Rethinking the Future

• subscribe to print magazine

• stay in touch with our email newsletter

  Subscribe to our regular weekly e-mail newsletter. It's packed with updates on recent and upcoming stories, events, campaigns and things every progressive should be informed about.

   

• email this article to a friend

  Your Name Your Email Recipient Email

  Personal message Thought you might be interested in this article from In These Times.

   

  Please help us prevent spam by verifying the word you see in the image above

  Send to multiple recipients. Just separate each email address with a comma.

• Reader Comments (2)

  Page 1 of 1 pages

  Biofuel is indeed dangerous and can’t be considered as an alternative to oil which shows how difficult it is to replace fossil fuels. Unfortunately governments around the world show a false enthusiasm for this kind of fuel. The example of palm oil shows how dangerous that enthusiasm is:

  Palm Oil, a Dangerous Solution for Biofuels
  Its production increases global warming

  Palm oil has been regarded as the best solution for obtaining an ideal biofuel: a cheap, renewable alternative to fossil fuels that would be also a solution for global warming.

  Thus, energy companies converted generators and energy production from palm oil increased.

  But new researches are increasingly pointing that: “As a biofuel, it’s a failure.”

  That’s the conclusion of a four-year research led by Marcel Silvius, a climate expert at Wetlands International in the Netherlands, that compared the benefits of palm oil to the ecological disaster from wiping out virgin Asian rain forests to grow lucrative new plantations.

  This oil was for long a primary ingredient in food and cosmetics, but about five years ago, scientists started looking on it as a source of renewable energy, spurred by subsidies in many European Union countries and imports increased by 65 % since 2002.

  Palm oil is attractive as it is relatively abundant, cheap
  (roughly $550 per ton), and needs few or no changes to already existing power stations.

  Unlike fossil fuels, it was considered that the carbon emitted from palm oil’s burning is equal to that absorbed during its growth.

  But the cultivation of the palm trees was found to unleash far more carbon dioxide than will be saved by oil’s burning.

  The report investigated the carbon released from peat swamps in Indonesia and Malaysia that had been drained and burnt to make place for the palm oil trees.

  Roughly 85 % of the world’s palm oil is produced by the two countries, and about 25 % of Indonesia’s plantations are on drained peat bogs.

  600 million tons of carbon dioxide enters the atmosphere yearly from the drained swamps and another 1.4 billion tons is expelled while firing the rain forests to clear the ground for plantations.

  The resulting smoke often shrouds Singapore (hotels) and Malaysia in a dense fog for weeks at a time.

  The CO2 expelled in the air for planting palm trees can represent up to 8 % of the world’s fossil fuel emissions.

  Experts said the research is astonishing, credible and reveals that harvesting palm oil for fuel is counterproductive.

  “Deforestation is the No. 2 cause of greenhouse gas emissions after the burning of fossil fuels,” said Jeffrey Dukes, a biologist at the University of Massachusetts.

  more
  http://news.softpedia.com/news/Palm-Oil-A-Dangerous-Solution-for-Biofuels-50885. .shtml

  Posted by Jimmy Jimbo on May 28, 2009 at 7:37 AM

  “But history, Holmgren writes, shows that nations experiencing rapid decreases in complexity generally become deeply unstable and experience food insecurity, mass migration and a breakdown of law and order.”

  Japan somehow finds a way to ensure stability and harmony to a great extent throughout its islands, even with food self-sufficiency at around 40%, and the importation of fossil fuels at close to 100% for its needs.

  When push comes to shove over the peak of oil production, they will find a way to greatly increase other available energy sources. There is considerable angst in the country over expanded use of nuclear power, but they will find a way to offset any energy shortages down the road resulting from oil’s decline.

  The Japanese expect to have a somewhat authoritarian government, and will continue to do so, even 6 decades after we wrote their post-war constitution and installed democracy.

  The Japanese take what they want from the rest of the world, filter out what is undesirable, and put the rest to their advantage. 

  Maybe there is something to be said for a nation that has a 98+% homogeneous population, instead of a “melting pot.”

  If necessary a few decades from now, the Japanese will find a way to lead “more locally focused lives.” They did it before, they can do it again.

  I have faith many countries in this world can change.

  But can the United States of America? We shall see.

  Posted by patrick hattman on May 29, 2009 at 12:13 AM

  Page 1 of 1 pages

• register a new account »Posting Security

  To participate in our forums, please register for a free account.

  Username Password

    Remember me
  

  Retreive lost password »

Also by Mike Lynn

• Rethinking the Future
  Fossil fuels can't last forever. A new book plans for a world without them.