We call on the EU to abandon targets for biofuel use in Europe

31 January 2007

Open Letter

To: The Council of the European Union, the European Commission, the European Parliament, and citizens in Europe

biofuel-2We are extremely concerned by the plans as presented by the European Commission to adopt a mandatory target for biofuel use in transport. Implementing these measures means that the EU will risk breaching its international commitments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and protect biodiversity and human rights; because, as set out below – the proposed targets will amongst other things promote crops with poor greenhouse gas balances, trigger deforestation and loss of biodiversity and exacerbate local land use conflicts.


Any targets relating to energy we believe, must therefore first be directed towards reducing overall energy use, and improving energy efficiency. Instead of addressing Europe’s excessive consumption, the Commission proposes a biofuels target as a percentage of the EU´s fast growing and of as yet unlimited transport fuel consumption.1 This approach must be rejected as counterproductive. The fact that the European Commission’s ‘Energy Package’2 only proposes targets for biofuels for transport but not for other alternative energies is indicative of a seriously flawed policy approach to addressing greenhouse gas emissions.


The EU is suggesting that much of the biofuel crop will have to be produced in the global South and exported to Europe.3 Although presented as an opportunity for Southern economies, evidence suggests that monoculture crops for biofuel such as oil palm, soya, sugar cane and maize lead to increased destruction of biodiversity and rural livelihoods and further erosion of food security, with serious impacts on water, soil, and regional climate patterns.4 Several statements already made by civil society organisations from the South express deep concern and call for a rejection of the EU biofuel plans.5


Biofuel is arguably the least desirable alternative energy form for which the EU could set a target. Biofuels for transport are less effective than wind, solar or solid biomass energy schemes.6 The production of biofuel crops uses scarce resources such as fresh water7 and productive land8 and in most crops used today, the greenhouse gas savings are marginal at best in comparison to fossil fuels. A thorough understanding of the emissions produced throughout the chain from land conversion to production, refining and use of biofuels is essential to ensure biofuel use will truly reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Not only is deforestation itself a major cause of CO2 emissions, but biodiesel from South East Asian palm oil (where most world palm oil currently originates), can be expected to cause between two and eight times as much CO2 emissions from damage to peat as the CO2 emissions from the mineral diesel it replaces (by conservative estimates, and according to the most recent science).9 These emissions make it less likely for the EU to meet their commitment of achieving the climate target of no more than 2°C change in average global temperature.10 Furthermore, research already suggests that the carbon balance of some biofuel crops may actually be negative when taking the complete process into account.11 Further study is thus needed before setting biofuel targets.


Price increases for some biofuel crops that are also staple foods will exacerbate not only deforestation, but also put food security at risk.12 Since biofuel targets in the EU would promote the production of biomass in the global South, the EU could be responsible for reducing the area of land devoted to food production, so eroding local and international food security and sovereignty and causing food shortages. Like EU targets, the US biofuel targets have been criticized for requiring an excessive proportion of the corn crop.13 The combined additional pressure from these two economies on crops widely used as essential food crops seriously threatens food price increases in poorer countries. Already, US demand for biofuel from corn has increased the current world grain deficit, raising corn prices significantly.14 In addition, The FAO in 2006 reported a historical low in the world’s stocksto-use ratio for grains and record levels of demand (surpassing global production) for oil crops due to biofuel production. World cereal reserves have also fallen to their lowest level in more than two decades.15


Serious human rights abuses have been reported from sugar cane, palm oil and soy plantations in Brazil, Argentina, Paraguay, Colombia and South-East Asia. These include slavery, very poor working conditions and low wages, violent land conflicts, death and health crises due to the use of agrochemicals and deforestation.16


The genetic engineering sector of the biotechnology industry is promoting biofuels to gain access to a new market. The GM varieties of several crops now used as biofuel crops (eg: maize, soya, oilseed rape) have met strong resistance to their use as food, especially in Europe. The industry hopes that by promoting them as biofuels, these crops will gain acceptance. However, the problems associated with GM, including contamination, would not be addressed. The introduction of GM crops in the South has had a massive impact on farming methods, human rights and the environment.17 An EU target will give support to the GM industry to expand still further. The industry also plans to use GM to alter, break down or remove the lignin and cellulose of plants to facilitate and increase biofuel yields18, with consequences that cannot be predicted.


If the EU applies incentives and subsidies to biofuels, these will further intensify all the pressures that we foresee from the targets. They will also distort markets and further undermine food production. They should not be applied while there is still so much argument about the real contribution biofuels can make to energy use and climate. Finally, incentives for biofuels contradict the pro-poor strategies of the Millennium Development Goals and disregard the 2010 Target agreed on at the World Summit for Sustainable Development in Johannesburg by adding a severe additional driver of biodiversity loss.


Sustainability certification is being proposed as a way of addressing many of the problems outlined above. However, the European Commission energy package does not provide clarity on whether a certification scheme for biofuels will be introduced, and if so, whether it would be voluntary or mandatory. Previous certification initiatives suggest that certification processes by themselves cannot address most of the environmental and social ‘problems’, particularly in countries with poor human rights records or weak enforcement of environmental and labour legislation. The Round Table on Responsible Soy (RSS), a voluntary certification process led by some large environmental NGO’s and industry, has run into great controversy with civil society organisations and small farmers’ movements in Latin America and is widely perceived as acting against their interests. The Round Table on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) has yet to agree on procedures for verifying adherence to its standards and some of the RSPO industry members continue to destroy large areas of rainforest and openly bid for concessions which contravene RSPO principles, such as Wilmar International’s bid for Bugala Island, Uganda, or PT SMART’s plans for palm oil expansion in Indonesia. At present, no credible certification process leading to strong and mandatory standards, with full involvement of affected groups in producer countries, is available. Setting targets for biofuels before fully addressing the problems it can cause should be strongly rejected.

We therefore call on the Member States to reject the biofuel target for transport and halt all other incentives for biofuel production which could encourage in any way the use of biofuels linked to the problems described above. Instead, the focus should be on drastic reduction of energy use and support for genuinely sustainable renewables. “We are collecting more signatures from organisations, local groups and well-known individuals, such as academics or writers. If you or your group would like to sign, please email us at “.

Signatories: Organisations

1. Aberdeen Campaign Against Climate Change, UK ;

2. ACAT Nederland, Action of Christians for the Abolition of Torture and Death Penalty, Netherlands
Wim Petersen ,
3. Action Campaign for Endangered Species (ACES)
Brigitte Peter,
4. ACU Associazione Consumatori Utenti, Italy
5. AEFJN – Wtizerland (Reseau Foi et Justice Afrique Europe Antenne Suisse), Switzerland
Claude Maillard,,
6. Africa-Europe Faith and Justice Network, Switzerland
Yvonne Goossens,,
7. Afrika-Europa Netwerk Nederlands, Netherlands
8. Aipazcomun Section Suisse, Switzerland
9. ALAI, Latin America Information Agency

10. Amis de la Terre (FoE France), France
11. Arbeitsgemeinschaft Regenwald und Artenschutz, Germany
Wolfgang Kuhlmann,,
12. Arbeitsgruppe Schweiz – Kolumbien, Germany
Stephan Suhner,,
13. ASEED Europe, Action for Solidarity, Equity, Environment and Solidarity, Holland,
14. Asociacionsanfranciscodeasis, Argentina
15. Asociación pola defensa da Ría, Spain
Benito Andrade,
16. Associazione Nazionale Ambiente e Lavoro, Italy
Marcello Buiatti,
17. Base Investigaciones Sociales, Paraguay
18. Begegnungszentrum fuer aktive Gewaltlosigkeit (Centre for Encounter and active Non-Violence), Austria
Matthias Reichl,,
19. Berne Declaration, Switzerland

20. Bharat Krishak Samaj (Farmers’ Forum India), India
Krishan Bir Chaudhary,
21. Biofuelwatch
22. Biowatch SA, South Africa
23. Bloque Popular de Honduras, Honduras
24. Borneo Orangutan Survival Foundation,,
25. Both ENDS Netherlands
26. Brothers FIC – General Council, Netherlands ,
27. Bruno Manser Fonds – Fairness im Tropenwald, Switzerland
Lukas Straumann,
28. BSOe (Bundeskoordination student. Oekologiearbeit), Germany
29. BUND (FoE Germany), Germany,
Angelika Zahmt,, ,
30. BUKO Agrar Koordination, Germany
31. Bundersverband Buergerinitivativen Umweltschutz e.V., Germany

32. Capitulo Cubano de la Alianza Social Continental (CC-ASC) , Cuba,
33. Capitulo Peruano de la ASC, Peru

34. Capitulo Venezolano de la ASC, Venezuela

35. CAPPA, Indonesia, Rivani Noor
36. Carbon Coach Ltd, UK
Dave Hampton,
37. Carbon Trade Watch, Transnational Institute,,
38. Campaign Promotions, Gareth Strangemore-Jones
39. CEBRAPAZ/Campaña por la Desmilitarizacion de las Américas

40. CENSAT Agua Viva, Friends of the Earth Colombia,
41. Centre for Sustainable Agriculture, India
42. Center for Encounter and active Non-Violence, Austria
Matthias Reichl, ;
43. Centro de Proteccion a la Naturaleza, Argentina,
44. Centro de Políticas Públicas para el Socialismo (CEPPAS), Argentina
Soledad Vogliano,
45. Centro para la Gestión Tecnológica Popular (CETEP), Venezuela
Ignacio Alzuru,
46. Chacabuco Sustentable, Argentina
47. Chalice Farm and Sustainable Living Center,California, USA
48. Cheltenham FoE, UK
49. Cheltenham Green Party, UK
John Heywood,
50. C.I.F.A.E.S. – Universidad Rural Paulo Freire de Tierra de Campos, Spain
51. Citizens’ Biotechnology Information Center (CBIC), Japan

52. CLEAN(Cavan Leitrim Environmental Awareness Network)Ltd, Ireland
Christine Raab-Heine ,
53. Climate Concern UK, Peter Hale,,
54. Climate Outreach and Information Network (COIN), UK

55. COECOCeiba-FoE Costa Rica; Costa Rica; Isaac Rojas y Javier Baltodano , ;
56. Colectivo de Colombianos Refugiados en Asturias, Spain
57. Common Frontiers, Canada
58. Common Sense Solutions, UK
Rupert Hawley,
59. Communiteit MSC Missiehuis Tilbur, Netherlands
60. Community Technology Development Trust, Zimbabwe
Andrew T Mushita,;
61. ConoSur Sustentable, South America
62. Corner House, UK
63. Coordinadora Ecoloxista d’Asturies, Spain
64. Coordinadora Popular Colombiana, France ;
65. Coordinación Técnica Red de Semillas, Spain
66. Corporate Europe Observatory,
67. Dogwood Alliance, North Carolina, USA ,
68. Down to Earth UK, Liz Chidley,
69. “Echos d’Amérique Latine” association, France
Abimael Castro,
70. ecodevelop: Action for Socio-ecologic Development, Germany
71. Ecologistas en Acción, Spain,
72. Ecological Council, Denmark
Christian Ege, ,
73. Ecological Internet, USA,
74. Ecological Society of the Philippines
75. Econexus
Helena Paul,,
76. Ecoportal.Net, Argentina
Dra. Noemi Abad, ,
77. Ecoropa, Bonn, Germany
Christine von Weizsäcker
78. Edmonds Institute, USA ;
79. El Sindicato Labrego Galego (SLG), Spain,
80. EKPIZO, Consumer Association Quality of Life’, Greece
81. Encuentro Popular, Costa Rica

82. Ethical Consumer Research Association, UK
Dan Welch, ,
83. European Region of the Humanist International
Juha Uski,,
84. European Youth for Action (EYFA) ,
85. Exeter Friends of the Earth, UK,
86. FARM, UK
John Turner, ,
87. Farmers’ Link, UK
88. FASE-AMAZONIA, Brazil,
89. FASE Espirito Santo, Brazil

90. FERN, Jutta Kill,
91. Filippijnengroep Nederland (FGN), Netherlands ,
92. Flipside Vision Ltd, UK
93. Food and Water Watch Europe
94. Food for Maine’s Future, Maine, USA
95. Forum Fairer Handel, Germany
Dr. Hans-Christoph Bill, ,
96. Forum for Biotechnology and Food Security, India
97. France Amérique Latine, France
Valérie Techer, ,
98. France Libertés – Fondation Danielle Mitterrand, France ,
99. Friends of the Earth Brussels, Brussels, Belgium
Michèle O’Brien,
100. Friends of the Earth, England and Wales
Ed Matthew
101. Friends of the Earth, Europe (FoEE)
Adrian Beeb,
102. Friends of the Earth Finland,
103. Friends of the Earth Slovakia
Roman Havlicek,
104. Associazione Nazionale Ambiente e Lavoro, Italy
Marcello Buiatti,
105. Fundacion Ambiente Nacional: Jorge Castillo
Chaco Argentina,,
106. Gaia Foundation, UK
Teresa Anderson,
107. Genetic Engineering Network, UK,
108. Gen-ethisches Netzwerk (GeN) e.V., Berlin, Germany
Ute Sprenger, ,
109. Genetic Food Alert, UK, Robert Vint ,
110. Gesellschaft für Ökologische Forschung
Sylvia Hamberger, München
111. Global2000, Friends of the Earth Austria
Silva Herrmann,
112. Global Forest Coalition, Simone Lovera,
113. Global Justice Ecology Project, USA,
114. GM Freeze Campaign, UK
Carrie Stebbings, ,
115. GRAIN,
116. Greenwood Alliance, California, USA,
117. Grito de los Excluidos, Brazil
118. Grupo de Ecología y Ecumenismo, Argentina ,
119. Grupo de Reflexión Rural Europa
120. Grupo de Reflexión Rural Argentina,
121. Humane Earth Foundation, France

122. INCOMINDIOS, Ressort Ressourcen, Switzerland
Heinz Lippuner, Prof.Dr.phil.,
123. Instituto de Estudios Políticos para América Latina y África (IEPALA), Spain
Carmelo García,
124. Integrated Rural Development Foundation (IRDF), Philippines,
125. Interessengemeinschaft Kommunale Trinkwasserversorgung in Bayern – IKT, Germany, Sebastian Schönauer,
126. Jubileo Sur

127. Kalapie (Association of Urban Cyclists), Spain,
128. Kenya GMO Concern Coalition, Kenya
129. Klimabündnis Österreich
Johann Kandler,,
130. Kooperation Brasilien (KoBra), Germany,
131. Krishok Federation, Bangladesh, Badrul Alam, President
132. Kritische Oekologie / ifak e.V., Germany
133. Large Scale Biofuels Action Group, UK
134. London Rising Tide, UK;
135. Marlborough Climate Pledge, UK
Jo Ripley,
136. MATA – Asien im Blick, Germany, Nicole Weydmann
137. Missie Zusters van het Onbevlekt Hart van Marie (ICM), Belgium
138. Missionary Sisters of O.L.of Africa, Netherlands
Anne Helwegen,
139. MOa (MOBIL Ohne auto), Germany
140. M.O.V.-groep Maarheeze, Netherlands
Judith van der Velden,
141. Mesa Global de Guatemala, Guatemala,
142. Missionary sisters ICM, Belgium
Françoise Vermeulen ,
143. Missionarissen van het heilig Har, Netherlands
144. Movimiente Indigena Plan del Sol Panama, Panama ,
145. Movimiento Social Nicaragüense: Otro Mundo es Posible, Nicaracua
146. Munlochy Vigil

147. National Forum of Forest People and Forest Workers (NFFPFW), India
148. National Society of Conservationists, Friends of the Earth Hungary ,
149. Nepenthes, Denmark
Tove Maria Ryding, ,
150. Netzwerk Afrika Deutschland, Germany,
151. NOAH – Friends of the Earth Denmark
152. Northwest Resistance Against Genetic Engineering, Oregon, USA,
153. Observatorio de la Deuda en la Globalizalización; Spain
154. Observatorio de Multinacionales en América Latina,,
155. ÖBV-Via Campesina Austria, Österreichische Bergbauern und Bergbäuerinnen Vereinigung, Austria
156. OeIE-Kaernten, Austria
157. Oilwatch, Esperanza Martínez ,
158. Openheid naar de wereld
Zrs. Franciscanessen, Etten Leur, Netherlands
159. Organización Nacional Indígena de Colombia (ONIC), National Colombian Indigenous Organization, Colombia
160. Oyugis Integrated Project Foundation, Netherlands

Henk van de Wal,
161. Pestizid Aktions-Netzwerk e.V. (PAN Germany)
162. Planetary Health Inc., USA
163. Plataforma Interamericana de Derechos Humanos, Democracia y Desarrollo (PIDHDD), Latin America

164. Plataforma Rural – Alianzas por un Mundo Rural Vivo , Spain
165. Practical Action, Schumacher Centre for Technology and Development, UK , Rachel Berger,
166. Progressio, UK ,
167. Pro REGENWALD, Germany,
Hermann Edelmann,,
168. Proyecto Gran Simio, Spain,
169. Pro Wildlife e.V., Germany ,
170. Rainforest Concern, UK ,
171. Rainforest Information Centre, NSW, Australia,;
172. RALLT (Red por una America Latina libre the transgenicos), Latin America
Elizabeth Bravo, ,
173. Red de Accion en Agricultura Alternativa (RAAA), Peru, ,
174. Red de Acción en Plaguicidas y sus Alternativas RAP-AL, Latin America (all national branches), RAP-AL: Pesticide Action Network Latin America and Caribbean
175. RAP-AL Colombia
176. RAP-AM, Mexico
177. Rede Alerta Contra o Deserto Verde (Network Against Green Deserts), Brazil

178. Red Brasileña por la Integración de los Pueblos (REBRIP), Brazil
179. Red Colombiana contra el Alca y el Libre Comercio, Colombia
180. Red-Green Alliance, Denmark

181. Red Nacional de Accion Ecologista de la Argentina (Renace), Argentina ,
182. Red Mexicana de Accion frente al Libre Comercio (RMALC) [The Mexican Action Network on Free Trade] ; ;
183. Reforesting Scotland, UK ,
184. Regenwald Institut, Institut fuer angewandten Regenwaldschutz e.V.

185. Rettet den Regenwald e. V., Germany
Reinhard Behrend,,
186. RISDA-Rural Innovative Services and Development Africa
Anthony Njogu ,
187. Rising Tide Dde Cymru (South Wales), UK
Owain Davies,
188. Rising Tide North America ,
189. Robin Wood, Germany, ,
190. Scarborough Against Genetic Engineering (SAGE), UK
191. Secretaria Centroamericana de la ASC, Central America

192. Sinti Techan, El Salvador
193. Socialistisk UngdomsFront (Socialistic Youth Front), Denmark,
Niklas Zenius Jespersen,
194. Solidarité, France

195. SOLIFONDS, Switzerland,
Brigitte Anderegg,,
196. Spiritan Community of Weert
197. SUMATE Red de Alternativas, Colombia,
198. Sumatran Orangutan Society, UK
Helen Buckland,,
199. Sustrans, UK,
Peter Lipman, ,
200. Swindon Friends of the Earth, UK,
Jean Saunders,
201. Terre des Hommes – Arbeitsgruppe Schwäbisch Gmünd, Germany
Norbert Müller,
202. Terra de Direitos, Brazil, ;
203. Thanal, Kerala, India,

204. The Land Is Ours, UK
205. The Low Carbon Lifestyle Tour,
206. Trashumancia y Naturaleza, Spain
Jesús Garzón
207. Veterinarios Sin Fronteras
Ferran Garcia,
208. Watch Indonesia!, Germany
Marianne Klute,,
209. Westfälische Gesellschaft für Artenschutz e. V. (WGA), Germany
Dr. Martina Raffel,,
210. United Labour Federation, Bangladesh,
Abul Hossain ,
211. Urgewald e.V., Germany
212. Ursuline Sisters of Bergen NH, Netherlands
213. Vida,Si! Alberdi,Pcia de Tucuman, Argentina
214. Wahana Lingkungan Hidup Indonesia (WALHI- Friends of the Earth Indonesia) – national, Roelly Syumanda,
215. WALHI (FoE) South Kalimantan, Indonesia
Berry Nahdian Forqan
216. WALHI (Friends of the Earth) East Kalimantan, Indonesia
Isal Wardhana,
217. World Development Movement, UK,,
218. Worldforests Scotland, UK
Mandy Haggith,
219. Warwick & Leamington Green Party,
Janet Alty,
220. Women in Europe for a Common Future (WECF),
Gertrude H. Roebeling.,
221. World Rainforest Movement

222. XminY solidarityfunds, Netherlands,
Wytze de Lange,
223. Yayasan Keadilan Rakyat Jambi, Indonesian NGO
224. ZGAP e. V., Germany
Roland Wirth,

Signatories: Individuals

225. Susan George Author, Chair of the Planning Board of the Transnational Institute,
226. Dr. Mayer Hillman, Senior Fellow Emeritus, Policy Studies Institute
227. Caroline Lucas Green Party MEP, UK,
228. Nora Radcliffe, MSP
229. Professor Tadeusz W. Patzek, University of Berkley, California, USA,
230. Frank Schwalba-hoth, Consultant and former MEP
231. Mark Lynas, journalist and author of High Tide
232. Brian D. Brunton, Managing Director, Alotau Environment Ltd, Papua New Guinea,
233. Dr. Klemens Laschefski, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Instituto de Geociências, Departamento de Geografia, Brazil,
234. Ignacio Chapela, Associate Professor, Ph.D., University of California
235. Osvaldo Fornari, solicitor assisting people affected by pesticide poisoning on soy plantations, Grupo de Reflexión Rural, Argentina
236. Dr Michael Antoniou, Department of Medical and Molecular Genetics, King’s College London School of Medicine
237. Jerry Ravetz, Associate Fellow, James Martin Institute for Science and Civilization, Oxford University
238. Mohan Mathews, Biologist from India/Denmark,
239. Dr Mark Huxham, Senior Lecturer and Senior Teaching Fellow, School of Life Sciences, Napier University, Edinburgh UK
240. Dr Ignacio A. Romero Senior Lecturer, Department of Biological Sciences, The Open University, Milton Keynes, UK
241. Sylvia Grevel, Theologian, Netherlands
242. Damian Allen, Executive Director of Children’s Services,
243. Fr Tom Wijffels M Afr. Jerusalem, Israel
244. Sr. Felisita Sri Budiarti, General Superior Sisters of Our Lady Amersfoort, Netherlands
245. Zr. Augustina Bastiaansen, Franciscanessen van Etten, Netherlands
246. Dr. Steffen Boehm, University of Essex, UK
247. Noemi Abad, Director of the journal Ambiente y Sociedad and of Ecoportal Net, Argentina
248. Gerard Dupin, General Manager, Taho!

And 94 individuals not linked to organisations Your organisation can sign this Open Letter by sending a message to: See for latest updated list of signatories

1 Annual emissions from EU transport are expected to grow by 77 million tonnes CO2eq between 2005 and 2020 – three times as much as from any other sector of the EU economy.

2 COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION: An energy policy for Europe COM(2007)1

3 An EU strategy for biofuels, COM(2006) 34 sets out that “both domestic producers and importers should benefit from a growing EU market for biofuels”.

4 See among others: Polluting effects of Brazil’s sugar-ethanol industry by Luiz Antonio Martinelli1 and Solange Filoso. Nature 445, 364 (25 January 2007); Kamerun: Biodiesel als Export-Schlager. Menschen und Wälder müssen Ölpalmen weichen,; World Rainforest Movement Bulletin 112, November 2006.; COLOMBIA: Biodiesel Push Blamed for Violations of Rights by Helda Martínez.

5 (1) We want Food Sovereignty Not Biofuels, signed by Alert Against the Green Desert Network, Latin American Network against Monoculture Tree Plantations, Network for a GM free Latin America, OilWatch South America and World Rainforest Movement, January 2007. (2) Statement from SawitWatch. (3) Statement by the UN Climate Convention negotiations in Nairobi, November 2006, demanding “..the Parties to the Framework Convention on Climate Change to immediately suspend all subsidies and other forms of inequitable support for the import and export of biofuels.”

6 For solar vs. biomass, see Pimentel et al, 2002., Table 2. Onshore wind can achieve over 3MW ha-1 of actual standing land, NET of wind variability, see British Wind Energy Association,, equivalent to 38 hectares delivering over 1 bn kWh per year, i.e. far better than solar. For biomass re. biofuels: A biomass crop can be chosen for best overall energy yield, rather than oil or ethanol yield, and energy is not expended extracting or processing the biofuel element. See evidence to UK Commons EFRA Committee inquiry, Note also that tropical energy crops with the highest energy outputs take up productive land (so displacing natural carbon stores or farmland) and have other ecological downsides or costs e.g. fertilizer use, water.

7 Food, biofuels could worsen water shortages-report.

8 See 20; also the EC Well To Wheels Study 2006 notes: “expansion of arable area onto other land, notably pasture and forest, would be likely to release large amounts of carbon from the soil, negating any benefit of the energy crops for decades to come.” – p.76, download at



11 COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION: An energy policy for Europe COM(2007)1

12 A Culinary and Cultural Staple in Crisis, Washington Post, January 26, 2007:

13 In 2000, 6 percent of the U.S. corn crop was used for ethanol production. In 2006 the figure had risen to 20 percent, and the ethanol plants under construction would double capacity by 2010. The Washington Post: Blindness on Biofuels by Robert J. Samuelson Wednesday, January 24, 2007; Page A23.

14 “Higher prices for corn (which is fed to poultry, hogs and cattle) raise retail meat prices. Ironically, fuel subsidies may boost food costs” The Washington Post: Blindness on Biofuels by Robert J. Samuelson Wednesday, January 24, 2007; Page A23.

15 USDA. Grain: World Markets and Trade. Circular Series FG 11-06. November 2006. FAO Food Outlook Nº. 2. Global Market Analysis. December 2006.


Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Tags: , , , , , ,