Agrofuels are not a climate solution

Corporate Europe Observatory will join the Agrofools Action Group at a petrol station in Malmo to highlight the issue of agrofuels - curretnyl being discussed at the European Social Forum.

The European push for agrofuels will have many social and environmental implications, including rising food prices, jeopardising people's food sovereignty and access to food.

Swedish car drivers will be invited to choose from a menu: fueling their car with agrofuel, or having access to food for themselves and other people. About 100 people will participate in the action.

For pictures: agrofoolsESF@gmail.com

Background:

Sweden is one of the EU member states most in favour of using more agrofuels, especially sugarcane ethanol from Brazil. This year, the Swedish government asked the EU to allow imports of sugarcane ethanol from Brazil with lowered trade barriers. Oil companies like Statoil are keen to get a share out of the new agrofuel business. Statoil signed a deal with Brazilian oil company Petrobras aimed at jointly expanding exploration, sub-sea and agrofuel production.

Many other Scandinavian companies are involved on agrofuels. Swedish company SEKAB has started large scale sugarcane production in Tanzania to fuel Swedish cars with ethanol. The German newspaper Spiegel reported that thousands of residents are being forced to move to make way for Sekab's plans, on at least 9,000 hectares. Five thousand hectares have already been approved but Sekab wants to expand to 50,000 hectares. SEKAB will compete with the local population for the water available in the river and wetlands, especially in the dry season. Residents complained about complete lack of information or compensation given. SEKAB claims that it sources 'certified sustainable' ethanol from Brazil, and has established its own criteria for this. However, these sustainability guarantees do nothing to stop the expansion of monoculture plantations in Brazil, with both direct and indirect impacts. Scandinavian cellulose companies are keen to profit as well, especially from the so-called 'second-generation' agrofuels. They misleadingly claim that the tree monocultures needed to provide the cellulose will not compete with food production.

NOTES TO THE EDITOR

The social and ecological consequences of agrofuels (three out of many):

1.Agrofuels are competing with food: The current food crisis is telling. Within a few month, the price of rice has increased with about 100 % and the price of grains by 130 % in 2007. One of the effects being food riots in many countries.

2.Large scale production of agrofuels is not environmentally friendly at all: as it extends monocultural cultivation, the use of human and environmentally polluting pesticides, the over-use of the soil, the loss of biodiversity and the use of genetic modification.

3.Small scale farmers loose their land and resources: as large scale agriculture is led by a relatively small number of large scale farmers and foreign companies. With small scale agriculture 40 families could sustain their livelihoods on a surface of 200 hectares. Large scale soja production, however, only needs one labourer for the same acreage.

For more information: http://biotech.indymedia.org (background information and reports on the debate in bonn) http://www.aseed.net/soy – http://www.regenwald.org – http://www.lasojamata.org - http://viacampesina.org - www.biofuelwatch.org