iowa, called the recent
criticism of ethanol by foreign officials “a big joke.” He questioned
why they were not also blaming a drought in Australia that reduced
the wheat crop and the growing demand for meat in China and India.

“You make ethanol out of corn,” he said. “I bet if I set a bushel of
corn in front of any of those delegates, not one of them would eat it.”

The senator’s comments reflect a political reality in Washington that
despite the criticism from abroad, support for ethanol remains solid.

Representative Jim McGovern, Democrat of Massachusetts, said he had
come to realize that Congress made a mistake in backing biofuels, not
anticipating the impact on food costs. He said Congress needed to
reconsider its policy, though he acknowledged that would be difficult.

“If there was a secret vote, there is a pretty large number of people
who would like to reassess what we are doing,” he said.

According to the World Bank, global food prices have increased by 83
percent in the last three years. Rice, a staple food for nearly half
the world’s population, has been a particular focus of concern in
recent weeks, with spiraling prices prompting several countries to
impose drastic limits on exports as they try to protect domestic
consumers.

While grocery prices in the United States increased about 5 percent
over all in the last year, some essential items like eggs and milk
have jumped far more. The federal government is expected to release
new data on domestic food prices Wednesday, with notable increases
expected.

On Monday, President Bush ordered that $200 million in emergency food
aid be made available to “meet unanticipated food aid needs in Africa
and elsewhere,” a White House statement said.

His spokeswoman, Dana M. Perino, said the president had urged
officials to look for additional ways to help poor nations combat
food insecurity and to come up with a long-term plan “that helps take
care of the world’s poor and hungry.”

Skeptics have long questioned the value of diverting food crops for
fuel, and the grocery and live- stock industries vehemently opposed
an energy bill last fall, arguing it was driving up costs.

A fifth of the nation’s corn crop is now used to brew ethanol for
motor fuel, and as farmers have planted more corn, they have cut
acreage of other crops, particularly soybeans. That, in turn, has
contributed to a global shortfall of cooking oil.

Spreading global dissatisfaction in recent months has intensified the
food-versus-fuel debate. Last Friday, a European environment advisory
panel urged the European Union to suspend its goal of having 10
percent of transportation fuel made from biofuels by 2020. Europe’s
well-meaning rush to biofuels, the scientists concluded, had created
a variety of harmful ripple effects, including deforestation in
Southeast Asia and higher prices for grain.

Even if biofuels are not the primary reason for the increase in food
costs, some experts say it is one area where a reversal of government
policy could help take pressure off food prices.

C. Ford Runge, an economist at the University of Minnesota, said it
is “extremely difficult to disentangle” the effect of biofuels on
food costs. Nevertheless, he said there was little that could be done
to mitigate the effect of droughts and the growing appetite for
protein in developing countries.

“Ethanol is the one thing we can do something about,” he said. “It’s
about the only lever we have to pull, but none of the politicians
have the courage to pull the lever.”

But August Schumacher, a former under secretary of agriculture who is
a consultant for the Kellogg Foundation, said the criticism of
biofuels might be misdirected. Development agencies like the World
Bank and many governments did little to support agricultural
development in the last two decades, he said.

He noted that many of the upheavals over food prices abroad have
concerned rice and wheat, neither of which is used as a biofuel. For
both those crops, global demand has soared at the same time that
droughts suppressed the output from farms.

Elisabeth Rosenthal and Steven R. Weisman contributed reporting.

2.

Bush officials defend ethanol; Jenkins, Monbiot on biofuel absurdity

Posted by: "Jim Roland" quailrecords@...   jimroland99

Wed Apr 16, 2008 6:39 am (PDT)


1. http://www.planetark.com/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/47992/story.htm


Bush Officials Defend Ethanol As Food Prices Rise

Mail this story to a friend | Printer friendly version

US: April 16, 2008

WASHINGTON – Senior Bush Administration officials reiterated their defence of corn-based ethanol fuel on Tuesday, saying it was one factor in rising food prices but that high energy costs were the main culprit.

Ethanol makers will consume about one-quarter of the 13.1-billion-bushel US corn crop this year, according to the Agriculture Department, a forecast that is increasingly alarming world governments and food aid workers.
"Certainly, that is a factor as we are seeing the rising food costs out there," US Agriculture Secretary Ed Schafer told CNBC. "It's not the factor, however. Energy is the big issue as we look at those food prices," he added.
Consumer food prices normally rise by about 2.5 percent annually, but they increased by 4 percent in 2007, the biggest increase in 17 years. And forecasts for 2008 are pointing to a another rise of 3 percent to 4 percent, USDA said in February.
A key goal of the Bush administration has been to boost supplies of renewable fuels to reduce the country's dependence on foreign energy.
But corn prices are rocketing to record highs, which will raise prices for a variety of products as corn is widely used as feed for livestock. Corn for delivery in May rose 15-1/4 cents to $6.07 a bushel at the Chicago Board of Trade Tuesday.
Asked about the food crisis and how it related to biofuels, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said the two were related but there were a host of other issues involved, such as high transportation costs of food.
"We have an energy and a food problem. There are some relationships between them," Rice told the House of Representatives Armed Services Committee.
"We also think a significant part of the food problem relates not from biofuels but from simply the costs of energy in terms of fertilizer and in terms of transportation costs for food," she added.
Food prices have taken on even more importance as oil prices have risen. US crude futures rose sharply to a record high near $114 a barrel on Tuesday at the New York Mercantile Exchange.
Schafer also was asked if he favours releasing more land for farming. About 34.7 million acres are enrolled in the US Conservation Reserve Program. The reserve, the largest US land retirement program, pays landowners an annual rent in exchange for idling environmentally sensitive land.
Schafer said 1 million acres were coming out of program this year and 4.5 million next year, but USDA is not sure if the land is going to be re-enrolled.
"The reality is, if you planted all of that into corn, you might affect the price maybe 20 cents," said Schafer.
The increased use of grains to produce biofuels along with growing global demand for food has lead to grain shortages, rising prices, bread lines, and food riots around the globe.
(Editing by Russell Blinch and Walter Bagley)

Story by Christopher Doering

REUTERS NEWS SERVICE


2. http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2008/04/15/the-pleasures-of-the-flesh/

The Pleasures of the Flesh
Posted April 15, 2008

If you care about hunger, eat less meat.

By George Monbiot. Published in the Guardian 15th April 2008
Never mind the economic crisis. Focus for a moment on a more urgent threat: the great food recession which is sweeping the world faster than the credit crunch.
You have probably seen the figures by now: the price of rice has risen by three-quarters in the past year, that of wheat by 130%(1). There are food crises in 37 countries. One hundred million people, according to the World Bank, could be pushed into deeper poverty by the high prices(2). But I bet you have missed the most telling statistic. At 2.1bn tonnes, last year’s global grain harvest broke all records(3). It beat the previous year’s by almost 5%. The crisis, in other words, has begun before world food supplies are hit by climate change. If hunger can strike now, what will happen if harvests decline?
There is plenty of food. It is just not reaching human stomachs. Of the 2.13bn tonnes likely to be consumed this year, only 1.01bn, according to the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO), will feed people(4).
I am sorely tempted to write another column about biofuels. From this morning all sellers of transport fuel in the United Kingdom will be obliged to mix it with ethanol or biodiesel made from crops. The World Bank points out that “the grain required to fill the tank of a sports utility vehicle with ethanol … could feed one person for a year”(5). Last year global stockpiles of cereals declined by around 53m tonnes(6); this gives you a rough idea of the size of the hunger gap. The production of biofuels this year will consume almost 100m tonnes(7), which suggests that they are directly responsible for the current crisis. In the Guardian yesterday the transport secretary Ruth Kelly promised that “if we need to adjust policy in the light of new evidence, we will.”(8) What new evidence does she require? In the midst of a global humanitarian crisis, we have just become legally obliged to use food as fuel. It is a crime against humanity in which every driver in this country has been forced to participate.
But I have been saying this for four years and I am boring myself. Of course we must demand that our governments scrap the rules which turn grain into the fastest food of all. But there is a bigger reason for global hunger, which is attracting less attention only because it has been there for longer. While 100m tonnes of food will be diverted this year to feed cars, 760m tonnes will be snatched from the mouths of humans to feed animals(9). This could cover the global food deficit 14 times. If you care about hunger, eat less meat.
While meat consumption is booming in Asia and Latin America, in the United Kingdom it has scarcely changed since the government started gathering data in 1974. At just over 1kg per person per week(10), it’s still about 40% above the global average(11), though less than half the amount consumed in the United States(12). We eat less beef and more chicken than we did 30 years ago, which means a smaller total impact. Beef cattle eat about 8kg of grain or meal for every kilogramme of flesh they produce; a kilogramme of chicken needs just 2kg of feed. Even so, our consumption rate is plainly unsustainable.
In his magazine The Land, Simon Fairlie has updated the figures produced 30 years ago in Kenneth Mellanby’s book Can Britain Feed Itself? Fairlie found that a vegan diet grown by means of conventional agriculture would require only 3m hectares of arable land (around half the current total)(13). Even if we reduced our consumption of meat by half, a mixed farming system would need 4.4m hectares of arable fields and 6.4 million hectares of pasture. A vegan Britain could make a massive contribution to global food stocks.
But I cannot advocate a diet I am incapable of following. I tried it for about 18 months, lost two stone, went as white as bone and felt that I was losing my mind. I know a few healthy-looking vegans and I admire them immensely. But after almost every talk I give, I am pestered by swarms of vegans demanding that I adopt their lifestyle. I cannot help noticing that in most cases their skin has turned a fascinating pearl grey.
What level of meat-eating would be sustainable? One approach is to work out how great a cut would be needed to accommodate the growth in human numbers. The UN expects the population to rise to 9bn by 2050. These extra people will require another 325m tonnes of grain(14). Let us assume, perhaps generously, that politicians like Ms Kelly are able to “adjust policy in the light of new evidence” and stop turning food into fuel. Let us pretend that improvements in plant breeding can keep pace with the deficits caused by climate change. We would need to find an extra 225m tonnes of grain. This leaves 531m tonnes for livestock production, which suggests a sustainable consumption level for meat and milk some 30% below the current world rate. This means 420g of meat per person per week, or about 40% of the UK’s average consumption.
This estimate is complicated by several factors. If we eat less meat we must eat more plant protein, which means taking more land away from animals. On the other hand, some livestock is raised on pasture, so it doesn’t contribute to the grain deficit. Simon Fairlie estimates that if animals were kept only on land that’s unsuitable for arable farming, and given scraps and waste from food processing, the world could produce between a third and two thirds of its current milk and meat supply(15). But this system then runs into a different problem. The FAO calculates that animal keeping is responsible for 18% of greenhouse gas emissions. The environmental impacts are especially grave in places where livestock graze freely(16). The only reasonable answer to the question of how much meat we should eat is as little as possible. Let’s reserve it - as most societies have done until recently - for special occasions.
For both environmental and humanitarian reasons, beef is out. Pigs and chickens feed more efficiently, but unless they are free range you encounter another ethical issue: the monstrous conditions in which they are kept. I would like to encourage people to start eating tilapia instead of meat. It’s a freshwater fish which can be raised entirely on vegetable matter and has the best conversion efficiency - about 1.6kg of feed for 1kg of meat - of any farmed animal(17). Until meat can be grown in flasks, this is about as close as we are likely to come to sustainable flesh-eating.
Re-reading this article, I see that there is something surreal about it. While half the world wonders whether it will eat at all, I am pondering which of our endless choices we should take. Here the price of food barely registers. Our shops are better stocked than ever before. We perceive the global food crisis dimly, if at all. It is hard to understand how two such different food economies could occupy the same planet, until you realise that they feed off each other.
www.monbiot.com
References:
1. Eg http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/7284196.stm
2. World Bank, 14th April 2008. Food Price Crisis Imperils 100 Million in Poor Countries, Zoellick Says. Press release. http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/NEWS/0,,contentMDK:21729143~menuPK:51062075~pagePK:34370~piPK:34424~theSitePK:4607,00.html
3. Food and Agriculture Organisation, April 2008. Crop Prospects and Food Situation.http://www.fao.org/docrep/010/ai465e/ai465e01.htm
4. ibid.
5. World Bank, 2008. Biofuels: The Promise and the Risks. http://econ.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/EXTDEC/EXTRESEARCH/EXTWDRS/EXTWDR2008/0,,contentMDK:21501336~pagePK:64167689~piPK:64167673~theSitePK:2795143,00.html
6. Gerrit Buntrock, 6th December 2007. Cheap no more. The Economist.
7. Food and Agriculture Organisation, April 2008, ibid.
8. Ruth Kelly, 14th April 2008. Biofuels: a blueprint for the future? The Guardian.
9. Food and Agriculture Organisation, April 2008, ibid.
10. The British government gives a total meat purchase figure of 1042g/person/week for 2006.http://statistics.defra.gov.uk/esg/publications/efs/datasets/UKHHcons.xls
11. There’s a discussion of global average figures here: http://envirostats.info/2007/09/18/0406/
12. See Food and Agriculture Organisation, 2006. Livestock’s Long Shadow. Figure 1.4, p9.ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/010/a0701e/a0701e.pdf
13. Simon Fairlie, Winter 2007-8. Can Britain Feed Itself? The Land.
14. Based on the current population of 6.8bn consuming 1006mt of grain.
15. Simon Fairlie, forthcoming. Default livestock farming. The Land, Summer 2008.
16. Food and Agriculture Organisation, 2006. Livestock’s Long Shadow.ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/010/a0701e/a0701e.pdf
17. The FAO (ibid) gives 1.6-1.8. On April 12th, I spoke to Francis Murray of the Institute of Aquaculture, University of Stirling, who suggested 1.5.


3. http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/apr/16/biofuels.alternativeenergy


The cost of green tinkering is in famine and starvation
Biofuels threaten food supplies, rainforest and climate - yet our leaders push them in the name of the environment

Simon Jenkins
The Guardian,
Wednesday April 16 2008
Article history

About this articleClose
This article appeared in the Guardian on Wednesday April 16 2008 on p31 of the Comment & debate section. It was last updated at 00:09 on April 16 2008.
Farewell the age of reason, welcome the idiocracy. Only George Orwell could have invented - and named - the government's Renewable Transport Fuel Obligation (RTFO) that came into operation yesterday. It is the latest in a long line of measures intended to ease the conscience of the rich while keeping the poor miserable, in this case spectacularly so.
The consequences of the RTFO have been much trumpeted on these pages. It says enough that one car tank of bio petrol needs as much grain as it takes to feed an African for a year, or that a reported one-third of American grain production is now subsidised for conversion into biofuel. Jeremy Paxman pleaded the cause of this latest green wheeze on Monday's Newsnight, while the United Nations food expert, Jean Ziegler, screamed for it to stop: "Children are dying ... It is a crime."
The transport secretary, Ruth Kelly, said this week: "The government has consistently stressed that biofuels are only worth supporting if they deliver genuine environmental benefits." Yet she must know that, at present, the opposite is the case. Kelly pleaded that rescinding her policy might impede investment and "weaken our influence over the direction of EU policy". She did not mention biofuels' threat to rainforests, food self-sufficiency and global warming generally, through needing costly fertiliser and road transport. Nor did she mention the role in her decision of such lobbies as the British Association for Biofuels and Oils, and the National Farmers' Union.
The RTFO is the latest in a series of policies, proselytised by the green movement and then commandeered by commercial lobbies, which fit a pattern of irrationality worthy of Moral Re-Armament. Until recently, most greenery has seemed no more than a feelgood parlour game. Now it is getting serious.
I have tried to follow the global warming debate, and will admit that it has changed my mind on occasions. I was once a sceptic on nuclear power and genetically modified foods. Security made the former expensive, and ignorance made the latter suspect, vulnerable to such greed-motivated cul-de-sacs as the "terminator gene" (increasing output but for just one harvest). I could also see the virtue of harnessing wind and waves, and seeking new ways of using the sun's rays, either directly or through plant photosynthesis.
I am wiser now. As the major premise of the debate has shifted to global warming, so has the balance of argument. Wherever one stands on the spectrum of climate complacency versus alarm, burning carbon should be discouraged. But as public money starts to flow, so financial interest pollutes debate.
The British government has been persuaded by the wind turbine manufacturers to commit a third of its annual renewables subsidy to this uniquely inefficient energy source, advertising over hill and dale the cabinet's horror of making a decision on nuclear power. When this was put to Tony Blair by a Commons committee early in his second parliament, he replied jokily: "Would you want a nuclear plant in your constituency?" This appeared to be the sum total of his thinking on the topic.
Ten years after Blair came to office, the government still lacks the courage to make a decision, scared of what the anti-nuclear lobby might say. Such Christian Science greenery implies that the world would be better dead than with one split atom on its surface. Nuclear power may be expensive but as the former chief scientist, Sir David King, wrote recently, "the dangers of climate change are far worse".
The same applies to genetically modified foods. It is clear that modification, which is as old as botany, has side-effects. But increased food productivity is so patently a good thing that to ban GM from European imports, and thus from Africa, is beyond perverse. Increased Indian and Chinese consumption is sucking the world dry of grain at just the time when the GM ban is denying the developing world the swiftest path to higher productivity - and at a time when supply is curbed by biofuel substitution.
These various green policies have established a lethal pincer movement on world food production. As the Oxford economist Paul Collier points out in his book The Bottom Billion, Africa has been subjected by European governments to one form of "befuddled romanticism" after another, from campaigns against GM foods and low-wage produce to "save the peasant" farm reform. Africa, says Collier, has less commercial agriculture than it did at the end of the age of empire, half a century ago.
While antagonism to science merely impedes progress, antagonism to economics is regressive. American subsidies to ethanol fuel are not just causing "tortilla riots" but costing American taxpayers a staggering $5.5bn a year. Biofuel tankers are circling the globe, burning gasoline and chasing subsidies. They have joined carbon emissions certificates among the world's greatest trading scams.
If I have changed my mind, I am not sure the same applies to many greens. I have rarely encountered so much fanaticism and blind faith. Did those demanding fuel subsidies not realise that palm oil would wipe out rainforests and that ethanol from corn would use as much carbon as it saved? Did those pleading for wind farms really think they could ever substitute for nuclear power; or those wanting eco-towns not realise they would just add to car emissions? Did they not understand that, once the tap of public money is turned on, lobbyists will ensure it is never turned off - however harmful?
If all these fancy subsidies and market manipulations were withdrawn tomorrow and government action confined to energy-saving regulation, I am convinced the world would be a cheaper and a safer place, and the poor would not be threatened with starvation.
Just now, for reasons not all of which are "green", commodity prices are soaring. Leave them. Send food parcels to the starving, but let demand evoke supply and stop curbing trade. The marketplace is never perfect, but in this matter it could not be worse than government action. Playing these games has so far made a few people very rich at the cost of the taxpayer. Now the cost is in famine and starvation. This is no longer a game.
simon.jenkins@guardian.co.uk
__________________________________________________________
Amazing prizes every hour with Live Search Big Snap
http://www.bigsnapsearch.com
3.

Spiegal : Pressure Grows on EU to Abandon Biofuels + London protests

Posted by: "Andrew Boswell" andrewboswell@...   a_boswell_2004

Wed Apr 16, 2008 8:06 am (PDT)



http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518,547609,00.html

HARVESTING TROUBLE

Pressure Grows on EU to Abandon Biofuels

By Charles Hawley

With food prices skyrocketing and faith in biofuels plummeting, many are
demanding that the European Union back away from its commitment to eco-fuel.
Even the EU's own scientists are skeptical.

<http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518,grossbild-1152063-547609,
00.html>
<http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518,grossbild-1152063-547609,
00.html> Zoom
<http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518,grossbild-1152063-547609,
00.html>

Getty Images

Protesters on Tuesday rally against the UK's new biofuel requirements.

The timing can, at best, be described as awkward. On Tuesday, the United
Kingdom's new biofuel regulations went into effect, requiring that 2.5
percent of fuel sold at pumps in the UK be made up of fuel made from grains
and grass. By 2010, the mixture will be boosted to 5 percent -- all in an
effort to drastically reduce the amount of carbon dioxide that gets pumped
into the atmosphere.

But the regulation comes during a week of mounting critique against
biofuels. With unrest
<http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,547198,00.html> around
the world growing (more...) due to rising food prices, many are beginning to
point their fingers at ethanol and biodiesel as important culprits. Even as
the new UK regulations enact ambitious European Union goals aimed at
reducing greenhouse gas emissions, the EU itself is facing increasing
pressure to abandon its goal of seeing all fuel sold at pumps in Europe
contain 10 percent biofuels by 2020.

First generation biofuels "don't hold as much potential environmental
benefits as people thought when they embarked on these policies," Stefan
Tangermann, Director of the Trade and Agricultural Directorate for the
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), told SPIEGEL
ONLINE. "We must come to the conclusion that maybe it is time to revisit our
commitment to biofuels."

Tangermann's is just one in a chorus of voices urging the EU to reconsider.
The development charity Oxfam on Tuesday blasted the UK regulation, saying
that green fuels have the potential to do much more harm than good. The UN's
Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) argues in a paper released on
Monday that biofuels negatively affect those in poorer countries. The paper
argues that the growing biofuel industry competes directly with food crops
for farmland, water and investment money. Food prices increase as a result
and biofuels "put at risk access to food by the poorest sectors," the paper
says.

And even the European Union's own scientific advisory body has gotten into
the act. "I see absolutely no reason to use a lot of energy, money and large
swaths of farmland" to produce biofuels, Professor Helmut Haberl, a member
of the European Environment Agency's Scientific Committee, told SPIEGEL
ONLINE. "The EU should scrap the 10 percent mixture rules."

His group includes 20 leading climate scientists from EU member states and
plays a key advisory role for EU policy. Haberl said that the issue of
biofuels has played an increasingly dominant role in the group's regular
meetings -- a focus that last Friday resulted in an extraordinary plea for
the European Union to abandon its 10 percent target. Calling the target
"overambitious" and an "experiment," the paper argued that the side effects
of biofuels are too harmful to ignore.

'A Crime Against Humanity'

The EU's immediate reaction to this week's critique has been one of
defiance. "There is no question for now of suspending the target fixed for
biofuels," Barbara Helfferich, a spokeswoman for EU Environmental
Commissioner Stavros Dimas, told AFP on Monday.

But with the world's attention focusing on skyrocketing prices for food, it
is doubtful that the issue will go away any time soon. The World Bank last
week said that food prices have spiked 83 percent in the last three years
and other international organizations have also jumped into the fray -- with
UN Special Rapporteur for the Right to Food Jean Ziegler calling biofuels
production "a crime against humanity" on German radio on Monday.
Unaffordable food has recently led to rioting in Haiti, Cameroon and
elsewhere and is fuelling a growing government crisis in the Philippines.

Even were one to set aside rising food prices, skepticism of
first-generation biofuels -- made from crops planted specifically for the
purpose rather than, as with second-generation
<http://www.spiegel.de/international/business/0,1518,547312,00.html>
biofuels (more...), processing agricultural by-products and other non-edible
biomass -- is rampant. Scientists point to fertilizers used to grow biofuel
crops as releasing more greenhouse gases than the fuel itself would save.
Additionally, as the industry grows, rainforests are being cut down to make
way for crops and peat bogs are being drained -- both valuable as "carbon
sinks" that absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.

Plus, as Haberl points out, the energy yield relative to the effort invested
is not particularly impressive. "We could save much more energy if we just
burned agricultural residue for heating," he says. "That would be much more
efficient and you wouldn't be competing with food production."

Germany, so far, is the only EU country to have partially backed
<http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,545419,00.html> away
from its commitment (more...) to biofuels -- but, as Haberl says, "for the
wrong reasons." Having determined that far too many automobiles would be
unable to process the eco-fuel, the Environment Ministry earlier this month
opted not to up the biofuels mixture from the current 5 percent to 10
percent as had been planned.

Despite comments to the contrary, Brussels may be leaning towards a
re-evaluation as well. The idea of introducing a field certification system
-- which would greenlight only those biofuel crops grown ecologically on
land not recently won through rain forest destruction -- is gaining
credence.

"It looks a bit like people are beginning to take (criticism of biofuels)
into account," Tangermann said. "The EU is beginning to be concerned about
the sustainability and climate change part of it. And that is something we
welcome."

4.

New report from International Assessment of Agricultural Science and

Posted by: "Andrew Boswell" andrewboswell@...   a_boswell_2004

Wed Apr 16, 2008 8:10 am (PDT)

Telegraph coverage of biofuels aspects at bottom.

International Assessment of Agricultural Science and Technology for
Development

Press Materials

Press Releases: 15 April, 2008

<http://www.agassessment.org/docs/Global_Press_Release_final.doc> GLOBAL:
Agriculture- The Need for Change
<http://www.agassessment.org/docs/CWANA_press_release_final.doc> CWANA:
Water Shortages Threaten Farming from Kazakhstan to Morocco
<http://www.agassessment.org/docs/ESAP_press_release_Final.doc> ESAP: Major
Report Puts Development at Heart of Asia-Pacific Security
<http://www.agassessment.org/docs/NAE_press_release_final.doc> NAE:
"Business as Usual is Not an Option"
<http://www.agassessment.org/docs/SSA_press_release_Final.doc> SSA: African
Farming Fails to Reach Potential

Multimedia

<http://clients.mediaondemand.net/IAASTD/> Global Press Launch: Video
<http://www.agassessment.org/docs/IAASTD_Pres.pdf> Slide Presentation

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B-0B4Z-7A4s> IAASTD Video: English
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FyPrx4Vy9q0> IAASTD Video: Espańol

<http://www.agassessment.org/docs/IAASTD_leaflet_final.pdf> IAASTD Leaflet
Agriculture Fact <http://www.greenfacts.org/en/agriculture-iaastd/> Sheet

<http://www.agassessment.org/docs/IAASTDAchimSteinerSpeechFinal.m4a> Hear
the Plenary Opening Remarks by UNEP's Achim Steiner (mp4: 20.7 MB)
(Download Quicktime player)
<http://www.apple.com/quicktime/download/>

<http://www.agassessment.org/docs/IFOAM_press_release_final.doc> IFOAM
Press Release: April 15
<http://www.agassessment.org/docs/IFOAM_press_release_final.doc>

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q84gqY_SROw> Video: A Call to Action
<mailto:peter@satellitemc.com> (request TV-ready version)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?xml=/earth/2008/04/15/eabiofuel2
15.xml

'Biofuel from non-food crops within 15 years'

By Charles Clover, Environment Editor

Last Updated: 7:01pm BST 15/04/2008

Energy crops made from algae, woody plants and bacteria that do not compete
for land with the world's food supplies are between five and 15 years away,
a senior Government scientist has said.

* Biofuel
<http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?xml=/earth/2008/04/15/eabiofuel
115.xml> rules 'could make millions homeless'

* Biofuels
<http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?xml=/earth/2008/04/14/eabiofuel
114.xml> scheme 'may damage environment'

* Biofuel
<http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?xml=/earth/2008/04/11/eabiogas1
11.xml> potential for commercially grown grass

Dr Robert Watson, chief scientist to the Department for the Environment,
Food and Rural Affairs indicated that the current spike in world food
prices, caused partly because of the use of food crops as fuel, could last
that long.

He said that using food crops such as maize and wheat as biofuels was
"unsustainable" but "different people had different views" as to when a
generation of fuels that did not interfere with food supplies would be
developed.

His estimate of up to 15 years is unusually pessimistic.

Dr Watson was speaking at the launch of a report backed by 60 countries on
the future for agriculture and development, which he chaired.

The report, the International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science
and Technology for Development, concluded that food production had increased
faster than population growth since the 1960s.

However, 800 million people still went to bed hungry because of uneven
distribution and institutional failure.

It said that there had been major successes in producing more food in Asia
and the Pacific, particularly China, but in Africa food production had gone
down. Elsewhere the rate of improvement had slowed.

Launching the report, Dr Watson blamed present food price rises on increased
demand for grain to feed livestock in China; drought in Australia; commodity
price speculation; some countries stopping the export of grain and on food
crops being used for biofuels.

"We need to move forward to second and third generation biofuels," he said.

Dr Watson said that contrary to what many believed, there were already
biofuels which cut greenhouse gas emissions and did not apparently compete
with food crops or displace farming into the rainforest, in the form of
sugar cane. "Sugar cane looks very good," he said.

However, he said that United States production of more maize for fuel could
be argued to have displaced production of soya into Brazil and other
countries which had displaced livestock into the rainforest.

"We need to do a very careful analysis," he said. The Government's review of
the environmental effect of its biofuels policy, which has meant 2.5 per
cent of all fuel at the pumps has to be from energy crops from this week, is
expected this summer.

Four countries, the United States, Canada, Australia and Britain have yet to
back the report, called the International Assessment of Agricultural
Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development, the first three because
of its sceptical views on GM technology as a solution to the world's food
shortages.

Dr Watson said it was "controversial" as to whether GM technology had
achieved the gains in agricultural productivity claimed for it.

The United States also dissented from the report's conclusions that
agriculture should be seen as not just about production but about producing
"ecosystem services" such as water conservation and carbon sequestration
because it could prejudice its position in world trade talks.

The report was welcomed by the organic farming movement because it
criticised industrial agriculture for being "too narrowly focused" and
called for a more holistic approach to food production.

Robin Maynard, campaigns director of the Soil Association, the organic
farming body, said: "This is exactly what organic farming at its best
achieves - producing the same amount of food for 26 per cent less energy
than chemical based farming; delivering a greater variety and number of
wildlife species; and because it doesn't depend on vast quantities of
expensive agrichemicals is more accessible and adaptable to smaller scale
poorer farms in developing countries."

5.

Guardian, Simon Jenkins : The cost of green tinkering is in famine a

Posted by: "Andrew Boswell" andrewboswell@...   a_boswell_2004

Wed Apr 16, 2008 8:18 am (PDT)



http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/apr/16/biofuels.alternativeener
gy

The cost of green tinkering is in famine and starvation

Biofuels threaten food supplies, rainforest and climate - yet our leaders
push them in the name of the environment

* <http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/simonjenkins> Simon Jenkins

*

* <http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/simonjenkins> Simon Jenkins
* <http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardian> The Guardian,

Wednesday April 16 2008

This article appeared in the Guardian
<http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardian> on Wednesday April 16
<http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardian/2008/apr/16> 2008 on p31 of the
Comment
<http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardian/2008/apr/16/mainsection/commentanddeb
ate> & debate section. It was last updated at 00:09 on April 16 2008.

Farewell the age of reason, welcome the idiocracy. Only George Orwell could
have invented - and named - the government's Renewable Transport Fuel
Obligation (RTFO) that came into operation yesterday. It is the latest in a
long line of measures intended to ease the conscience of the rich while
keeping the poor miserable, in this case spectacularly so.

The consequences of the RTFO have been much trumpeted on these pages. It
says enough that one car tank of bio petrol needs as much grain as it takes
to feed an African for a year, or that a reported one-third of American
grain production is now subsidised for conversion into biofuel. Jeremy
Paxman pleaded the cause of this latest green wheeze on Monday's Newsnight,
while the United Nations food expert, Jean Ziegler, screamed for it to stop:
"Children are dying ... It is a crime."

The transport secretary, Ruth Kelly, said this week: "The government has
consistently stressed that biofuels are only worth supporting if they
deliver genuine environmental benefits." Yet she must know that, at present,
the opposite is the case. Kelly pleaded that rescinding her policy might
impede investment and "weaken our influence over the direction of EU
policy". She did not mention biofuels' threat to rainforests, food
self-sufficiency and global warming generally, through needing costly
fertiliser and road transport. Nor did she mention the role in her decision
of such lobbies as the British Association for Biofuels and Oils, and the
National Farmers' Union.

The RTFO is the latest in a series of policies, proselytised by the green
movement and then commandeered by commercial lobbies, which fit a pattern of
irrationality worthy of Moral Re-Armament. Until recently, most greenery has
seemed no more than a feelgood parlour game. Now it is getting serious.

I have tried to follow the global warming debate, and will admit that it has
changed my mind on occasions. I was once a sceptic on nuclear power and
genetically modified foods. Security made the former expensive, and
ignorance made the latter suspect, vulnerable to such greed-motivated
cul-de-sacs as the "terminator gene" (increasing output but for just one
harvest). I could also see the virtue of harnessing wind and waves, and
seeking new ways of using the sun's rays, either directly or through plant
photosynthesis.

I am wiser now. As the major premise of the debate has shifted to global
warming, so has the balance of argument. Wherever one stands on the spectrum
of climate complacency versus alarm, burning carbon should be discouraged.
But as public money starts to flow, so financial interest pollutes debate.

The British government has been persuaded by the wind turbine manufacturers
to commit a third of its annual renewables subsidy to this uniquely
inefficient energy source, advertising over hill and dale the cabinet's
horror of making a decision on nuclear power. When this was put to Tony
Blair by a Commons committee early in his second parliament, he replied
jokily: "Would you want a nuclear plant in your constituency?" This appeared
to be the sum total of his thinking on the topic.

Ten years after Blair came to office, the government still lacks the courage
to make a decision, scared of what the anti-nuclear lobby might say. Such
Christian Science greenery implies that the world would be better dead than
with one split atom on its surface. Nuclear power may be expensive but as
the former chief scientist, Sir David King, wrote recently, "the dangers of
climate change are far worse".

The same applies to genetically modified foods. It is clear that
modification, which is as old as botany, has side-effects. But increased
food productivity is so patently a good thing that to ban GM from European
imports, and thus from Africa, is beyond perverse. Increased Indian and
Chinese consumption is sucking the world dry of grain at just the time when
the GM ban is denying the developing world the swiftest path to higher
productivity - and at a time when supply is curbed by biofuel substitution.

These various green policies have established a lethal pincer movement on
world food production. As the Oxford economist Paul Collier points out in
his book The Bottom Billion, Africa has been subjected by European
governments to one form of "befuddled romanticism" after another, from
campaigns against GM foods and low-wage produce to "save the peasant" farm
reform. Africa, says Collier, has less commercial agriculture than it did at
the end of the age of empire, half a century ago.

While antagonism to science merely impedes progress, antagonism to economics
is regressive. American subsidies to ethanol fuel are not just causing
"tortilla riots" but costing American taxpayers a staggering $5.5bn a year.
Biofuel tankers are circling the globe, burning gasoline and chasing
subsidies. They have joined carbon emissions certificates among the world's
greatest trading scams.

If I have changed my mind, I am not sure the same applies to many greens. I
have rarely encountered so much fanaticism and blind faith. Did those
demanding fuel subsidies not realise that palm oil would wipe out
rainforests and that ethanol from corn would use as much carbon as it saved?
Did those pleading for wind farms really think they could ever substitute
for nuclear power; or those wanting eco-towns not realise they would just
add to car emissions? Did they not understand that, once the tap of public
money is turned on, lobbyists will ensure it is never turned off - however
harmful?

If all these fancy subsidies and market manipulations were withdrawn
tomorrow and government action confined to energy-saving regulation, I am
convinced the world would be a cheaper and a safer place, and the poor would
not be threatened with starvation.

Just now, for reasons not all of which are "green", commodity prices are
soaring. Leave them. Send food parcels to the starving, but let demand evoke
supply and stop curbing trade. The marketplace is never perfect, but in this
matter it could not be worse than government action. Playing these games has
so far made a few people very rich at the cost of the taxpayer. Now the cost
is in famine and starvation. This is no longer a game.

simon.jenkins@guardian.co.uk

6a.

TV Coverage of Biofuel Protest, Bolton.

Posted by: "James Alden" jamesaldenuk@...

Wed Apr 16, 2008 8:18 am (PDT)

TV coverage of Biofuel Protest, at Ruth Kelly's constituency office, Bolton.

http://www.channelm.co.uk/news/

---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------"The saving of our world from pending doom will come, not through the complacent adjustment of the conforming majority, but through the creative maladjustment of a nonconforming minority." Martin Luther King, Strength to Love p27 ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------

---------------------------------
Yahoo! for Good helps you make a difference
6b.

Re: TV Coverage of Biofuel Protest, Bolton.

Posted by: "Andrew Boswell" a_boswell_2004@...   a_boswell_2004

Wed Apr 16, 2008 10:35 am (PDT)

The report is at this link:

http://link.brightcove.com/services/link/bcpid1213934526/bctid1504464364

_____

From: biofuelwatch@yahoogroups.com [mailto:biofuelwatch@yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of James Alden
Sent: 16 April 2008 14:49
To: James Alden
Subject: [biofuelwatch] TV Coverage of Biofuel Protest, Bolton.

TV coverage of Biofuel Protest, at Ruth Kelly's constituency office, Bolton.

http://www.channelm <http://www.channelm.co.uk/news/> .co.uk/news/

---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
---------- ---------- ---------- ----------"The saving of our world from
pending doom will come, not through the complacent adjustment of the
conforming majority, but through the creative maladjustment of a
nonconforming minority." Martin Luther King, Strength to Love p27
---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
----------

_____

Yahoo! for Good helps you make
<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/mailuk/taglines/isp/control/*http:/us.rd.yahoo.com/e
vt=51947/*http:/uk.promotions.yahoo.com/forgood/> a difference

7.

Coverage of IAASTD report: Reuters, The Guardian, BBC

Posted by: "Jim Roland" quailrecords@...   jimroland99

Wed Apr 16, 2008 8:18 am (PDT)


1. http://www.planetark.com/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/47982/story.htm


Free Food Trade Threatens Environment, Poor - Report

Mail this story to a friend | Printer friendly version

UK: April 16, 2008

LONDON - Food trade liberalisation in developing countries can hurt attempts to alleviate poverty and damage the environment, according to a report from a United Nations and World Bank sponsored group issued on Tuesday.

"Opening national markets to international competition can offer economic benefits but can lead to long term negative effects on poverty alleviation, food security and the environment without basic national institutions and infrastructure being place," the report said.
Sixty governments, including Brazil, China, France and India, have approved the report. The US, Australia and Canada are due to submit reservations later this week while Britain have not yet officially responded.
Governments are deeply concerned at the impact of rising food prices and the effect they are having on the world's poor. There have been food-related riots in Haiti as well as protests in Cameroon, Niger and Burkina Faso in Africa, and in Indonesia and the Philippines.
Top finance and development officials from around the world called this week for urgent steps to stem rising food prices, warning that social unrest would spread unless the cost of basic staples was contained.
Tuesday's report, from the International Assessment of Agricultural Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD), said increases in intensive, export-orientated agriculture had serious social and environmental implications including exportation of soil nutrients and water and exploitative labour conditions.
The IAASTD, whose co-sponsors include the World Bank, the UN's Food and Agriculture Organisation and the World Health Organisation, said the benefits of increases in agricultural production were also unfairly distributed with the current system often increasing the gap between rich and poor.
(Reporting by Nigel Hunt; editing by Chris Johnson)

REUTERS NEWS SERVICE


2. Note: there is an interview download of John Vidal's interview with Robert Watson, director of IAASTD at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/audio/2008/apr/15/vidal.food.shortage?gusrc=rss&feed=worldnews


http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/apr/16/food.biofuels

Change in farming can feed world - report
· Ample resources wasted, global study warns· Biofuels exacerbating shortage of food crops

John Vidal, environment editor
The Guardian,
Wednesday April 16 2008
Article history

About this articleClose
This article appeared in the Guardian on Wednesday April 16 2008 on p15 of the International section. It was last updated at 00:38 on April 16 2008.

Filipino children eat rice, a staple crop that is under pressure across the developing world. Photograph: Romeo Gacad/AFP/Getty Images
Sixty countries backed by the World Bank and most UN bodies yesterday called for radical changes in world farming to avert increasing regional food shortages, escalating prices and growing environmental problems.
But in a move that has led to the US, UK, Australia and Canada not yet endorsing the report, the authors said GM technology was not a quick fix to feed the world's poor and argued that growing biofuel crops for automobiles threatened to increase worldwide malnutrition.
The report was issued as the UN's World Food Programme called for rich countries to contribute $500m (Ł255m) to immediately address a growing global food crisis which has seen staple food price rises of up to 80% in some countries, and food riots in many cities. According to the World Bank, 33 countries are now in danger of political destabilisation and internal conflict following food price inflation.
The authors of the 2,500-page International Assessment of Agricultural Science and Technology for Development [IAASTD] say the world produces enough food for everyone, yet more than 800 million people go hungry. "Food is cheaper and diets are better than 40 years ago, but malnutrition and food insecurity threaten millions," they write. "Rising populations and incomes will intensify food demand, especially for meat and milk which will compete for land with crops, as will biofuels. The unequal distribution of food and conflict over control of the world's dwindling natural resources presents a major political and social challenge to governments, likely to reach crisis status as climate change advances and world population expands from 6.7 billion to 9.2 billion by 2050."
Robert Watson, director of IAASTD and chief scientist at the UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, said: "Business as usual will hurt the poor. It will not work. We have to applaud global increases in food production but not everyone has benefited. We have not succeeded globally. In some parts of India 50% of children are still malnourished. That is not success."
Watson said governments and industry focused too narrowly on increasing food production, with little regard for natural resources or food security. "Continuing with current trends would mean the earth's haves and have-nots splitting further apart," he said. " It would leave us facing a world nobody would want to inhabit. We have to make food more affordable and nutritious without degrading the land."
The report - the first significant attempt to involve governments, NGOs and industries from rich and poor countries - took 400 scientists four years to complete. The present system of food production and the way food is traded around the world, the authors concluded, has led to a highly unequal distribution of benefits and serious adverse ecological effects and was now contributing to climate change.
The authors say science and technology should be targeted towards raising yields but also protecting soils, water and forests. "Investment in agricultural science has decreased yet we urgently need sustainable ways to produce food. Incentives for science to address the issues that matter to the poor are weak," said Watson.
The GM industry, which helped fund the report, together with the UN's Food and Agriculture Organisation, the World Health Organisation and the British and US governments, abandoned talks last year after heated debate.
The scientists said they saw little role for GM, as it is currently practised, in feeding the poor on a large scale . "Assessment of the technology lags behind its development, information is anecdotal and contradictory, and uncertainty about possible benefits and damage is unavoidable," said the report.
"The short answer to whether transgenic crops can feed the world is 'no'. But they could contribute. We must understand their costs and benefits," said Watson yesterday.
The authors also warned that the global rush to biofuels was not sustainable. "The diversion of crops to fuel can raise food prices and reduce our ability to alleviate hunger. The negative social effects risk being exacerbated in cases where small-scale farmers are marginalised or displaced form their land," they said.
Responding to the report, a group of eight international environment and consumer groups, including Third World Network, Practical Action, Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth, said in a statement: "This is a sobering account of the failure of industrial farming. Small-scale farmers and ecological methods provide the way forward to avert the current food crisis and meet the needs of communities."
Lim Li Chung, of Third World Network in Malaysia, said: "It clearly shows that small-scale farmers and the environment lose under trade liberalisation. Developing countries must exercise their right to stop the flood of cheap subsidised products from the north."
Guilhem Calvo, an adviser with the ecological and earth sciences division of Unesco, one of the report's sponsors, said at a news conference in Paris: "We must develop agriculture that is less dependent on fossil fuels, favours the use of locally available resources and explores the use of natural processes such as crop rotation and use of organic fertilisers."
At a glance
Bio-energy The report says biofuels compete for land and water with food crops and are inefficient. They can cause deforestation and damage soils and water.
Biotechnology The use of GM crops, where the technology is not contained, is contentious, the UN says. Data on some crops indicate highly variable yield gains in some places and declines in others.
Climate change While modest temperature rises may increase food yields in some areas, a general warming risks damaging all regions of the globe. There will be serious potential for conflict over habitable land.
Trade and markets
Subsidies distort the use of resources and benefit industrialised nations at the expense of developing countries.


3. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7347239.stm


Page last updated at 16:46 GMT, Tuesday, 15 April 2008 17:46 UK

E-mail this to a friend
Printable version

Global food system 'must change'

Small-scale farmers are not benefitting from recent advances, the report says
The global agriculture system will have to change radically if the world is to avoid future environmental and social problems, a report has warned.
The study, commissioned by the UN and World Bank, concluded that while recent advances had increased food production, the benefits were spread unevenly.
It said that 850 million people were still not getting enough food to eat.
The authors added that food prices would remain volatile as a result of rising populations and biofuel growth.
The findings were published by the International Assessment of Agricultural Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD), an intergovernmental body that involved more than 400 scientists and 30 governments.
"We tried to assess the implications of agricultural knowledge, science and technology both past, present and future on a series of very critical issues," explained IAASTD director Robert Watson.
"These issues are hunger and poverty; rural livelihoods; nutrition and human health.
"The key point is how do we address these issues in a way that is environmentally, socially and economically sustainable?"
'Need for reform'
Speaking at the launch of the final report in London, Professor Watson said advances over the past 50 years had seen total food production grow faster than the human population had increased.
"The price of food, in real terms, has also gone down. Even today, many food commodities are comparable to the early 1990s; so what's the problem?

Agriculture is far more than just production of food, and that is what we have to recognise

Professor Robert Watson,IAASTD director"Well, we still have over 800 million people going to bed hungry every night. There have been some successes but if we look at it on a region-by-region basis, there have been uneven results."
He added that the study identified other consequences: "We have lost some of our environmental sustainability.
"There have been adverse effects in some parts of the world on soils, water, biodiversity; our agricultural systems have contributed to human-induced climate change and, in turn, human-induced climate change threatens agricultural productivity."
IAASTD co-chairman Dr Hans Herren said "contentious political and economic stances" were affecting attempts to address some of the imbalances.
"Specifically, this refers to the many OECD member countries who are deeply opposed to any changes in trade regimes or subsidy systems," he stated.
"Without reforms, many poorer countries will have a very hard time."
Food for thought
The authors projected that the global demand for food was set to double in the next 25-50 years, primarily in developing nations.
As a result, they said that it was necessary for the agricultural sector to grow, but in a way that did not result in social hardship or environmental degradation.
As well as looking at the global picture, the IAASTD also examined the situation in different regions:

Central/West Asia and North Africa: unique agricultural biodiversity is beginning to disappear. Likely to suffer the consequences of limited water supplies and climate change
East/South Asia and the Pacific: development in the region is increasing pollution levels. Climate change is likely to trigger large-scale migration
Latin America and the Caribbean: increased yield from agriculture has not led to a significant decrease in poverty. Food imports have created dependence and disruption to local production
Sub-Saharan Africa: agriculture accounts for about 32% of the region's GDP, yet 80% of arable land is experiencing water scarcity
North America and Europe: private sector funding has affected the direction of agricultural research and has increased the influence of transnational companies
The study found that access to food was taken for granted in many nations, and farmers and farm workers were poorly rewarded for acting as stewards of almost one-third of the Earth's land.
It recommended a fundamental rethink of agricultural knowledge, science and technology, in order to achieve a sustainable global food system.
The experts said that efforts should focus on the needs of small-scale farmers in diverse ecosystems, and areas with the greatest needs.
Measures would include giving farmers better access to knowledge, technology and credit. It would also require investment to bring the necessary information and infrastructure to rural areas.
'Valuing services'
Professor Watson outlined some of the challenges facing the sector over the coming 50 years: "We need to enhance rural livelihoods where most of the poor live on one or two dollars a day.
"We also need to stimulate economic growth because half of the countries in Africa have a significant percentage of their GDP in the agricultural sector.

About 80% of arable land in Sub-Saharan Africa is short of water
"At the same time, we need to meet food safety standards and make sure that we do not have pesticide residues, unacceptable levels of hormones or heavy metals.
"All of this must be done in an environmentally and socially sustainable manner."
He warned that agriculture could no longer be approached as a single issue.
"We need to consider the environmental issues of biodiversity and water; the economic issues of marketing and trade, and the social concerns of gender and culture.
"How do we pay farmers to not only produce food, but to value the environmental services?
"Agriculture is far more than just production of food, and that is what we have to recognise." [Ends]
__________________________________________________________
Get Hotmail on your mobile. Text MSN to 63463 now!
http://mobile.uk.msn.com/pc/mail.aspx
8.

Guardian : Change in farming can feed world - report

Posted by: "Andrew Boswell" andrewboswell@...   a_boswell_2004

Wed Apr 16, 2008 8:20 am (PDT)



http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/apr/16/food.biofuels

Food crisis

Change in farming can feed world - report

· Ample resources wasted, global study warns
· Biofuels exacerbating shortage of food crops

* <http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/johnvidal> John Vidal,
environment editor
* <http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardian> The Guardian,
* Wednesday April 16 2008
* Article history

About this article

Close

This article appeared in the Guardian
<http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardian> on Wednesday April 16
<http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardian/2008/apr/16> 2008 on p15 of the
International
<http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardian/2008/apr/16/mainsection/international
> section. It was last updated at 00:38 on April 16 2008.

Filipino children eat rice, a staple crop that is under pressure across the
developing world

Filipino children eat rice, a staple crop that is under pressure across the
developing world. Photograph: Romeo Gacad/AFP/Getty Images

Sixty countries backed by the World Bank and most UN bodies yesterday called
for radical changes in world farming to avert increasing regional food
shortages, escalating prices and growing environmental problems.

But in a move that has led to the US, UK, Australia and Canada not yet
endorsing the report, the authors said GM technology was not a quick fix to
feed the world's poor and argued that growing biofuel crops for automobiles
threatened to increase worldwide malnutrition.

The report was issued as the UN's World Food Programme called for rich
countries to contribute $500m (Ł255m) to immediately address a growing
global food crisis which has seen staple food price rises of up to 80% in
some countries, and food riots in many cities. According to the World Bank,
33 countries are now in danger of political destabilisation and internal
conflict following food price inflation.

The authors of the 2,500-page International Assessment of Agricultural
Science and Technology for Development [IAASTD] say the world produces
enough food for everyone, yet more than 800 million people go hungry. "Food
is cheaper and diets are better than 40 years ago, but malnutrition and food
insecurity threaten millions," they write. "Rising populations and incomes
will intensify food demand, especially for meat and milk which will compete
for land with crops, as will biofuels. The unequal distribution of food and
conflict over control of the world's dwindling natural resources presents a
major political and social challenge to governments, likely to reach crisis
status as climate change advances and world population expands from 6.7
billion to 9.2 billion by 2050."

Robert Watson, director of IAASTD and chief scientist at the UK Department
for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, said: "Business as usual will hurt
the poor. It will not work. We have to applaud global increases in food
production but not everyone has benefited. We have not succeeded globally.
In some parts of India 50% of children are still malnourished. That is not
success."

Watson said governments and industry focused too narrowly on increasing food
production, with little regard for natural resources or food security.
"Continuing with current trends would mean the earth's haves and have-nots
splitting further apart," he said. " It would leave us facing a world nobody
would want to inhabit. We have to make food more affordable and nutritious
without degrading the land."

The report - the first significant attempt to involve governments, NGOs and
industries from rich and poor countries - took 400 scientists four years to
complete. The present system of food production and the way food is traded
around the world, the authors concluded, has led to a highly unequal
distribution of benefits and serious adverse ecological effects and was now
contributing to climate change.

The authors say science and technology should be targeted towards raising
yields but also protecting soils, water and forests. "Investment in
agricultural science has decreased yet we urgently need sustainable ways to
produce food. Incentives for science to address the issues that matter to
the poor are weak," said Watson.

The GM industry, which helped fund the report, together with the UN's Food
and Agriculture Organisation, the World Health Organisation and the British
and US governments, abandoned talks last year after heated debate.

The scientists said they saw little role for GM, as it is currently
practised, in feeding the poor on a large scale . "Assessment of the
technology lags behind its development, information is anecdotal and
contradictory, and uncertainty about possible benefits and damage is
unavoidable," said the report.

"The short answer to whether transgenic crops can feed the world is 'no'.
But they could contribute. We must understand their costs and benefits,"
said Watson yesterday.

The authors also warned that the global rush to biofuels was not
sustainable. "The diversion of crops to fuel can raise food prices and
reduce our ability to alleviate hunger. The negative social effects risk
being exacerbated in cases where small-scale farmers are marginalised or
displaced form their land," they said.

Responding to the report, a group of eight international environment and
consumer groups, including Third World Network, Practical Action, Greenpeace
and Friends of the Earth, said in a statement: "This is a sobering account
of the failure of industrial farming. Small-scale farmers and ecological
methods provide the way forward to avert the current food crisis and meet
the needs of communities."

Lim Li Chung, of Third World Network in Malaysia, said: "It clearly shows
that small-scale farmers and the environment lose under trade
liberalisation. Developing countries must exercise their right to stop the
flood of cheap subsidised products from the north."

Guilhem Calvo, an adviser with the ecological and earth sciences division of
Unesco, one of the report's sponsors, said at a news conference in Paris:
"We must develop agriculture that is less dependent on fossil fuels, favours
the use of locally available resources and explores the use of natural
processes such as crop rotation and use of organic fertilisers."

At a glance

Bio-energy The report says biofuels compete for land and water with food
crops and are inefficient. They can cause deforestation and damage soils and
water.

Biotechnology The use of GM crops, where the technology is not contained, is
contentious, the UN says. Data on some crops indicate highly variable yield
gains in some places and declines in others.

Climate change While modest temperature rises may increase food yields in
some areas, a general warming risks damaging all regions of the globe. There
will be serious potential for conflict over habitable land.

Trade and markets

Subsidies distort the use of resources and benefit industrialised nations at
the expense of developing countries.

9.

Corn, Soybeans Rise on `Buying Panic' to Avoid Food Shortages

Posted by: "almuthbernstinguk" almuth@...   almuthbernstinguk

Wed Apr 16, 2008 8:52 am (PDT)

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?
pid=20602013&sid=alE9bf2xJCug&refer=commodity_futures

By Jeff Wilson

April 15 (Bloomberg) -- Corn and soybeans rose for a second straight
day on speculation global demand will increase as nations seek to
slow inflation and avoid food shortages.

The Philippines, the biggest rice importer, yesterday urged Asian
nations to convene an emergency meeting on the region's food crisis.
Kazakhstan, the world's fifth-largest wheat exporter, banned
shipments of the grain until Sept. 1 to control domestic prices for
bread and other foods. Wheat and rice prices have doubled to records
in the past year.

``Countries are in a buying panic about corn and soybeans,'' said
Mark Schultz, a vice president for Northstar Commodity Investments in
Minneapolis. ``If there is any global weather problem this year, corn
and soybeans will be substantially higher than they are today. No one
wants to suffer a food shortage.''

Corn futures for May delivery advanced 14.25 cents, or 2.4 percent,
to $6.06 a bushel on the Chicago Board of Trade. On April 9, the most-
active contract reached a record $6.16. The price has climbed 59
percent in the past year.

Futures for December delivery, reflecting the new crop, rose as much
as 2.6 percent to a record $6.29 a bushel.

Soybean futures for July delivery gained 7.75 cents, or 0.6 percent,
to $13.97 a bushel. The price has surged 89 percent in the past year,
reaching a record $15.8625 on March 3.

Soybean-oil futures for July delivery rose 1.02 cents, or 1.6
percent, to 63.27 cents a pound. The price has soared 88 percent in
the past year, reaching a record 72.69 cents on March 4.

Biofuels, Inflation

U.K. Prime Minister Gordon Brown said last week his government is
concerned that biofuels are stimulating inflation and pushing up food
prices around the world.

Global food prices increased 57 percent last month from a year
earlier, according to the United Nations Food and Agriculture
Organization. Rising costs have triggered protests in countries
including Indonesia and Egypt.

Prices paid to U.S. producers climbed 1.1 percent in March, almost
twice as much as forecast, Labor Department data showed today. Food
prices rose 1.2 percent, led by increases in vegetables, rice, beef
and veal. The 8.7 percent gain in rice was the biggest since 2002.

Corn and soybeans rose as energy costs climbed, signaling demand for
biofuels will increase. Crude oil and gasoline futures rose to
records today.

``The rally in crude oil is driving inflation and speculator demand
for commodities,'' said Jerry Gidel, a market analyst at North
American Risk Management Services Inc. in Chicago. ``Crude-oil gains
are boosting ethanol margins and production.''

Wet Weather

Wet weather threatens timely planting of corn and soybeans, analysts
said.

Fields from Oklahoma to Wisconsin may get more than 2 inches of rain
in the next five days with above-normal rainfall forecast for most of
the Midwest from April 20 to April 26, according to the National
Weather Service.

About 2 percent of the U.S. corn crop was planted as of April 13,
compared with 4 percent a year earlier and 7 percent on average in
the prior five years, the U.S. Department of Agriculture said
yesterday in a report.

That marked the slowest planting pace for corn since 1993, according
to Bill Nelson, a vice president at Wachovia Securities LLC in St.
Louis. In that year, widespread flooding in the Midwest drove yields
down 23 percent from 1992.

`Window Closing'

The yield potential for corn declines unless seeds are sown before
the end of April in the southern Midwest or by the middle of May in
the rest of the region, because plants need to pollinate before the
arrival of hot summer weather. Wet soils also hinder seed germination
rates and development of deeper root systems. Planting of soybeans
usually begins in early May.

``The window for planting corn is quickly closing,'' Gidel of North
American Risk Management Services said. ``It will be difficult for
U.S. planting progress to exceed 10 percent next week,'' compared
with 22 percent on average in the previous five years, he said.

Corn is the biggest U.S. crop, valued at a record $52.1 billion in
2007, followed by soybeans at $26.8 billion, government data show.

To contact the reporter on this story: Jeff Wilson in Chicago at
jwilson29@bloomberg.net

10.

FT/New Straits Times/Soyatech.com: Malaysia's Largest Palm Oil Firms

Posted by: "ekogaia" ekogaia@...

Thu Apr 17, 2008 2:09 am (PDT)



-------- Original Message --------
Subject:
Date:
From:
To:

www.soyatech.com/news_story.php?id=7876
<http://www.soyatech.com/news_story.php?id=7876>

* *

*Malaysia*'s Largest Palm Oil Firms Ready for Sustainability
Certification, Official Says

Business Times (Malaysia) -- 4/16/2008 -- Giant planters such as Sime
Darby Bhd, IOI Corp Bhd and Kuala Lumpur Kepong Bhd are ready to comply
with global buyers' requirements that palm oil in the country be grown
and harvested in a sustainable manner, Malaysian Palm Oil Board chairman
Datuk Sabri Ahmad said.

"Malaysia is ready to supply 2.5 million tonnes of sustainably produced
and certified palm oil to European buyers and the rest of the world,"
Sabri told reporters at the International Palm Oil Sustainability
Conference 2008 in Kota Kinabalu yesterday.

The inaugural event was officiated by Plantation Industries and
Commodities Minister Datuk Peter Chin Fah Kui.

Global buyers from 140 countries, spearheaded by Europe-based
non-governmental organisations (NGOs), are clamouring for the
certification out of concern for the natural habitat of orang utans and
the preservation of virgin forests, which they believe are threatened by
oil palm cultivation.

Some buyer countries, such as the UK, at the urging of NGOs like the
Friends of the Earth, want Malaysian and Indonesian producers to prove
to the rest of the world that their palm oil is not harming the
environment, wildlife or other natural resources.

To satisfy their requirements, the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil
(RSPO) is coming up with a common standard to enable consumers to tell
the difference between certified and non-certified palm oil.

The RSPO is a grouping of global parties involved in the palm oil
industry, including producers, consumers, bankers, governments and NGOs.

/Copyright © 2008 The New Straits Times Press (Malaysia) Bhd, Source:
The Financial Times Limited
Copyright notice
This is a news service of NewsEdge Corporation ©2008.
Reproduced from Soyatech eNews, April 16, 2008./

____________________

/Please note:/

*eNews and Background Info by* */Trace/Consult*™ are for information
purposes only and come from sources we believe to be reliable. However,
no liability can be assumed for the correctness of facts reported or any
predictions made. Views and opinions expressed are entirely those of
their authors and do not necessarily reflect those of */Trace/Consult*.

Please let us know *here* <http://www.traceconsult.ch/5211/5253.html> if
you wish to *unsubscribe* or *change* your eMail address.

__________________

*/ /*

*Visit our ethical headlines **eNewsticker* <http://www.traceconsult.ch/>* *

* *

*Genčve*

*Switzerland***

*/ /*

*www.TraceConsult.ch ***

* *

* *

*News@TraceConsult.ch*

* *

11.

Emailing: Planet Ark  Brazil Lula Defends Biofuels From Growing Crit

Posted by: "Muller, Andrew" Andrew.Muller@...

Thu Apr 17, 2008 2:10 am (PDT)

<<Planet Ark Brazil Lula Defends Biofuels From Growing Criticism.htm>>

__________________________________________________________
IMPORTANT
1. Before opening any attachments, please check for viruses.
2. This e-mail (including any attachments) may contain confidential information
for the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient,
please contact the sender and delete all copies of this email.
3. Any views expressed in this e-mail are those of the sender and are not
a statement of Australian Government Policy unless otherwise stated.
4. Electronic addresses published in this email are not conspicuous publications
and DVA does not consent to the receipt of commercial electronic messages.
5. Please go to http://www.dva.gov.au/feedback.htm#sub to unsubscribe emails
of this type from DVA.
6. Finally, please do not remove this notice.
12.

Dimas: social conditions needed; EEA chairman and other EU opinions

Posted by: "Jim Roland" quailrecords@...   jimroland99

Thu Apr 17, 2008 2:10 am (PDT)


1. http://www.planetark.com/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/47990/story.htm


EU Environment Chief Raises New Biofuels Condition

Mail this story to a friend | Printer friendly version

BELGIUM: April 16, 2008

BRUSSELS - The European Union's environment chief raised new conditions on Tuesday for the use of biofuels in road transport, saying social concerns such as food prices and food security must be taken into account.

Environment Commissioner Stavros Dimas did not explicitly question the EU's target of producing 10 percent of road transport fuel from crops and biomass by 2020, but he made clear that goal must be subservient to strict conditions.
Asked by Reuters whether the EU should reconsider the target in the light of soaring world food prices and fears that farmland in developing countries is being diverted to produce biofuels, Dimas said:
"The EU heads of state agreed to have a 10 percent biofuel target subject to compliance with sustainability criteria and the promotion of second generation biofuels.
"The issue of sustainability criteria is of crucial importance," he said in a written reply to a question.
The next generation of biofuels is expected to come largely from domestic and agricultural waste rather than food crops such as maize, sugar cane and palm oil.
Environmentalists have stepped up campaigning against biofuels, arguing they are already diverting production away from food and animal feed, and contributing to sharp rises in the price of cereals and milk products.
Dimas said the EU's sustainability criteria "must address both environmental and social concerns in order to be able to help us protect the environment and respect social justice".
The European Commission did not include social impacts in the criteria it proposed in January, which mostly concerned protecting rainforests and ensuring that biofuels achieve a real reduction in greenhouse gas emissions blamed for global warming.
"CATASTROPHE"
A Commission source said Dimas and Developement Commissioner Louis Michel had argued unsuccessfully at the time for social criteria to be added, but were rebuffed by Energy Commissioner Andris Piebalgs and Trade Commissioner Peter Mandelson.
However, the dramatic rise in food prices, coupled with food riots in several developing countries and public controversy about the impact of existing biofuels production have reignited the debate within the Commission, the source said.
Michel told the Belgian Senate on Tuesday that "I have long said that the fashion for biofuels could be a catastrophe especially in countries which are not self-sufficient in food", according to the Belga news agency.
Faced with strong public pressure, EU goverments appointed a panel last month to define acceptable sustainability criteria for biofuels, which is due to report to ambassadors on May 7.
Scientists from the European Environment Agency last week urged the 27-nation bloc to drop the 10 percent biofuels target.
A Slovenian EU presidency official said the working group was not empowered to reconsider the target, but it was looking at how the criteria could be refined to limit social damage.
The working group is also exploring how to measure and calculate savings in carbon dioxide emissions from biofuels.
Dimas said once the conditions had been agreed, "such criteria then need to be rigorously applied".
The Commission said on Monday the EU had sufficient unused farmland to produce biofuels without reducing its own food output. However, EU experts say at most 6 percent of the EU target can be met from domestic production and at least 4 percent will have to be imported, notably from Brazil, the world's biggest ethanol producer.
(editing by Nigel Hunt)

Story by Paul Taylor

REUTERS NEWS SERVICE


2. http://www.iht.com/bin/printfriendly.php?id=12000566


An appeal to slow down on biofuel
By Elisabeth Rosenthal
Wednesday, April 16, 2008

ROME: Last Friday an advisory panel to the European Environment Agency issued an extraordinary scientific opinion: The European Union should suspend its goal of having 10 percent of transportation fuel made from biofuel by 2020.
The European Union's biofuel targets were increased and extended from 5.75 percent by 2010 to 10 percent by 2020 just last year. Still, Europe's well-meaning rush to biofuels, the scientists concluded, had produced a slew of harmful ripple effects - from deforestation in Southeast Asia to higher prices for grains.
In a recommendation released last weekend, the 20-member panel, made up of some of Europe's most distinguished climate scientists, called the 10 percent target "overambitious" and an "experiment" whose "unintended effects are difficult to predict and difficult to control."
"The idea was that we felt we needed to slow down, to analyze the issue carefully and then come back at the problem," Laszlo Somlyody, the panel's chairman and a professor at the Budapest University of Technology and Economics, said in a telephone interview.
He said that part of the problem was that when it set the targets, the European Union was trying desperately to solve the problem of rising transportation emissions "in isolation," without adequately studying the effects of other sectors like land use and food supply.
"The starting point was correct: I'm happy that the European Union took the lead in cutting greenhouse gasses and we need to control traffic emissions," Somlyody said. "But the basic problem is it thought of transport alone, without considering all these other effects. And we don't understand those very well yet."
The panel's advice is not binding and it is not clear whether the European Commission will follow the recommendation.
It has become increasingly clear that the global pursuit of biofuels - encouraged by a rash of targets and subsides in both Europe and the United States - has not produced the desired effect.
Investigations have shown, for example, rain forests and peat swamp are being cleared to make way for biofuel plantations, a process that produces more emissions than the biofuels can save.
Meanwhile, land needed to produce food for people to eat is planted with more profitable biofuel crops, and water is diverted from the drinking supply.
In Europe and the United States, food prices for items like pizza and bread have increased significantly as grain stores shrink and wheat prices rise.
The price of wheat and rice are double those of a year ago, and corn is a third higher, the Food and Agriculture Organization said this week.
"Food price inflation hits the poor hardest, as the share of food in their total expenditures is much higher than that of wealthier populations," said Henri Josserand of the Food and Agriculture Organization.
Biofuels are not, of course, the only reason for high food prices. Fuel to transport food is more expensive with oil more than $100 a barrel. There have been unexpected droughts this year as well.
But the rush to meet biofuels targets has put our "need" to drive a car to the mall in direct competition with the need to eat in some of the poorest countries in the world.
A global analysis performed by forestry experts at the Australian International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, a scientific study group, found that biofuels were "in conflict with the reduction of deforestation" and also had negative effects on farming intensity and food security.
It also concluded that the rush to make biofuels from crops like corn, soy and rapeseed did not do much to reduce global greenhouse gasses anyway, producing an "ambiguous effect on greenhouse gas emissions." This is partly because of land use changes like the clearing of forests and partly because the process of converting plants into fuel takes a lot of energy itself.
The European Union started promoting biofuels for use in transportation in 2003 as emissions from road transportation had been growing rapidly.
It required that 2 percent of transport fuel come from biofuel by 2005 and 5.75 percent by 2010. The first goal was not met and the 2010 goal is expected to be missed as well. Even so, the goal was raised to 10 percent by 2020, raising the pressure for countries to comply.
Should we conclude that all biofuels are bad?
No. But motivated by the obvious problems now emerging, scientists have begun to take a harder look at their benefits.
For example, the European Environment Agency advisory panel suggests that the best use of plant biomass is not for transport fuel but to heat homes and generate electricity.
To be useful for vehicles, plant matter must be distilled to a fuel and often transported long distances. To heat a home, it can often be used raw or with minimal processing, and moved just a short distance away.
Likewise, the ambitious 10 percent target has led to destruction of vital natural resources, the European Environment Agency recommendation said, "increasing pressures on soil, water and biodiversity" in Europe and elsewhere.
"We felt we need to understand more about biofuels and to integrate these various goals before just moving ahead," said Somlyody, the panel's chairman.


3. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=89676007&ft=1&f=1004

Soaring World Food Prices
Balancing Biofuel, Food Crops a Challenge for Britain
by Rob Gifford

Listen Now [4 min 5 sec] add to playlist
Third in a five-part series

Enlarge
Cate Gillon
Biofuel producer Tom Lasica fills a car in London with biodiesel made from vegetable oil waste from local catering companies, restaurants and pubs. Getty Images



Enlarge
Lindsay Mangum, NPR
An index of global food prices jumped 83 percent in the three years ended in February, while wheat prices nearly tripled. Enlarge to see price projections for key food crops.


Morning Edition, April 16, 2008 · A new law went into effect in Britain on Tuesday that requires 2.5 percent of all gasoline and diesel sold for any vehicle to come from biofuels. That will rise to 5 percent by 2010, and the European Union has proposed a target of 10 percent across Europe by 2020. While those targets initially were criticized as a timid response to global warming, now there is some relief that the policies haven't gone further.
The grim contradiction at the heart of this debate is that, at least for now, it seems impossible to move to greener ways of powering machines and simultaneously feed the world. Solving that contradiction is at the heart of what those in Europe and elsewhere are now trying to do.
The Rising Cost of Bread
The global food crisis has started to affect Bonnet's Bakery in the tiny town of Chatteris, just north of Cambridge in eastern England. Standing behind the counter serving wholesome whole-grain loaves is Valerie Shay.
"The price of wheat has gone up, which affects the price of a loaf of bread. I'd say about 10 to 15 percent rise on a loaf of bread," she says.
The customers trickling into the bakery seem philosophical about the extra 40 or 50 cents on the cost of a loaf of bread. Perhaps that's because, unlike most of the developing world, where up to 80 percent of income can be spent on food, in Britain and much of Europe, that figure is more like 10 percent to 15 percent. Europeans grumble a little, tighten their belts, cut down on luxuries and get on with it.
But there's no grumbling at all, for once, from one group of Europeans.
A Boost for Farmers
George Munns, 47, climbs aboard his big green tractor on the 500 acres he farms just outside Chatteris. For decades, it has been tough for British farmers, as rock-bottom crop prices meant huge financial difficulties.
But in the past couple of years — with rising demand in China and India, and poor harvests in places such as Australia — that has all changed.
"Wheat prices three years ago were 60 pounds a ton. Now the spot price for wheat is about 170," Munns says.
That tripling of the price Munns gets for his wheat has revitalized his farm as a business. And it has meant that, while a few years ago he and neighboring farms were looking at the possibility of growing crops for biofuels, he now isn't interested.
"We won't do anything particularly to make biofuel here now, because it's just not worth it," he says.
Part of the Solution
Britain has turned much less land over to biofuels than other European countries, such as Germany. But only 2 percent of European agricultural land is used to grow such crops, compared with 20 to 30 percent in the United States.
Michael Mann, the European Union's spokesman on agriculture, contends the multinational partnership is part of the solution to the world food shortage, not part of the problem.
"We are seeing huge areas of land in countries that have recently joined the European Union coming into production that previously were left unplanted. We are also trying very hard to move to the second generation of biofuels, which don't use agricultural raw materials but use byproducts and waste products," Mann says. "... So we don't see that European Union biofuel policy will have a major effect on food prices or food availability."
John Alliston, dean of the school of agriculture at Britain's Royal Agricultural College, agrees. He says the world does need to find a replacement for burning fossil fuels, of course, but in the current dilemma, he says, Europe should stick to its strengths.
"In mainland Europe, we are good at producing food because of the climate we have and because of the rainfall we get, so that's what I think we should be doing," Alliston says. "And maybe other parts of the world that produce sugar perhaps might want to produce the energy."

[Ends]
__________________________________________________________
Win 100’s of Virgin Experience days with BigSnapSearch.com
http://www.bigsnapsearch.com
13.

Views: Ireland, Denmark, India, Latin America; UK: government, NFU

Posted by: "Jim Roland" quailrecords@...   jimroland99

Thu Apr 17, 2008 2:10 am (PDT)


1. http://www.edie.net/news/news_story.asp?id=14508

Ministers urged to join biofuel debate (16 April 2008) Labour Party environment spokesperson Joanna Tuffy has urged ministers to get behind European Environment Agency scientists, according to Friends Of The Earth Ireland.
Friends of the Earth said the price of food is rising because of the use of crops for biofuels
The scientists are calling on the EU to suspend the target to used 10% of biofuels in petrol by 2020. Ms Tuffy wants the minister for environment, heritage and local government, John Gormley, and energy minister Eamon Ryan, to support the cause. Friends of the Earth Ireland has expressed growing concerns about the negative impacts of biofuel production. More agriculture space given to the production of crops means less space is available for the production of food. The organisations said: "As a result, food prices, not just here in Ireland, but worldwide, are skyrocketing. "Just this week we saw that the cost of basic foodstuffs have gone up by almost 10% in the last 12 months, which is double the rate of inflation." New legislation came into force in the UK on Tuesday which means that all petrol sold must have at least 2.5% biofuels. The Washington DC-based World Bank has said that an increase in global corn production worldwide over the last three years accounted for biofuels production in the US, with existing stocks getting depleted for other global uses.

2. http://www.cphpost.dk/get/106702.html


Minister: Food should not be used for fuel

New user?

Login

Password:

Search articles

16.04.2008
Print article (IE & NS 4+)

Threats of a world food shortage has climate minister Connie Hedegaard reconsidering Danish targets for biofuel production

Until recently, biofuel use was considered an important means of combating climate change. However, the world food shortage now has politicians fleeing from the bio alternative, reports Politiken newspaper.
Threats of famine and riots in the world's poorest nations and concerns from the United Nations and the World Bank have the government and opposition parties wondering how feasible it is for Denmark to focus on biofuel production in years to come.
Connie Hedegaard, the climate and energy minister, is now for the first time admitting that it would be 'silly' for Denmark to keep its goals of biofuel production if the energy source does not become more sustainable in the long-term.
Socialist People's Party and Social Democrat MPs, who previously supported more biofuel focus, are now saying it was possibly a mistake to have set the current targets.
In order to live up to EU standards, Denmark must reach its goal of 5.75 percent biofuel by 2010. This was a target accepted by the government after pressure from the opposition, environmental organisations and agricultural lobbyists.
Since then, increasing criticism has come about as a result of large European and American investments in crop production for biofuel, which can destabilise the environment and food production in many parts of the world. Recent skyrocketing food prices on the world market and a subsequent threat of famine has caused concern among Danish politicians.
Hedegaard recently announced that she would not uphold the Danish target unless the EU established more strict rules for biofuel to be made from agricultural refuse, instead of from corn or other crops that could be used for human consumption.
'Biofuel is only one of the reasons for the food crisis, but an important one,' she told Politiken. 'We must not put food in fuel tanks.'
'As long as we are not sure about the sustainability of biofuel in terms of its environmental and social effects in relation to the food shortage situation, we cannot count on it,' she said.
The EU Commission recently proposed that biofuel should reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 35 percent, compared to normal petrol, for it to be worthwhile.
However, Hedegaard believed that the target had to be increased to 44 percent before she would seriously consider gambling on biofuel. Other EU countries have voiced similar opinions.
It is likely that the government can expect support from the opposition if it decides to drop Denmark's target of 5.57 percent biofuel usage by 2010.
Anne Grete Holmsgaard, the Socialist People's party's climate spokesperson, said that the current situation required that politicians acted cautiously.
Former environment minister Svend Auken agreed with Holmsgaard, saying that the way the situation was developing showed that biofuels could wind up being detrimental to nature, environment and the world food crisis.
'I would probably take it a step further and say that EU should give up its goal of ten percent biofuel by 2010,' he said. 'It was, quite simply, a mistake and it's very unfortunate.'
Danish farmers have long been interested in biofuel, but are aware that food production should always be the priority.
'But let's not panic,' said Peter Gćmelke, chairperson of the Agriculture Council. 'There are many possibilities of making biofuel from refuse.' (LYT)




3. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India/Inflation_woes_make_PM_wary_of_biofuel_option/rssarticleshow/2954723.cms

Inflation woes make PM wary of biofuel option16 Apr 2008, 0152 hrs IST,TNN

Print
Save
EMail
Write to Editor

No diversion of farm land for biofuel, say producers
Sandip DasPosted online: Tuesday , April 15, 2008 at 2236 hrs IST

NEW DELHI: Prime Minister Manmohan Singh wants a hard look at India's biofuel policy options as he is not comfortable with formulations that are being considered which could pave the way for large-scale diversion of land for crops for hybrid fuels. The government's recent problems with inflation and concerns over food management have deepened the PM's unease over developing bio-fuels to meet the challenge of the next decade's fuel requirements. A proposal that would entail developing 12 million hectares of crop by 2017 for bio-fuels has been doing the rounds in government. A prime ministerial aide said the PM has taken a fairly conservative view of the biofuel option as India's food requirements are only growing. With saturation in agriculture, India has become a net importer of food and until its domestic farm bottlenecks are cleared, it will need to source foodgrain regularly. Hence, it made little sense to reduce the area under food crop cultivation. The realisation that biofuels to run cars and even public transport must be viewed with caution has bit harder with the government preparing for the possibility of importing commodities this year. The political aspect of diverting land is obvious - the government could get savaged for developing esoteric fuels at the cost of the common man's food requirements. Given the enormous dependence on a good crop for maintaining buffer stocks and ensuring a comfortable market situation, policies that could see land where rice is grown being diverted for sugarcane production to produce biofuels seem preposterous. Diverting land, water and crop seems as lopsided as the insistence of some green lobbies that India drastically cut down coal-fired power even though this is the most plentiful fossil fuel in the country. Even though there are proposals to incorporate "safeguards" like stipulating that biofuels produced in India will be consumed internally and that non-food crops will be used for hybrid fuels, the scepticism in PMO seems undiminished. Given the current environment, biofuels will be regarded as costly, futuristic and politically unviable. Singh has been sharing his views with leaders of other countries too. At the retreat at an Asean conclave last year, the PM took up the immediacy of the food crisis. His argument that food management was a significant challenge struck a ready echo. Given the global nature of food shortages, diversion of crops is simply not an option. Finance minister has also spoken against diversion of crops for biofuels, pointing out that it was absurd that some countries were doing this for a section of people to use cheaper fuel while ignoring the food needs of an even bigger slice of the global population.


4. http://www.financialexpress.com/news/No-diversion-of-farm-land-for-biofuel-say-producers/296776/


No diversion of farm land for biofuel, say producersSandip DasPosted online: Tuesday , April 15, 2008 at 2236 hrs IST

New Delhi, Apr 14: Contrary to the concern raised by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh against diversion of agricultural land for growing biofuel producing plants like Jatropha & Pongamia, the apex body of biodiesel producers has said that all the plantations have been in the wastelands.
According to the Biodiesel Association of India (BAI), the cultivation of Jatropha in agriculture land could not be lucrative for the farmers as it takes 5 to 10 years for the plants to be ready for processing. While dismissing fears about large scale diversion of agricultural land for Jatropha plantation, BAI has said that jatropha plantation could be grown only in wasteland as it would not be economic for farmers to use agricultural land to grow Jatropha.
“We have been consistently telling the government that the Jatropha cultivation could be viable only in the wasteland,” Sandeep Chaturvedi, President, BAI told FE.
According to the ministry of rural development, there are estimated to be 55.27 million hectares of wasteland in the country. The national mission on biodiesel aims at bringing unutilized wastelands into productive use and reduce the country's dependence on imported petroleum products.
Due to rise the global commodity prices, the economists had raised concern that the United States' move to use maize in the production of the ethanol was one of the reasons behind the current food crisis in the world.


5. Latin American small farmers groups call on FAO for moratorium on biofuel production (15/4/08)

http://www.iii.co.uk/news/?type=afxnews&articleid=6656691&subject=general&action=article


6. http://www.fwi.co.uk/Articles/2008/04/15/110170/nfu-defends-uk-biofuel-production-on-biofuels-day.html

NFU defends UK biofuel production on Biofuels Day15/04/2008 14:00:00FWi

The NFU has taken the opportunity of national Biofuels Day to draw a clear distinction between biofuels produced to what it calls "The British Model" that yield genuine greenhouse gas savings, and biofuels produced elsewhere in the world with fewer environmental safeguards.

NFU president Peter Kendall explained that all biofuels are not the same, and that different systems of biofuel production have hugely varying impacts on the environment, greenhouse gas emissions and the food versus fuel equation.
"There is a world of difference between biofuels grown on cleared rain-forest and then transported half way across the globe and those grown sustainably here in Britain", he said.
"People can use biofuels produced to the British model with a clear conscience, knowing they are doing their bit for the environment, and I urge them to do so.
British-grown and processed biofuels achieve savings of up to 64% in greenhouse gas emissions compared with petrol or diesel, he added "They will be grown in accordance with independently monitored farm assurance standards and they will yield as much high protein animal feed as they do bioethanol and biodiesel."
The key elements in the British model of biofuels are:

Wheat and oilseed rape grown for bioethanol and biodiesel respectively are produced in accordance with the Assured Combinable Crops Scheme
EU cross-compliance conditions already require environmentally friendly field margins and preclude damage to either landscape or bio-diversity
Every tonne of wheat used for bioethanol or oilseed rape for biodiesel will yield a third of a tonne of fuel and a third of a tonne of high protein animal feed
Mr Kendall said the impact of biofuels on world food supplies and prices had been grossly exaggerated. Less than 1% of the world's wheat crop was used for bioethanol production last year, yet wheat prices more than doubled.

The next 30 years
"It is the world's demand for food that is driving prices up", said Mr Kendall. "The core problem is years of under-investment in agriculture around the world - the result of unsustainably low prices.
"Over the next 30 years, a combination of rising population and changing diets will mean that the world's farmers have to double or triple production to keep the world fed.
"Biofuels are a relatively minor factor in the overall equation, and if more crops are now being used for fuel, that is mainly down to the record price of oil, and the desire of countries like the USA to strengthen their energy security.
"In the UK we can produce all of the biodiesel and bioethanol needed to meet the targets of the Renewable Transport Fuel Obligation from feed wheat that would otherwise be exported, or oilseed rape grown on former set-aside land.
Development
Even the EU target of a 10% inclusion rate by 2020 will have only minor impact on prices.
"Biofuels are at present the only viable renewable alternative to fossil fuels in road transport. We need to develop this technology if we are to beat climate change without seriously restricting personal mobility.
"National Biofuels Day is an opportunity not only to set the record straight but to send out a clear message that the best biofuels for the planet are biofuels grown in Britain."

by Philip Clarke (About this Author)


7. http://www.motoring.co.za/index.php?from=rss_Motoring&fArticleId=4355445

'DEATH AND FOREST DEVASTATION WILL FOLLOW'

April 15, 2008The Friends of the Earth organisation has rejected a British government claim that having 2.5 percent biofuel in a tank of petrol will improve the environment.The organisation's statement coincided with the April 15 launch of the UK's Renewable Transport Fuel Obligation (no, that's really the name!) that demands 2.5 percent of all fuel sold in the UK be biofuel - rising to five percent by 2010.Drivers will fill up as usual and their vehicles will run just as well but, the UK's rulers say, total carbon dioxide production from their exhausts will be cut by 2.5 million tonnes a year by 2010
'Greener fuel is an important step to reducing CO2' - government
.Transport Minister Jim Fitzpatrick asserted: "Making it easier for motorists to use greener fuel is an important step to reducing carbon emissions from transport." Friends of the Earth, however, says that the large-scale production of biofuel could destroy forests, produce more greenhouse gases than they save, and threaten the lives of some of the world's most vulnerable people.The group rubbishes the theory that the CO2 released by burning biofuel merely recirculates the carbon dioxide the plant material absorbed while it was growing. The government conveniently forgets to include the CO2 produced by machinery while those plants are sown, harvested, processed into fuel and transported. It also says growing crops for biofuel competes with food production for arable land and irrigation water."This will raise food prices around the world, especially in developing countries," it said
'It will raise food prices around the world, especially in developing countries' - Friends of Earth
. Instead, the UK should drop its biofuel targets and look to other ways of solving the problem of climate change.Oxfam echoed that, telling the BBC that millions of indigenous people faced clearance from their land to make way for biofuel plantations such as palm oil.Fitzpatrick wasn't fazed: "We must do all we can to ensure biofuel is produced sustainably. We know people are concerned about the environmental risks associated with expanding biofuel production and we take those concerns very seriously."We want to introduce mandatory standards as soon as possible to guarantee that biofuel doesn't cause deforestation or food shortages and we are leading international work to do this."Meanwhile, we require suppliers to produce sustainability reports, providing an immediate incentive for them to source biofuel responsibly." - Reuters
__________________________________________________________
Amazing prizes every hour with Live Search Big Snap
http://www.bigsnapsearch.com
14.

As Other Staples Soar, Potatoes Break New Ground

Posted by: "Jim Roland" quailrecords@...   jimroland99

Thu Apr 17, 2008 2:10 am (PDT)


http://www.planetark.com/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/47974/story.htm


FEATURE - As Other Staples Soar, Potatoes Break New Ground

Mail this story to a friend | Printer friendly version

PERU: April 16, 2008

LIMA - As wheat and rice prices surge, the humble potato -- long derided as a boring tuber prone to making you fat -- is being rediscovered as a nutritious crop that could cheaply feed an increasingly hungry world.

Potatoes, which are native to Peru, can be grown at almost any elevation or climate: from the barren, frigid slopes of the Andes Mountains to the tropical flatlands of Asia. They require very little water, mature in as little as 50 days, and can yield between two and four times more food per hectare than wheat or rice.
"The shocks to the food supply are very real and that means we could potentially be moving into a reality where there is not enough food to feed the world," said Pamela Anderson, director of the International Potato Centre in Lima (CIP), a non-profit scientific group researching the potato family to promote food security.
Like others, she says the potato is part of the solution.
The potato has potential as an antidote to hunger caused by higher food prices, a population that is growing by one billion people each decade, climbing costs for fertilizer and diesel, and more cropland being sown for biofuel production.
To focus attention on this, the United Nations named 2008 the International Year of the Potato, calling the vegetable a "hidden treasure".
Governments are also turning to the tuber. Peru's leaders, frustrated by a doubling of wheat prices in the past year, have started a program encouraging bakers to use potato flour to make bread. Potato bread is being given to school children, prisoners and the military, in the hope the trend will catch on.
Supporters say it tastes just as good as wheat bread, but not enough mills are set up to make potato flour.
"We have to change people's eating habits," said Ismael Benavides, Peru's agriculture minister. "People got addicted to wheat when it was cheap."
Even though the potato emerged in Peru 8,000 years ago near Lake Titicaca, Peruvians eat fewer potatoes than people in Europe: Belarus leads the world in potato consumption, with each inhabitant of the eastern European state devouring an average of 376 pounds (171 kg) a year.
India has told food experts it wants to double potato production in the next five to 10 years. China, a huge rice consumer that historically has suffered devastating famines, has become the world's top potato grower. In Sub-Saharan Africa, the potato is expanding more than any other crop right now.
Some consumers are switching to potatoes. In the Baltic country of Latvia, sharp price rises caused bread sales to drop by 10-15 percent in January and February, as consumers bought 20 percent more potatoes, food producers have said.
The developing world is where most new potato crops are being planted, and as consumption rises poor farmers have a chance to earn more money.
"The countries themselves are looking at the potato as a good option for both food security and also income generation," Anderson said.
AFFORDABLE RAINBOW OF COLORS
The potato is already the world's third most-important food crop after wheat and rice. Corn, which is widely planted, is mainly used for animal feed.
Though most Americans associate potatoes with the bland Idaho variety, they actually come in some 5,000 types. Peru is sending thousands of seeds this year to the Doomsday Vault near the Arctic Circle, contributing to a gene bank for food crops that was set up in case of a global disaster.
With colors ranging from alabaster-white to bright yellow and deep purple and countless shapes, textures, and sizes, potatoes offer inventive chefs a chance to create new, eye-catching plates.
"They taste great," said Juan Carlos Mescco, 17, a potato farmer in Peru's Andes who says he frequently eats them sliced, boiled, or mashed from breakfast through dinner.
Potatoes are a great source of complex carbohydrates, which release their energy slowly, and -- so long as they are not smothered with butter -- have only five percent of the fat content of wheat.
They also have one-fourth of the calories of bread and, when boiled, have more protein than corn and nearly twice the calcium, according to the Potato Centre. They contain vitamin C, iron, potassium and zinc.
SPECULATORS AREN'T TEMPTED
One factor helping the potato remain affordable is the fact that unlike wheat, it is not a global commodity, so has not attracted speculative professional investment.
Each year, farmers around the globe produce about 600 million metric tonnes of wheat, and about 17 percent of that flows into foreign trade.
Wheat production is almost double that of potato output. Analysts estimate less than 5 percent of potatoes are traded internationally, and prices are mainly driven by local tastes, instead of international demand.
Raw potatoes are heavy and can rot in transit, so global trade in them has been slow to take off. They are also susceptible to infection with pathogens, hampering export to avoid spreading plant diseases.
The downside to that is that prices in some countries aren't attractive enough to persuade farmers to grow them. People in Peruvian markets say the government needs to help lift demand.
"Prices are low. It doesn't pay to work with potatoes," said Juana Villavicencio, who spent 15 years planting potatoes and now sells them for pennies a kilo in a market in Cusco, in Peru's southern Andes.
But science is moving fast. Genetically modified potatoes that resist "late blight" are being developed by German chemicals group BASF. The disease led to famine in Ireland during the 19th century and still causes about 20 percent of potato harvest losses in the world, the company says.
Scientists say farmers who use clean, virus-free seeds can boost yields by 30 percent and be cleared for export.
That would generate more income for farmers and encourage more production as companies could sell specialty potatoes abroad, instead of just as frozen french fries or potato chips.

Story by Terry Wade

REUTERS NEWS SERVICE
__________________________________________________________
Amazing prizes every hour with Live Search Big Snap
http://www.bigsnapsearch.com
Recent Activity
Visit Your Group
New business?

Get new customers.

List your web site

in Yahoo! Search.

Special K Group

on Yahoo! Groups

Learn how others

are losing pounds.

Do-It-Yourselfers

Find Y! Groups

on Lawn & garden,

homes and autos.

Need to Reply?

Click one of the "Reply" links to respond to a specific message in the Daily Digest.

Create New Topic | Visit Your Group on the Web

#600 From: "Pankaj Oudhia" <pankajoudhia@...>
Date:: Fri Apr 11, 2008 9:29 pm
Subject:: FW: Philippines cultivates new biofuel wonder crop
pankajoudhia
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
 
[Moderator's comment: Malunggay is Drumstick, Munga or Sahajan
(Moringa oliefera)]

Philippines cultivates new biofuel wonder crop

Filed from Singapore 11/04/2008 10:14:46 GMT


Philipines

PHILIPPINES: The Philippines is cultivating a new wonder crop for
biofuel production, according to media reports. The malunggay, a plant
that can be grown for food and fuel, is touted to be a better biofuel
crop than jatropha.

Unlike jatropha, all parts of the plant can be used either for food or
for fuel. The leaves of malunggay can be eaten, while oil can be drawn
from the seeds to produce fuel. The malunggay seedlings will take one
to two years to mature, half the time required for jatropha.

Secura International is promoting the cultivation of the new wonder
corp backed by the support from the Department of
Agriculture-Biotechnology Programme Office.

The biotechnology company has established 30 malunggay plantations
covering 300,000 hectares (741,316 acres) nationwide. It is now
looking for an additional 200,000 hectares (494,211 acres) in
Cotabato, Sultan Kudarat, Davao, Ilocos, Pangasinan and Bohol.

Oil extracted from the malunggay harvests at the plantations will be
supplied to North American Biofuel Inc. for biodiesel production.

http://www.energycurrent.com/index.php?id=3&storyid=9922

#599 From: "Tushar Dash" <tushardash01@...>
Date:: Fri Apr 11, 2008 4:49 pm
Subject:: Biofuel; Cause of international Food Crisis
tushardash_01
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
 

British PM sounds biofuel warning

4/11/2008 10:45:00 AM

 

British Prime Minister Gordon Brown has written to Japanese Prime Minister and G-8 Nations Chairman Yasuo Fukuda calling for a discussion of the impact of biofuel production on food prices at the Group of Eight rich nations summit in July.

"There is a growing consensus that we need urgently to examine the impact on food prices of different kinds and production methods of biofuels, and ensure that their use is responsible and sustainable," Brown wrote.

On Friday, French farm minster Michel Barnier told Reuters that production of food must take precedence over biofuels as prices surge and the threat of famine grows, and called for a European Union initiative on world supplies. "Absolute priority must be given to agricultural production for food," he said.

 

http://www.country-guide.ca/east/issues/ISArticle.asp?id=82785&issue=04112008&story_id=&PC=FBC



Tushar

Vasundhara

 


#598 From: "Tushar Dash" <tushardash01@...>
Date:: Thu Apr 10, 2008 7:55 am
Subject:: Biofuel;Fueling Food Crisis
tushardash_01
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
 

Biofuel; Fueling Food Crisis and Food Riot

 

UN agencies warn of food riots unless corrective steps taken

The Financial Express

Commodities Bureau
Posted online: Thursday , April 10, 2008 at 2354 hrs IST

 

 

 

New Delhi, Apr 9 The chiefs of UN agencies cautioned about food riots in the near future if corrective steps were not taken on time. They expressed concerns over the rising food prices across the world.

Briefing mediapersons here on Wednesday, the director-general of UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO), Jacques Diouf, said, "World food prices have risen 45% in the last nine months and there are serious shortages of rice, wheat and maize."

He singled out bio-fuel programme as one of the major contributing factor to the global price rise as it has caused diversion of farmland from food to fuel crops and the prices of bio-fuels which scaled up in tandem with the prices of fossil fuels in turn affected the food prices.

Diouf also said that the climate change had had its impact like droughts, floods and natural calamities at places. He called for smoothening of the demand-supply chain. He informed that global food stocks were at historic low since 1980s. He said that another reason for the price rise was the high GDP growth rate in populous countries like India and China where rise in disposal income had caused a change in life style and increased demand.

The FAO chief suggested that the governments should step up their investments in agriculture, particularly in irrigation, storage, feed and livestock, infrastructure and mechanism for ensuring sanitary and phytosanitary measures. "The critical situation of today is due to the wrong policies pursued in the last 20 years," he said.

Regarding global market, he said that it should ensure a level playing field and should not be distorted by subsidies and high tariffs. UNIDO director-general Kandeh K Yumkella said, "Industry can play a major role n post-harvest management, processing and in supply of inputs."

http://www.financialexpress.com/news/UN-agencies-warn-of-food-riots-unless-corrective-steps-taken/294857/

 

Just enough food to last 2-3 months, says FAO chief
9 Apr 2008, 2330 hrs IST , AGENCIES

 

NEW DELHI: The world had just about enough cereal stocks to feed the global population for two to three months. With a crisis looming worldwide, food prices too are far from coming down, the United Nations' Food and Agriculture Organisation revealed on Wednesday.

"The rise in prices of food commodities all over the world will not ease in the short term in view of supply-demand situation," FAO director general Jacques Diouf told reporters after meeting agriculture minister Sharad Pawar.

Diouf said the world has 4-5 million tonne of cereals stocks that can feed the global population for only 8-12 weeks.

"The world food situation is very serious today with food riots reported from many countries like Egypt, Cameroon, Haiti, Burkina Faso and Senegal. We fear that this may spread to other countries," he added.

"World food prices have risen 45% in the last nine months and there are serious shortages of rice, wheat and maize," Dious said.

Diouf noted that people in the developing countries spend 50-60% of their income on food and therefore, any rise in food prices affects them.

He attributed the increasing demand from developing countries, particularly in
China and India, and diversion of food grains towards production of bio-fuels to rising commodity prices across the world.

However, Pawar expressed confidence that India's food situation was comfortable.

"We have over half a million tonne of food grain surplus than the buffer norms as on April 1," Pawar said.

According to Food Corporation of India, the wheat stock as on April 1 is 5.5 MT against the buffer norm of 4 MT.
 
 
Tushar

 

 


#597 From: "Pankaj Oudhia" <pankajoudhia@...>
Date:: Wed Apr 9, 2008 8:20 pm
Subject:: 4 Children hospitalized due to Jatropha poisoning in CG
pankajoudhia
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
 
Dear Group Members,

     Raipur based Daily Chhattisgarh reported today that 4 children
were hospitalized in Bilaspur hospital due to accidental feeding of
poisonous Jatropha. These children are from village named Kopra
Bahatarai. All are from same family.


Pankaj Oudhia

#596 From: "Pankaj Oudhia" <pankajoudhia@...>
Date:: Wed Apr 9, 2008 8:00 am
Subject:: Re: By 2017, biofuel will meet 10% of transport needs
pankajoudhia
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
 
Status of Jatropha curcas in year 2022 in India.

By Pankaj Oudhia

http://ecoport.org/ep?SearchType=earticleView&earticleId=3082&page=-2


--- In jatropha@..., "Kanchi Kohli" <kanchikohli@...> wrote:
>
> By 2017, biofuel will meet 10% of transport needs
> 9 Apr 2008, 0341 hrs IST,Nitin Sethi,TNN
>
>
>
> New Delhi: Disregarding the consequences of the use of scarce land
to grow
> biofuels on environment and food security,
>
<http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India/By_2017_biofuel_will_meet_10_of_tr
> ansport_needs/articleshow/2936405.cms> India is readying a national
biofuel
> policy, which aims to set a target of meeting about 10% of total
transport
> fuel with bio-fuels by 2017.
>
> The policy is open to changes, but estimates suggest that 12 million
> hectares of land would have to be brought under
>
<http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India/By_2017_biofuel_will_meet_10_of_tr
> ansport_needs/articleshow/2936405.cms> biofuel crops to meet the
target.
>
> This is roughly an area the size of
>
<http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India/By_2017_biofuel_will_meet_10_of_tr
> ansport_needs/articleshow/2936405.cms> Goa and Kerala put together.
Though
> the government has said that it would use only revenue and forest
wastelands
> for plantations, the continued premium on biofuels is sure to cause
> consternation to the growing numbers who feel that the land
resources should
> be harnessed solely for growing crops or animal feed.
>
> A Group of Ministers, headed by agriculture minister Sharad Pawar, is
> expected to finalise the policy by the end of May after being under
> discussion for almost a year.
>
> The group will finalize its stance when the romance with biofuels
seems to
> have somewhat soured because of the food crisis and the findings
that they
> may worsen the problem of climate change.
>
> Unlike the US and southeast Asian countries, the policy will push
for only
> non-edible crops to be used for manufacturing biofuels. With the
diversion
> of corn by US and palm in southeast Asia being partially blamed for
a global
> food crisis, the stipulation on using non-edible plants is also a
devise to
> deflect criticism of encouraging biofuels.
>
> US plans to meet 30% of its transport fuel demand through biofuels
by 2030.
> This means that huge quantities of corn and maize that US
>
<http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India/By_2017_biofuel_will_meet_10_of_tr
> ansport_needs/articleshow/2936405.cms> farmers produce will
disappear from
> the international grain markets.
>
> Even in India, food-fuel issues are not likely to go away,
particularly when
> farm productivity is low, capital investment is lagging and procurement
> problems could force government to look at imports.
>
> India already has 600,00 hectares under jatropha plantations in AP,
> Rajasthan, MP and Chhattisgarh, which could provide 0.3-0.5 billion
litres
> of biodiesel. India is also keen on using biofuels not only for
producing
> fuel but also electrification. The first such biofuel electrified
village
> has already come up in Chhattisgarh.
> The policy would also create a National Biofuel Board to spearhead the
> development of these fuels. It would be provided due legal backing
with a
> law.
>
> A subsidy for biofuel growers could be a part of the policy, sources
said.
> The policy also contemplates a subsidy structure to keep biofuels at
parity
> with other fuels by adjusting excise and VAT. The government is also
keen on
> keeping the biofuel sector completely domestic - it will not be open to
> export and import which is seen as a measure to protect farmers from
> volatile international oil markets.
>
> This is contrary to US plans which is working to a long-term strategy of
> creating an international market with standardized biofuels that can be
> traded just like any other commodity. US is steadily moving towards
> second-generation biofuels. Unlike the first generation technology,
which
> uses sugar, starch, vegetable oil, or animal fats to make oil, the
> second-generation technology is based on cellulosic biofuels from
non-food
> crops and is yet to reach a commercial scale.
>
> Some experts have argued that developing countries like India should
wait
> for second-generation technology, which has a much smaller ecological
> footprint. But India is bound to focus on both ethanol and jatropha
besides
> other crops on which research is still on.
>
>
>
>
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India/By_2017_biofuel_will_meet_10_of_tra
> nsport_needs/articleshow/2936405.cms
>

#595 From: "Kanchi Kohli" <kanchikohli@...>
Date:: Wed Apr 9, 2008 5:26 am
Subject:: By 2017, biofuel will meet 10% of transport needs
kanchikohli
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
 

By 2017, biofuel will meet 10% of transport needs
9 Apr 2008, 0341 hrs IST,Nitin Sethi,TNN

 

New Delhi: Disregarding the consequences of the use of scarce land to grow biofuels on environment and food security, India is readying a national biofuel policy, which aims to set a target of meeting about 10% of total transport fuel with bio-fuels by 2017.

The policy is open to changes, but estimates suggest that 12 million hectares of land would have to be brought under biofuel crops to meet the target.

This is roughly an area the size of Goa and Kerala put together. Though the government has said that it would use only revenue and forest wastelands for plantations, the continued premium on biofuels is sure to cause consternation to the growing numbers who feel that the land resources should be harnessed solely for growing crops or animal feed.

A Group of Ministers, headed by agriculture minister Sharad Pawar, is expected to finalise the policy by the end of May after being under discussion for almost a year.

The group will finalize its stance when the romance with biofuels seems to have somewhat soured because of the food crisis and the findings that they may worsen the problem of climate change.

Unlike the US and southeast Asian countries, the policy will push for only non-edible crops to be used for manufacturing biofuels. With the diversion of corn by US and palm in southeast Asia being partially blamed for a global food crisis, the stipulation on using non-edible plants is also a devise to deflect criticism of encouraging biofuels.

US plans to meet 30% of its transport fuel demand through biofuels by 2030. This means that huge quantities of corn and maize that US farmers produce will disappear from the international grain markets.

Even in India, food-fuel issues are not likely to go away, particularly when farm productivity is low, capital investment is lagging and procurement problems could force government to look at imports.

India already has 600,00 hectares under jatropha plantations in AP, Rajasthan, MP and Chhattisgarh, which could provide 0.3-0.5 billion litres of biodiesel. India is also keen on using biofuels not only for producing fuel but also electrification. The first such biofuel electrified village has already come up in Chhattisgarh.
The policy would also create a National Biofuel Board to spearhead the development of these fuels. It would be provided due legal backing with a law.

A subsidy for biofuel growers could be a part of the policy, sources said. The policy also contemplates a subsidy structure to keep biofuels at parity with other fuels by adjusting excise and VAT. The government is also keen on keeping the biofuel sector completely domestic — it will not be open to export and import which is seen as a measure to protect farmers from volatile international oil markets.

This is contrary to US plans which is working to a long-term strategy of creating an international market with standardized biofuels that can be traded just like any other commodity. US is steadily moving towards second-generation biofuels. Unlike the first generation technology, which uses sugar, starch, vegetable oil, or animal fats to make oil, the second-generation technology is based on cellulosic biofuels from non-food crops and is yet to reach a commercial scale.

Some experts have argued that developing countries like India should wait for second-generation technology, which has a much smaller ecological footprint. But India is bound to focus on both ethanol and jatropha besides other crops on which research is still on.

 

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India/By_2017_biofuel_will_meet_10_of_transport_needs/articleshow/2936405.cms


#594 From: "Pankaj Oudhia" <pankajoudhia@...>
Date:: Sun Mar 30, 2008 8:04 am
Subject:: FW: Revealed: No Jatropha policy in place
pankajoudhia
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
 
Revealed: No Jatropha policy in place
By Fanyana Mabuza

An eye-opening seminar on Jatropha, the much touted alternative to
fossil fuels, was held at the University of Swaziland's Luyengo Campus
on Tuesday evening, and it managed to bring to the fore the pros and
cons of this ambitious project currently driven by D1 Oils Swaziland,
a local subsidiary of the International company.

Entitled `Jatropha... A Case for Food Security in Swaziland', the
seminar, organised by the UNISWA's UMoba Society, pitted the plant's
detractors and supporters against each other.

Among the panelists were D1 Oils' Rex Brown, a former lecturer in
Agricultural Geography at the University and Thuli Makama, Director of
environmental watchdog Yonge Nawe - Friends of the Earth International
(FoEI).

revolutionalise

Yonge Nawe (FoEI)'s stand over the Jatropha issue is well known, while
D1 Oils' Brown insisted that the tree could revolutionalise farmer's
lives, as they can begin reaping financial rewards in the third year
of a Jatropha tree's life, while that windfall could last for over 50
years as the tree is capable of growing that old.

Other panelists included Solomon Gamedze from the Ministry of
Agriculture, Professor OT Edje from the University, and
representatives from NGOs working on food and poverty alleviation,
like World Vision, the Food and Agricultural Organisation and CANGO.

formulating

It can be said that the Ministry of Agriculture's Gamedze made
startling revelations to the effect that government was still
formulating a policy to regulate the planting and processing of
Jatropha in the country, but already D1 Oils had planted vast acres of
land with the tree.

The company has also roped in many farmers countrywide, most who have
quit cultivating staples and joined the Jatropha bandwagon, which
sadly, has not been tested for success in Swaziland.

There were fears also that what if the tree proved to be invasive and
toxic, which could leave the country with a bigger problem than
currently has, that of Chromolaema Odorata (Sandanezwe).

decried

Gamedze decried the fact that seemingly the country had thrown caution
to the wind and adopted the Jatropha craze, without fully engaging the
practitioners.

"We have not had much chance of talking to each other as stakeholders,
while so much has taken place concerning the plant. As much as the
Ministry welcomes the issue of biofuels if they can relieve the
country of the ever escalating costs of fossil fuels, we should
remember that only 10 percent of the land is arable, and we should be
seen to be asking how much of that land can be sacrificed to
Jatropha," Gamedze noted.

competition

He continued that they were aware of the already raging competition
between Jatropha and food security, which was unfortunate as
government did not have sufficient information about the oil producing
tree, whether, for example, it was invasive or not.

"No environmental risk assessment has been undertaken over Jatropha,
when it should have been put under a severe environmental scrutiny
before it could be embarked upon. This is against the spirit of the
Plant Control Act of 1981.

"More data, more quantitative information and partnership should have
been forged between stakeholders before we committed ourselves to the
Jatropha project," Gamedze stated, putting the house in a quandary as
to whoever gave D1 Oils the go ahead to begin such an ambitious
project, when the country was still formulating a policy for it.

warned

Yonge Nawe FoEI's Makama warned that in the mix of all priorities in
the country, Swaziland could be joining the Jatropha bandwagon blindly.

"The National Biofuels strategy is still being developed but acres
upon acres of arable land has been planted with Jatropha. What will
happen if the studies being conducted can prove otherwise? We should
have applied that old idiom: If there is an uncertainty, take
caution", she said.

She noted that the tree was not grown in private farms, which had the
necessary controls but was being foistered on Swazi farmers with no
power to remediate it, if it could get out of hand.

"The United Nations has identified Jatropha as invasive, while the
Jatropha growing farmers are the same ones queuing for Mshamndane
food. All the myths about Jatropha's pros are contested. We needed a
full disclosure on the plant before we could commit ourselves fully,
but sadly we have already done so." she closed.

intercrop

Professor Edje explained that it was possible to intercrop Jatropha
with other crops like beans, saying such a practice could lead to
better land usage.

Other organisations at the seminar refrained from making any remarks
on the subject, saying they were watching closely the developments,
and could comment thereafter.

It should be said that His Majesty King Mswati II was expected to
officially launch the D1 Oils Swaziland Jatropha project the previous
Friday, but the event was postponed to a later date, due to reasons as
yet unexplained.

http://www.observer.org.sz/weekend/main.php?id=42441&section=mainweek

#593 From: "Pankaj Oudhia" <pankajoudhia@...>
Date:: Sun Mar 30, 2008 8:03 am
Subject:: FW: Bio-fuel: End or Beginning
pankajoudhia
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
 
Bio-fuel: End or Beginning
Sun, 2008-03-30 02:15

By Chandra Mohan - Syndicate Features

Though bio-fuel is touted as one of the better and cheaper
environment-friendly alternatives for motor vehicles, it has been
attracting a rash of negative publicity particularly after
corn-derived ethanol produced in the US has driven up corn prices as a
result of which tortilla, a must food item in Mexican homes, is
becoming unaffordable in Mexican homes. So, the question is will the
honeymoon with bio-fuel be over even before it has begun?

Bio-fuel has been painted as a villain that will inflict a more
serious problem on the hapless planet earth. A report prepared by
British members of parliament says that bio-fuel often increases
greenhouse gas emissions and exacerbates the climate change that it is
supposed to avoid. Merely increasing the use of bio fuels will not
mitigate the problem of climate change and the harm it is causing to
man and his planet.

It is widely believed that the food crops that go into the production
of bio-fuel will increase food prices manifold, which in turn may lead
to worldwide hunger. The message is grim because grain production is
already in decline the world over.

The cry against bio-fuel has not subsided even when $100 a barrel
looks like the base price of crude oil and its climb towards the $200
a barrel mark in maybe less than a year does not sound like a wild
guess. Some analysts say it will hit the $250 a barrel mark. It will
probably be a matter of debate which of the two is a nearer and more
serious threat: pollution or the astronomical levels of crude oil.

For countries like India the global tirade against bio-fuel may be
especially embarrassing as the campaign for popularising it in the
country remains in place despite the gathering storm against it. For
instance, it was only in February 2007 that the government of Haryana
had signed seven MoUs with independent power producers to set up 21
biomass-based power stations at eight different locations to produce
686 mw of power. The `raw material' to be used includes rice and wheat
husk and also sugarcane straw, all from an area within a radius of 15
to 20 km of the plants.

Haryana has identified a potential of 1400 mw from biomass. But that
is only a fraction of its projected need for 2010, which is 40,000 mw.
Meanwhile, officials continue to sing praises of Jatropha, a bio-fuel
crop that is seen as India's answer to the oil crisis caused by
rocketing prices and the country's insatiable hunger for oil, thanks
to its galloping economy.

The government will cut a sorry figure if it renounces the bio-fuel
policy after investing a great deal of money and thought into it. But
with questions being raised over the efficacy of bio-fuel the
government may have to decide if it wants to continue with active
bio-fuel programmes vigorously or put in slow motion. The present
position of the government is that it will continue to encourage
Jatropha cultivation for bio-fuel production but on degraded land. It
may be a signal for a change in the bio-fuel policy, but it has to be
pointed out that it has come without any assessment of Jatropha's
adverse impact on the cultivation of bio-fuel crops.

Of course, the embarrassment is not confined to India. The European
Union had announced some time ago that by 2020 it wants the fuel for
10 percent of cars in its member nations to come from bio fuels. The
target, which was set with a view to lessening the impact of climate
change, has not been given up, as far as one knows. The issue of
climate change has been agitating the world seriously for almost two
years now when the fear of its serious consequences has forced a
change in the earlier lackadaisical approach towards it.

Roughly speaking, anything that burns but made with vegetable matter
can be called bio-fuel. It was initially hailed as one of the best
solutions for dealing with the problem of climate change because
bio-fuel use can, at least so it was believed then, reduce greenhouse
gas emissions. Its application in the transport sector was greatly
advocated.

But the `vegetable matter' needed for producing bio-fuel is grown on
farmlands. Now experts say that 9 percent of the world agricultural
land will be needed to replace just 10 percent of the fuels used by
the transport sector. The figure does not suggest that bio-fuel is a
better source to counter the emission problems arising from the
transport sector.

It is furthered strengthened by a UN study, which says that bio-fuel
will be a more effective alternative if it is used for heating and
generating power rather than used in the transport sector.
So, there is still some reason to produce and use bio-fuel. Recently
developed technologies enable bio-fuel to be produced from waste from
cash crops and also from hardy plants that grow on poor soils. In a
given area it is possible to grow two crops, for food and bio-fuel.
This can even make food cheaper as farm incomes rise from two crops. A
lot of hope rests on the second generation of bio fuels.

However, it was never claimed that bio fuels alone can address the
problem of climate change. The issue is about alternatives to fossil
fuel, which are many but so far their application has, for various
reasons, been limited. The world is still to exploit the energy
potential of wind, thermal, solar and ocean currents. As the harmful
effects of climate change become more and more evident much of the
world is committing itself to reduced emissions. Even the hitherto
reluctant US is likely to come on board. Thanks to the relentless
upward ride of crude prices, the world has hardly any option other
than marching towards `renewable' and `alternative' sources of energy.
And bio-fuel does figure in this picture.

http://www.asiantribune.com/?q=node/10250

#592 From: "Viren Lobo" <vlobo62@...>
Date:: Tue Mar 25, 2008 1:41 pm
Subject:: Re: Re: On biodiesel and perpetual motion ?
vitits
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
 
thanks for the correction
 
Viren
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2008 9:37 AM
Subject: [jatropha] Re: On biodiesel and perpetual motion ?

Thanks Viren for your message. Here is minor correction in your
message. You have written.

'jatorpha has deveolped allelotrophic properties'

In fact Jatropha *possess* Allelopathic properties. It secrets so many
allelochemicals in soil. These allelochemicals inhibit growth of
native flora. Hence large scale plantation of such plants having
strong allelochemicals is curse for biodiversity.

When I was in Agriculture university I conducted small trial to study
allelopathic effect of Jatropha on Pigeonpea. Here is reference. This
lab study showed that Jatropha extracts are harmful to this crop
widely cultivated in crop bund where Jatropha plantation is in
progress in many parts of India including in Chhattisgarh.

http://ecoport.org/ep?SearchType=reference&ReferenceID=556604

Through on-going surveys I have listed over 500 native species
affected by Jatropha allelopathy.

What is status of pest infestation in Jatropha in your state?

regards

Pankaj Oudhia

--- In jatropha@yahoogroups.co.in, "Viren Lobo" <vlobo62@...> wrote:
>
>
> The Government policy on Biodiesel is based heavily on jatropha,
which they say can grow anywhere . particularly on wastelands and with
very little water .. .. To grow sucessfully in such conditions,
jatorpha has deveolped allelotrophic properties. ...... So what will
happen when millions of hectares are put under this plant ? The cut
paste from Robert Mc Arthurs book on Geographicla ecology shows that
under Gaus principle... no two species can live in the same niche ...
There has to be two distinct niches for them to exist .... The multi
species of the wet tropics, makes use of abundance to create such
multiple niches . In desert and semi desert conditions, a number of
unqiue niches are also created to use sun, rain and the nutireints
present in the soil.... What is the understanding of the those who in
thier wisdom think that jatropha is an answer to Inida's fuel crisis ???
>
>
> Viren
>
>
>
----------------------------------------------------------

>
> Some snippets from Robert Mc Arthurs book on Geographical ecology
>
>
> To do science is to search for repeated patterns not simply to
accumulate facts and to do the science of geographical ecology is to
search for patters of plant and animal life that can be put on amp .
>
> The theme running though this book is that he structure of the
environment , the morphology of the species , the economics of species
behaviour and the dynamics of population changes are the four
essential ingredients of all interesting biogeographic patterns ..
>
> Impact of adaibatics
>
> The derivation of adiabatic lapse rate is simple using the first
law of thermodynamics , the ideal gas law , and the rate of pressure
change with elevation . But since each of these has its own empirical
constraints , it is no greaer burden simply to assume the lapse rate
as an empirical rule . The derivation does show however that the
cooling rate is approximately constant....... We can now see why
mountaintops are cooler than lower elevations. In fact 3^F cooling of
100 feet of elevation on a moist mountain is very roughly equal to the
cooling of 100 miles of latitude , which has been called " hopkins
bioclimatic law " .
>
> now we suppose there is a small parcel of air being lifted by the
turbulence and cooling adiabatically f course as it rises . This air
finds itself less cool than the neighbouring air at each elevation and
hence it is lighter and continues to rise sucking up the air behind
it. .. this is called unstable. air which cools slower than than
adiabatic is stable and not vulnerable to eddies and disturbances ....
Warm air over a cold nocturnal desert is stable but gives way to
unstable air and dust deveils as the desert warms up in the day time .
>
>
> On competition
>
> For years ecologists were plaugued by an apparent paradox. many
species seemed to coexist in nature but not in the laboratory
experiments .. ...There has arisen from these and similar experiments
a widely accepted belief called the principle of competitive exclusion
or gause's principle .. The principle states that two species cannot
coexist unless they are doing differnt things or more baldly unless
there are two nches
>
> some terms
>
> competitor similarity - the more similar the competing species,
the smaller their zone of geographic or habitat overlap
>
> diffuse competition - sevarla competitors which can outcompete a
single species.
>
> resource overlap - the coexistence of two or more competitors
becomes rapidly more preacrious as the distance between their resource
mean approaches root 2 times thier standard deviation
>
> geographic sequences - along a geographic continuum two
competitors may be found in either of the following sequences 1. one
species then both , then the other 2. one species , then a vacant
zone , then the other .
>
> Volterra's thoery on competition
>
> equation to explain coexistence or one species replacing another.
>
>
> The economics of consumer choice
>
> Thus from a foraging birds point of view , there is a great
diversity of foliage types , from tree trunks to loose canopy , to
bushes to herbaceous ground cover , but each is repeated so that a
tree trunk feeder for example can find many trunks to search . This
postulate at least is required because it means that a searching bird
will have a fairly clear staititical .
>
>
> Functional morphology
>
> Some sort of continuity principle seems to be minimal: that nearby
morphologies are adapted for nearby methods of harvesting food.
>
>
> Cody 1971 has studied the economics of flocking behaviour of
fringillid species in the Mohave desert . He argues that foraging
flocks accomplish two things that are are not readily accomplished by
an individual acting independantly . First exploited vs unexploited
areas are more easily recognised with the result that S is reduced .
Second int he case of renewable resources flock behaviour can evolve
in such a wya as to optimze the return time to previous expoited areas.
>
> Compression hypothesis
>
> As the number of competing species incress feeding habitats
contract and the actual range of food items taken either remains
constant or actually increases slightly . .... Ocassionally however
the competitors may reduce the food in a species own favoured
location. In such situations the effect would be to increase the
species range of foraging species.
>
>
> The ringed kingfisher . should perch so that the greatest number
of grams of fish per day can be captured . so it perches high enough
to search a wide area for big fish .. but notice how this restricts
its diet : by perching so high so that it can survey a large area, it
can no longer see the very small fish .. and even if it did the
energy expended would not compensate for the long dive...
>
>
> Viren
>


#591 From: "Pankaj Oudhia" <pankajoudhia@...>
Date:: Tue Mar 25, 2008 12:32 pm
Subject:: FW: Top scientists warn against rush to biofuel
pankajoudhia
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
 
Thanks Shubhranshu Choudhary ji for forwarding this news.

Moderator
------


Top scientists warn against rush to biofuel

Brown plans to resist EU plans for increased quotas as doubts multiply

     * James Randerson and Nicholas Watt
     * The Guardian,
     * Tuesday March 25 2008
     * Article history

About this article
Close
This article appeared in the Guardian on Tuesday March 25 2008 on p1
of the Top stories section. It was last updated at 01:56 on March 25 2008.
Trucks are loaded with sugar cane, which will be used to produce
biofuels, in Brazil

Trucks are loaded with sugar cane, which will be used to produce
biofuels, in Brazil. Photograph: Paulo Whitaker/Reuters

Gordon Brown is preparing for a battle with the European Union over
biofuels after one of the government's leading scientists warned they
could exacerbate climate change rather than combat it.

In an outspoken attack on a policy which comes into force next week,
Professor Bob Watson, the chief scientific adviser at the Department
for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, said it would be wrong to
introduce compulsory quotas for the use of biofuels in petrol and
diesel before their effects had been properly assessed.

"If one started to use biofuels ... and in reality that policy led to
an increase in greenhouse gases rather than a decrease, that would
obviously be insane," Watson said. "It would certainly be a perverse
outcome."

Under the Renewable Transport Fuels Obligation, all petrol and diesel
must contain 2.5% of biofuels from April 1. This is designed to ensure
that Britain complies with a 2003 EU directive that 5.75% of petrol
and diesel come from renewable sources by 2010.

But scientists have increasingly questioned the sustainability of
biofuels, warning that by increasing deforestation the energy source
may be contributing to global warming.

Watson's warning was echoed last night by Professor Sir David King,
who recently retired as the government's chief scientific adviser. He
said biofuel quotas should be put on hold until the results were known
of a review which has been commissioned by ministers.

"What is absolutely desperately needed within government are people of
integrity who will state what the science advice is under whatever
political pressure or circumstances," he said.

The EU plans to raise the compulsory biofuel quota to 10% by 2020, but
Brown is understood to be ready to challenge this plan. A senior
government source said last night: "There is a growing feeling that we
need to get all the facts. Some biofuels are OK but there are serious
questions about others. More work needs to be done."

Sources say the government has no choice but to implement the
guidelines next month because Britain is obliged under EU law to
comply with the 2010 target.

But the report on biofuels, to come from the head of the Renewable
Fuels Agency, Professor Ed Gallagher, may be used to challenge the
more ambitious target for 2020, which is not set in law.

John Beddington, the government's current chief scientific adviser,
has already expressed scepticism about biofuels. At a speech in
Westminster this month he said demand for biofuels from the US had
delivered a "major shock" to world agriculture, which was raising food
prices globally. "There are real problems with the unsustainability of
biofuels," he said, adding that cutting down rainforest to grow the
crops was "profoundly stupid".

Britain will move cautiously in its battle with Brussels because José
Manuel Barroso, the European commission president, is championing the
10% target for 2020. Barroso this month dismissed as "exaggerated"
claims that biofuels can lead to increases in food prices and
greenhouse gas emissions due to deforestation. But other members of
the commission and other countries, including Germany, sympathise with
Britain.

Brown was due to release a report touching on issues including
biofuels, when he met Barroso in Brussels last month. But the prime
minister decided that the time was "not right or ripe".

The prime minister made clear that Britain is wary of the target when
he said last November: "I take extremely seriously concerns about the
impact of biofuels on deforestation, precious habitats and on food
security, and the UK is working to ensure a European sustainability
standard is introduced as soon as possible, and we will not support an
increase in biofuels over current target levels until an effective
standard is in place."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/mar/25/biofuels.energy1

#590 From: "Pankaj Oudhia" <pankajoudhia@...>
Date:: Tue Mar 25, 2008 4:07 am
Subject:: Re: On biodiesel and perpetual motion ?
pankajoudhia
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
 
Thanks Viren for your message. Here is minor correction in your
message. You have written.

'jatorpha has deveolped allelotrophic properties'


In fact Jatropha *possess* Allelopathic properties. It secrets so many
allelochemicals in soil. These allelochemicals inhibit growth of
native flora.  Hence large scale plantation of such plants having
strong allelochemicals is curse for biodiversity.

When I was in Agriculture university I conducted small trial to study
allelopathic effect of Jatropha on Pigeonpea. Here is reference. This
lab study showed that Jatropha extracts are harmful to this crop
widely cultivated in crop bund where Jatropha plantation is in
progress in many parts of India including in Chhattisgarh.

http://ecoport.org/ep?SearchType=reference&ReferenceID=556604

Through on-going surveys I have listed over 500 native species
affected by Jatropha allelopathy.


What is status of pest infestation in Jatropha in your state?

regards

Pankaj Oudhia


--- In jatropha@..., "Viren Lobo" <vlobo62@...> wrote:
>
>
> The Government  policy on Biodiesel  is based heavily on jatropha,
which they say can grow anywhere . particularly on wastelands and with
very little water ..  .. To grow sucessfully in such conditions,
jatorpha has deveolped allelotrophic properties.  ......  So what will
happen when millions of hectares are put under this plant ?  The cut
paste from Robert Mc Arthurs book on Geographicla ecology shows that
under Gaus principle... no two species can live in the same niche ...
There has to be two distinct niches for them to exist .... The multi
species of the wet tropics, makes use of abundance to create such
multiple niches . In desert and semi desert conditions,  a number of
unqiue niches are also created  to use sun, rain and the nutireints
present in the soil.... What is the understanding of the those  who in
thier wisdom think that jatropha is an answer to Inida's fuel crisis ???
>
>
> Viren
>
>
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------\
--------------------------

>
>   Some snippets from Robert Mc Arthurs book on Geographical ecology
>
>
>   To do science is to search for repeated patterns not simply to
accumulate facts and to do the science of geographical ecology is to
search for patters of plant and animal life that can be put on amp .
>
>   The theme running though this book is that he structure of the
environment , the morphology of the species , the economics of species
behaviour and the dynamics of population changes are the four
essential ingredients of all interesting biogeographic patterns ..
>
>   Impact of adaibatics
>
>   The derivation of adiabatic lapse rate is simple using the first
law of thermodynamics , the ideal gas law , and the rate of pressure
change with elevation . But since each of these has its own empirical
constraints , it is no greaer burden simply to assume the lapse rate
as an empirical rule . The derivation does show however that the
cooling rate is approximately constant....... We can now see why
mountaintops are cooler than lower elevations. In fact 3^F cooling of
100 feet of elevation on a moist mountain is very roughly equal to the
cooling of 100 miles of latitude , which has been called " hopkins
bioclimatic law " .
>
>   now we suppose there is a small parcel of air being lifted by the
turbulence and cooling adiabatically f course as it rises . This air
finds itself less cool than the neighbouring air at each elevation and
hence it is lighter and continues to rise  sucking up the air behind
it. .. this is called unstable.  air which cools slower than than
adiabatic is stable and not vulnerable to eddies and disturbances ....
Warm air over a cold nocturnal desert is stable but gives way to
unstable air and dust deveils as the desert warms up in the day time .
>
>
>   On competition
>
>   For years ecologists were plaugued by an apparent paradox. many
species seemed to coexist in nature but not in the laboratory
experiments .. ...There has arisen from these and similar experiments
a widely accepted belief called the principle of competitive exclusion
or gause's principle .. The principle states that two species cannot
coexist unless they are doing differnt things or more baldly unless
there are two nches
>
>   some terms
>
>   competitor similarity  - the more similar the competing species,
the smaller their zone of geographic or habitat overlap
>
>   diffuse competition - sevarla competitors which can outcompete a
single species.
>
>   resource overlap - the coexistence of two or more competitors
becomes rapidly more preacrious as the distance between their resource
mean approaches root 2 times thier standard deviation
>
>   geographic sequences - along a geographic continuum two
competitors may be found in either of the following sequences 1. one
species then both , then the other  2. one species , then a vacant
zone , then the other .
>
>   Volterra's thoery on competition
>
>   equation to explain coexistence or one species replacing another.
>
>
>   The economics of consumer choice
>
>   Thus from a foraging birds point of view , there is a great
diversity of foliage types , from tree trunks to loose canopy , to
bushes to herbaceous ground cover , but each is repeated so that a
tree trunk feeder for example can find many trunks to search . This
postulate at least is required because it means that a searching bird
will have  a fairly clear staititical   .
>
>
>   Functional morphology
>
>   Some sort of continuity principle seems to be minimal: that nearby
morphologies are adapted for nearby methods of harvesting food.
>
>
>   Cody 1971  has studied the economics of flocking behaviour of
fringillid species in the Mohave desert . He argues that foraging
flocks accomplish two things that are are not readily accomplished by
an individual acting independantly . First exploited vs unexploited
areas are more easily recognised with the result that S is reduced .
Second int he case of renewable  resources flock behaviour can evolve
in such a wya as to optimze the return time to previous expoited areas.
>
>   Compression hypothesis
>
>   As the number of competing species incress feeding habitats
contract and the actual range of food items taken either remains
constant or actually increases slightly . .... Ocassionally however
the competitors may reduce the food in a species own favoured
location. In such situations the effect would be to increase the
species range of foraging species.
>
>
>   The ringed  kingfisher . should perch so that the greatest number
of grams of fish per day can be captured . so it perches high enough
to search  a wide area for big fish ..   but notice how this restricts
its diet : by perching so high so that it can survey a large area, it
can no longer see the very small fish  .. and even if it did the
energy expended would not compensate for the long dive...
>
>
>   Viren
>

#589 From: "Viren Lobo" <vlobo62@...>
Date:: Tue Mar 25, 2008 2:25 am
Subject:: On biodiesel and perpetual motion ?
vitits
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
 
 
The Government  policy on Biodiesel  is based heavily on jatropha, which they say can grow anywhere . particularly on wastelands and with very little water ..  .. To grow sucessfully in such conditions, jatorpha has deveolped allelotrophic properties.  ......  So what will happen when millions of hectares are put under this plant ?  The cut paste from Robert Mc Arthurs book on Geographicla ecology shows that under Gaus principle... no two species can live in the same niche ... There has to be two distinct niches for them to exist .... The multi species of the wet tropics, makes use of abundance to create such multiple niches . In desert and semi desert conditions,  a number of unqiue niches are also created  to use sun, rain and the nutireints present in the soil.... What is the understanding of the those  who in thier wisdom think that jatropha is an answer to Inida's fuel crisis ???
 
 
Viren  
 
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------  
 
Some snippets from Robert Mc Arthurs book on Geographical ecology
 
 
To do science is to search for repeated patterns not simply to accumulate facts and to do the science of geographical ecology is to search for patters of plant and animal life that can be put on amp .
 
The theme running though this book is that he structure of the environment , the morphology of the species , the economics of species behaviour and the dynamics of population changes are the four essential ingredients of all interesting biogeographic patterns ..
 
Impact of adaibatics
 
The derivation of adiabatic lapse rate is simple using the first law of thermodynamics , the ideal gas law , and the rate of pressure change with elevation . But since each of these has its own empirical constraints , it is no greaer burden simply to assume the lapse rate as an empirical rule . The derivation does show however that the cooling rate is approximately constant....... We can now see why mountaintops are cooler than lower elevations. In fact 3^F cooling of 100 feet of elevation on a moist mountain is very roughly equal to the cooling of 100 miles of latitude , which has been called " hopkins bioclimatic law " .
 
now we suppose there is a small parcel of air being lifted by the turbulence and cooling adiabatically f course as it rises . This air finds itself less cool than the neighbouring air at each elevation and hence it is lighter and continues to rise  sucking up the air behind it. .. this is called unstable.  air which cools slower than than adiabatic is stable and not vulnerable to eddies and disturbances .... Warm air over a cold nocturnal desert is stable but gives way to unstable air and dust deveils as the desert warms up in the day time .
 
 
On competition
 
For years ecologists were plaugued by an apparent paradox. many species seemed to coexist in nature but not in the laboratory experiments .. ...There has arisen from these and similar experiments a widely accepted belief called the principle of competitive exclusion or gause's principle .. The principle states that two species cannot coexist unless they are doing differnt things or more baldly unless there are two nches
 
some terms
 
competitor similarity  - the more similar the competing species, the smaller their zone of geographic or habitat overlap
 
diffuse competition - sevarla competitors which can outcompete a single species.
 
resource overlap - the coexistence of two or more competitors becomes rapidly more preacrious as the distance between their resource mean approaches root 2 times thier standard deviation
 
geographic sequences - along a geographic continuum two competitors may be found in either of the following sequences 1. one species then both , then the other  2. one species , then a vacant zone , then the other .
 
Volterra's thoery on competition
 
equation to explain coexistence or one species replacing another.
 
 
The economics of consumer choice
 
Thus from a foraging birds point of view , there is a great diversity of foliage types , from tree trunks to loose canopy , to bushes to herbaceous ground cover , but each is repeated so that a tree trunk feeder for example can find many trunks to search . This postulate at least is required because it means that a searching bird will have  a fairly clear staititical   .
 
 
Functional morphology
 
Some sort of continuity principle seems to be minimal: that nearby morphologies are adapted for nearby methods of harvesting food.
 
 
Cody 1971  has studied the economics of flocking behaviour of fringillid species in the Mohave desert . He argues that foraging flocks accomplish two things that are are not readily accomplished by an individual acting independantly . First exploited vs unexploited areas are more easily recognised with the result that S is reduced . Second int he case of renewable  resources flock behaviour can evolve in such a wya as to optimze the return time to previous expoited areas.
 
Compression hypothesis
 
As the number of competing species incress feeding habitats contract and the actual range of food items taken either remains constant or actually increases slightly . .... Ocassionally however the competitors may reduce the food in a species own favoured location. In such situations the effect would be to increase the species range of foraging species.
 
 
The ringed  kingfisher . should perch so that the greatest number of grams of fish per day can be captured . so it perches high enough to search  a wide area for big fish ..   but notice how this restricts its diet : by perching so high so that it can survey a large area, it can no longer see the very small fish  .. and even if it did the energy expended would not compensate for the long dive...
 
 
Viren  
 
 
 

#588 From: "Pankaj Oudhia" <pankajoudhia@...>
Date:: Thu Mar 20, 2008 7:14 am
Subject:: FW: Be cautious about biofuels talk
pankajoudhia
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
 
Be cautious about biofuels talk


Publication Date: 3/20/2008

I wish to take issue with your editorial (DN March 11, 2008) on the
potential for biofuel in East Africa.

It was misleading to state, “we have the land and the climate”.
Nothing could be further from the truth. The large areas of empty land
are semi-arid or arid, while the sunny climate is only suitable to
bronze tourists and the occasional rain produces a few weeks poor
grazing per year.

Brazil is often cited as the example for its biofuel production, but
it is fortunate in having large areas of arable land with reliable
rainfall and can produce high yields of sugar efficiently.  No similar
possibility exists in Kenya, but the alternative use of semi-arid
areas to grow jatropha trees and process the oil into biodiesel is
regularly proposed and is being implemented on a limited scale.

The news of a new investment in unproven technologies may make good
headlines but so often that is all that is heard of the project.

T. B. MUCKLE,
Naro Moru

http://www.nationmedia.com/dailynation/nmgcontententry.asp?category_id=23&newsid\
=119393

#587 From: "Pankaj Oudhia" <pankajoudhia@...>
Date:: Wed Mar 19, 2008 5:14 am
Subject:: FW: Chinese biofuel 'could endanger biodiversity'
pankajoudhia
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
 
Chinese biofuel 'could endanger biodiversity'

Spike Millington, chief technical advisor to the European Union-China
Biodiversity Programme, raised the problem earlier this month (7
March) at the International Workshop on Biodiversity and Climate
Change, held in Beijing, China.



In July 2007, China released its middle- and long-term plan for
renewable energy. While shunning corn or soya-based biofuel production
to avoid endangering food security, the plan encourages the
development of non-grain biofuels, including cassava- and
sorghum-based ethanol in northeast and south China, and jatropha-based
biodiesel in southwest China's Guizhou, Sichuan and Yunnan provinces.



In line with the national plan, companies and government agencies
including PetroChina, the State Forestry Administration and local
governments in Sichuan and Yunnan have revealed ambitious plans to
develop jatropha-based biodiesel projects.



But Millington said, "The region of southwest China targeted for
biofuels coincides with the home of the last remaining intact natural
forests in China." He added that the degraded forests in the area also
play an important role in biodiversity.



Millington is echoed by Chen Shengliang, a biologist at Chongqing
Environmental Protection Bureau in southwest China.



"The rapid growth of single species of jatropha trees could inhibit
other plants such as grasses," Chen told SciDev.Net.



Liu Xuehua, an associate professor of environment at Tsinghua
University, adds that land classed as idle is often not empty land,
and can be home to diverse undomesticated species.



To cope with potential risks, Millington recommends that environmental
assessment is carried out to distinguish high biodiversity areas from
low biodiversity areas that are suitable for jatropha trees or other
biofuel plants.



The workshop organiser, the State Environmental Protection
Administration (SEPA) â€" which became the Ministry of Environment this
week (15 March) at the annual plenary meeting of the National People’s
Congress â€" announced earlier this month (6 March) that it is
initiating a major research programme to evaluate the impacts of
climate change on national biodiversity.



In addition, according to a paper published by scientists at the
University of California in Berkeley in the Journal of Environmental
Economics and Management last week (10 March), China's carbon dioxide
emissions are growing faster than previously estimated.



The country's annual growth rate of carbon emissions between 2004 and
2010 could be more than 11 per cent, instead of the 2.5â€"5 per cent
growth predicted by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

http://www.mynews.in/fullstory.aspx?storyid=3116

#586 From: "Pankaj Oudhia" <pankajoudhia@...>
Date:: Tue Mar 18, 2008 7:21 am
Subject:: FW: Senators blame Arroyo for rice crisis
pankajoudhia
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
 
Senators blame Arroyo for rice crisis

By Gil C. Cabacungan Jr.
Philippine Daily Inquirer
First Posted 19:18:00 03/17/2008

MANILA, Philippines -- From the fertilizer scam to hybrid rice to
jatropha, senators are blaming President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo for
the looming rice crisis and for making the Philippines the world's
biggest importer of the cereal.

“The rice crisis should be addressed and taken seriously by the
government. The root cause is not only external shocks but issues
related to high cost of inputs; absence or lack of forward planning;
and the shift to corn and jatropha,'' said Senator Francis Escudero in
a text message.

For full article visit at
http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/breakingnews/nation/view/20080317-125292/Senators-b\
lame-Arroyo-for-rice-crisis

#585 From: "Pankaj Oudhia" <pankajoudhia@...>
Date:: Mon Mar 17, 2008 3:12 pm
Subject:: Jatropha curcus poisoning in pediatric patients, Mauritius
pankajoudhia
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
 
Jatropha curcus poisoning in pediatric patients, Mauritius

Deepak Kumar Rai, MD pediatrics

Parul Lakhanpal, MD Pharmacology

Abstract
Background: Jatropha curcas (Physic nut; Hindi - Jungle Erandi) is
commonly known with the name of pignon d'Inde in Mauritius. It is
planted in Mauritius just because of one common myth that it keeps all
the bad evils away from the house. Though all parts of the plant are
poisonous, but its seeds are claimed to be highly poisonous.
Breakthrough of pignon d'Inde poisoning occurred in the year 2003,
where total of 11 cases were admitted on the same day with
gastrointestinal symptoms in one of the biggest hospital in Mauritius.
Aim: In this article, we have tried to discuss the details related to
the pignon d'Inde poisoning, clinical manifestations and its management.
Methods:Five year data of pignon d'Inde poisoning was collected
between 2002 till 2006 admitted in the pediatric unit of flacq
hospital ,Mauritius. In the year 2003, where total of 11 cases of
pignon d'Inde poisonings were reported ,7 children came on the same
day with gastrointestinal manifestations.
Results: All the children were treated symptomatically. They were kept
under observation for 24 hours and were discharged thereafter.
Conclusion: Though most children who ingest Jatropha curcus seeds do
not suffer much harm; however, health care providers must recognize,
assess, and manage the exposures causing serious injuries and initiate
the appropriate management to minimize the serious consequences that
could endanger the lives of the patients. The main objective of this
article is to make the practitioners and general population aware of
the potential dangers of pignon d'Inde seeds so as to minimize the
accidental pediatric poisoning emergencies and financial burden on the
community.

For full article please visit this link

http://www.ispub.com/ostia/index.php?xmlFilePath=journals/ijpn/vol8n2/curcus.xml

#584 From: "Pankaj Oudhia" <pankajoudhia@...>
Date:: Mon Mar 17, 2008 1:21 pm
Subject:: Nine children hospitalized due to Jatropha poisoning
pankajoudhia
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
 
Dear Group Members,

     Our member and active journalist Shri Rajesh Agrawal reported
through his blog that 9 children were hospitalized due to Jatropha
poisoning in Jashpurnagar of Indian state Chhattisgarh on March 16,
2008. For details please visit this blog.

http://cgreports.blogspot.com/2008/03/9.html

Thanks Rajesh ji for this information.

regards
Pankaj Oudhia

#583 From: "Pankaj Oudhia" <pankajoudhia@...>
Date:: Mon Mar 17, 2008 7:05 am
Subject:: 11. Jatropha Facts : A picture is worth a thousand words
pankajoudhia
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
 
Claim: Jatropha is free from pest.

Reality: 11. http://ecoport.org/ep?SearchType=pdb&PdbID=105601

Pankaj Oudhia

#582 From: "Pankaj Oudhia" <pankajoudhia@...>
Date:: Mon Mar 17, 2008 7:03 am
Subject:: 9. Jatropha Facts : A picture is worth a thousand words
pankajoudhia
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
 
Claim: Jatropha is free from pest.

Reality: 9. http://ecoport.org/ep?SearchType=pdb&PdbID=105040

Pankaj Oudhia

#581 From: "Pankaj Oudhia" <pankajoudhia@...>
Date:: Mon Mar 17, 2008 7:01 am
Subject:: 7. Jatropha Facts : A picture is worth a thousand words
pankajoudhia
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
 
Claim: Jatropha is free from pest.

Reality: 7. http://ecoport.org/ep?SearchType=pdb&PdbID=105054

Pankaj Oudhia

Messages 581 - 610 of 893   Newest  |  < Newer  |  Older >  |  Oldest
Advanced

Copyright © 2009 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy - Terms of Service - Guidelines - Help