Biofuels or Biofools? NUPGE releases new publication

'Is it smart to put so much faith in biofuels?'

Ottawa (26 Nov. 2008) - The National Union of Public and General Employees (NUPGE) has released a new leaflet called “Biofools?” It explores some of the key concerns that arise when agro-business grows fuel.

Two years ago Environment Canada warned the Harper government of the dangers of turning to biofuels as the big fix, pointing out that green fuels could cause more problems than benefits and that the risks to water and pollution were too high.

The memo stated:

"Based on global Life Cycle Assessments (LCA) of biofuel production, impacts on acidification, land degradation, waste generation, water use and human and environmental impacts were found more often to be unfavourable than favourable."

Now, NUPGE's new leaflet highlights five major points where biofuels need further examination:

1. The actually reduction of emissions that biofuels offer.
2. High food prices and food shortages triggered by shifts in agriculture.
3. Greater environmental damage from water consumption, pesticide and fertilizer use.
4. Greater instability as riots and unrest increase due to food insecurity.
5. Biofuels are not a grand-scale fix.

Brazil was host last week to an International Conference on Biofuels. Putting a green face on Brazil's ethanol industry, André Amado, head of the energy department in Brazil's foreign ministry, said "biofuels are the cleanest alternative source of energy in the world". He maintained that using sugarcane to create ethanol virtually eliminates competition with food farming.

Other farming and environmental organizations held their own parallel meeting to challenge these arguments. Their message emphasized the pitfalls of biofuels (or agrofuels as they are also termed) from slave labour to environmental damage and land grabs.

Although targets passed by the Canadian government earlier this summer are relatively modest, with gasoline to contain 5% renewable fuel, and diesel 2% renewable fuel, by 2010, there is still concern that setting even modest targets will have an impact on food security and a negligible impact on emission reductions.

Incentives and targets for agrofuel production have created real problems for food production, land rights and the environment in many countries.

European targets have created rising food prices and threatened millions more with hunger. As available arable land is used up in Europe, developing countries are encouraged to grow fuels to make up the difference. When this happens food security and environmental safety is directly threatened in those countries.

If food security and sustainable production are to be established, governments around the world need to stop setting targets that fix agrofuel production and treating it as a grand-scale fix. NUPGE