Biofuel Battle Highlights U.N. Food Summit

U.S., Brazil And Other Countries Lay Out Disagreements Over Biofuel's Role In Higher Food Prices

(AP)  Leaders gathered at a three-day U.N. summit on the world's food crisis have quickly laid out their disagreements over a key issue: how much the rush for environmentally friendly biofuels is contributing to the rocketing prices that are causing hunger and unrest around the globe.

Most countries and international organizations meeting at the Rome-based U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization cite multiple causes, including rising energy costs, more demand for meat and dairy products from some booming developing countries, trade restrictions, speculation as well as the increased demand for biofuels.

But how much each factor contributes was wildly debated as the summit opened on Tuesday.

Discussion of whether to scale back or push ahead with the introduction of biofuels is likely to weigh heavily on attempts to come up with a global strategy to solve the crisis.

"It is frightening to see attempts to draw a cause-and-effect relationship between biofuels and the rise of food prices," said the president of Brazil, whose country's sugar cane has long been used to produce ethanol that fuels cars and trucks.

"It offends me to see fingers pointed against clean energy from biofuels, fingers soiled with oil and coal," said Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, as he delivered an impassioned defense of biofuels.

Fuels made from sugar cane, corn and other crops have been seen as a way to combat climate change and rising oil prices. The United States has been heavily subsidizing corn-based ethanol production. Last year the 27-nation European Union endorsed a plan calling for biofuels to make up 10 percent of the fuel for road vehicles by 2020.

But environmentalists, international groups and some countries are becoming increasingly wary of biofuels, which they say could accelerate global warming by encouraging deforestation - and contribute heavily to the commodities price hike by diverting production from food crops to biofuel crops.

Studies by international organizations, including the International Monetary Fund, show that the increased demand for biofuels is contributing by 15-30 percent to food price increases, said Frederic Mousseau, a policy adviser at Oxfam, a British aid group.

"Food stocks are at their lowest in 25 years, so the market is very vulnerable to any policy changes" such as U.S. subsidies and the EU's mandate on greater use of this energy source, Mousseau said.

"In some cases, biofuel production is in competition with food supply," Japanese Prime Minister Yasuo Fukuda told the Rome summit on Tuesday. "We need to ensure that biofuel production is sustainable."

Fukuda said countries must speed up the research and introduction of second generation biofuels, which can make fuel out of various plants and not just food crops.

While agreeing that sustainability and innovation are needed, U.S. Agriculture Secretary Ed Schafer insisted that biofuels contribute only 2 or 3 percent to a predicted 43 percent rise in prices this year.

"The use of sustainable biofuels can increase energy security, foster economic development especially in rural areas, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions without weighing heavily on food prices," Schafer said in his address.

Last month, the U.S. Congress enacted a farm bill that reduced a tax credit for refiners by about 10 percent per gallon. The credit supports the blending of fuel with the corn-based additive. More money would go to cellulosic ethanol, made from plant matter.

But even among countries like the United States and Brazil which are trying to largely exonerate biofuels of the charge of raising food prices, there was little agreement on the best way to tap the energy source.

Brazil's president lashed out at the U.S. approach, saying that corn-based ethanol is less efficient than the fuel produced with sugar cane and that the former can only compete "when it is shored up with subsidies and shielded behind tariffs."

Ron Litterer, an Iowa corn farmer and president of the U.S. National Corn Growers Association, said that as technology develops, the gap in efficiency between corn and sugar cane will narrow and that subsidies are slowly being reduced as the industry grows.

"Brazil also had subsidies when it was developing its ethanol industry," Litterer told The Associated Press by telephone. "Over time our subsidies will be further reduced and could eventually even disappear."

[p-syrus]

"Biofuel" is simply a political boondoggle for corporate agribusiness. It is ecologically unsound, adds to Global Warming, and consumes more energy than it produces.

It is however popular with grain & grass farmers for promoting further agricultural subsidies, hence the pandering of politicians.

[downsteamjim]

Is BS considered a biofuel? If so the UN will destroy OPEC.

[rf35]

Sorry, the first post was incomplete when I accidentally hit the "publish" button. Here''s the full one:

So let the UN go lean on the Arabs and Iranians and Venezuelans...

Posted by gkc99

Yes, but also get the US off this idiotic corn-based ethanol obsession. Brazil has sugar cane and that works for them. It won''t work for us. An alternative source in needed. One that is not used for food. One that can grow in a variety of locations around the country. How about more than one?!? Using corn for biofuel makes biofuel worse than the alternatives. But then, SistaTee is right...dead people have no carbon footprint (unless cremated).

[rf35]

So let the UN go lean on the Arabs and Iranians and Venezuelans...

Posted by gkc99

Yes, but also get the US off this idiotic corn-based ethanol obsession. Brazil has sugar cane and that works for them. It won''t work for us. An alternative source in needed. One that is not used for food. One that can grow in a variety of locations around the country.

[mrtsvf]

As mentioned, biofuel production is only a fraction of the reason for food price increases. Demand and input costs (i.e. oil) are much more significant factors. However, it is true that the industry should begins focusing on next generation biofuels. I think the oil companies should be using their billions in profits to race to the finish-line on alternatives, rather than buy back their own stock. It''s a better investment for all parties.

[gkc99]

"Corn is probably the least effcient of any of the major food crops to produce fuel. You get a lousy 22 gallons of useable oil per acre whereas a simple plant like mustard can deliver more than 60 gal per acre. Palm oil, hundreds of gallons per acre, etc Posted by talkingham


Oil crops make more sense as biofuels. For one thing you don''t have to distill as you do with ethanol, a major energy savings, as the oils separate themselves from water. Canola is another option.

The main problem is how the Asians have bred themselves into a menace to the planet. Perhaps the Korean UN chief could address that point?

[factsearcher]

The reality of the high prices issue is this.
Have you seen yourself or your neighbors making remarkable modifications in your lifestyles to be able reduce oil and oil related products consumption?
This administration needs to "unlock" the tight rope of researh and development for alternative fuel and use a watchdog on oil commpanies....put aside profit interests and look into our well being.

[talkingham]

Corn is probably the least effcient of any of the major food crops to produce fuel. You get a lousy 22 gallons of useable oil per acre whereas a simple plant like mustard can deliver more than 60 gal per acre. Palm oil, hundreds of gallons per acre, etc etc

[gkc99]

I wonder how good the smoked salmon and caviar is at the UN Food Conference buffets?

The UN is famous for its sumptuous buffets!

[gkc99]

It''s not biofuels, it''s the high cost of petroleum that is driving the runup in food prices. Ever think about what kind of mileage a tractor gets? We don''t plow with horses any more!

So let the UN go lean on the Arabs and Iranians and Venezuelans instead of their usual USA bashing.

Time to form the "Organization of Food Exporting Countries".

[fireceos]

The US needs to limit exports of food. Homeowners need to plant gardens. We need to help save ourselves, because the government is not going to do it. We need to cash in our debts by other coutries to fund the illegal and unfounded war in Iraq, and rather than further drain tax dollars by putting illegal immigrants in jail, ship them home to their own countries and have the respective countries foot the bill.

[mommakat64]

OUR government, at least, needs to be sensible and, at least, have some viable alternative fuel sources available BEFORE they take away the only sources that we have. Development first...turn over second. This Lieberman-Warner bill will only punish us for using the power and fuel sources that we have now without giving us any true alternatives. We will be punished for using gasoline when there really is no other fuel available for our present vehicles. Evidently, our economy and way of life is being destroyed, and we have nowhere else to turn. SENATE, PLEASE, GIVE US RELIABLE ALTERNATIVES BEFORE YOU CUT US OFF AT THE PUMP!!!

[msmellymel]

oops...typo...I meant the Industrial Revolution WASN''T as good as we thought it was.

[msmellymel]

It''s a catch-22, but food takes precedence.

Face it...we have to give up our cars by 2030 or starve to drive them.

I guess it''s back to being born, living, and dying within an 8 mile radius. It''s back to bicycles, horses, feet, and steam power kiddies. Maybe the ''Industrial Revolution'' was as good as we thought it was.

[sistatee-2009]

Bad news: People are starving so we can have bio-fuel.
Good news: Dead people have no carbon footprint.