Don’t Blame Bio-fuels For Everything
Confession time. I have to admit that I may have been a bit of a grumpy environmental blogger, failing to give due credit where credit is due..
In particular, I have frequently complained about bio-fuels driving up world food prices in absence of a few wider considerations, I’ve been dismissive at the EU’s lack of ability to actually implement anything that makes a real difference to the environment, and most recently I described an environmental tax levied on cows as the most stupid idea ever. So it is maybe time to examine these issues in a more positive light – negativity is, after all, the enemy of progress.
Bio-fuels Are Not Solely Responsible For World Food Prices
In fact, there are several reasons behind the recent price increases. Firstly, there are simply more people to feed these days as the earth’s population begins to swell, and feeding these masses hasn’t been made any easier by recent spates of bad weather which have reduced crop production in some parts of the world.
Secondly, not only are there more of us, but we are eating more as the world grows wealthier. In particular, rising standards of living in developing nations is leading to an increase in meat consumption, meaning that instead of using grain directly to feed people it is being used to feed animals to feed people - which is a very inefficient process.
Finally, we shouldn’t forget the impact of farm subsidies in the Western world, which have effectively forced many farmers in developing nations out of business by distorting food markets and has ultimately lowered world food production capacity.
Whilst bio-fuels may not be entirely innocent, they are certainly not the only villain.
Taxing Cows Is Not a Bad Idea
Considering the impact of increased meat production on food prices, a tax on cattle herds starts to sound more sensible. When one considers the additional environmental impacts of overgrazing, soil erosion, desertification and deforestation – not to mention the millions of tons of greenhouse gasses from manure and cow-smells – then it starts to sound quite necessary.
I previously criticized the tax which is now being levied on cattle farmers in Estonia, claiming that there are few alternatives to cows and that there are few ways to make cows more efficient. However, I have to admit that I overlooked the option of simply eating more vegetables instead.
And the EU is Making Sensible Subsidies
To round off, recognizing some of the problems being caused by the massive $62 billion spent by the EU each year on farm subsidies, EU leaders will this week consider plans to pay farmers not for producing food, but to take better care of the countryside instead. The sustainability of farming is becoming increasingly important as high prices encourage some farmers to over stress their land for short term profit.
Under the new proposals, whilst farmers will be more exposed to market forces, they will receive government funds to encourage more sustainable agricultural practices. It is hoped that such reforms will level the world-wide playing field for food production whilst also encouraging and preserving the traditional European rural way of life.
Full Circle
Coming full circle, whilst using food to power vehicles may still not be the smartest long term green energy solution, it is certainly not the only problem, and in our rush to blame bio-fuels we run the risk of ignoring other important problems which also need to be addressed.
At the same time, it’s easy to forget that although our world is under increasing environmental pressure, global environmental awareness and initiatives are at an all time high. We will continue to make many mistakes, but we are also making steady progress. No more grumpy posts from this blogger - for now.
More about agriculture and bio-fuels at Green Options:
How Green Are Biofuels- Comparison Chart [PIC]
3 Reasons Manure is Becoming a Cash Crop
What About the Food in the Farm Bill-
Image credit: kables at Flickr under a Creative Commons license
Just sticking my oar in where it’s not wanted: Mark, as you know, what about Tesco et al here in the UK, who can determine the prices of foodstuffs to a certain extent, thus undercutting local, independent grocers and butchers, ultimately putting them out of business, leaving said supermarkets the sole traders and so, in the process, able to monopolise food prices for surrounding areas.
mutter
Mark, interesting article. I always appreciate when some one makes an effort to be positive in his or her thinking, as I can tend to dwell on the negatives myself. Would transporting bison to the EU be an alternative to a cow tax? I’m pretty sure they are far better for the environment, and they don’t taste too bad either.
I agree.Biofuels aren’t the only problem. People fail to look at the bigger picture sometimes.
@Pem
Thanks for the oar Pem. I think the buying-power of the UK supermarkets perhaps warrants a post all of it’s own as it is far too deep a situation to explore here. My own view, in short, is that the large UK supermarkets have done a tremendous service to the population in terms of providing low cost and quality food. Compared to many places in the world UK shoppers seem to be getting a pretty good deal.
However, large supermarket chains do seem to have a disproportionate amount of market power, impacting consumer choice and driving many suppliers right up against the wall. I understand that there are constant discussions about regulating the supermarkets, although on balance it is still thought that consumers would ultimately suffer. UK grocery market competition is intense – usually a good thing for the consumer.
I’m generally wary of regulation in this area since it seems to me that when governments interfere and regulate markets, they do it badly.
@Levi
Knowing nothing about bison, and having never tried one I would have no idea. I’d be interested to know more, although I would hate to say goodbye to cows.
@George
Exactly!
Thank you for the apology, but you still haven’t gone far enough! Biofuels are not even part of the problem, but rather they are the solution.
It should be obvious that energy costs are responsible for high food costs since even now farmers are making only $89,000 per year. And biofuels have lowered the price of energy.
You are correct that there is plenty more land for biofuels if the developed world would just stop wiping out agriculture in the developing world with subsidies. The developing world needs agriculture for economic development to afford food and other goods, something both biofuels and food can provide. We don’t need them begging for subsidized food from countries like the US which has surplus land for either export or biofuels. Why should farm countries like the US keep losing wealth to the Arabs because countries like India can’t stop populating?
You were also right about the movement to meat eating the number one cause of greenhouse gases. Flesh eating is digusting. Feed people, not animals!
Erm, Mike. Is flesh eating disgusting?
Last time I looked - I’m *sure* I was still a member of a species that was omnivorous.
Yes, of course I’ve been a vegetarian, suppling my protein needs via soya, but I enjoy meat and experience no sense of self-loathing having feasted greedily on a carcass.
And burped.
Still, re: biofuels. Don’t they emit CO2? I still find it odd that solutions that emit carbon are seen as solutions.
Isn’t the … well, isn’t the solution one that stops the emission of CO2 into the atmosphere until our blue marble can stabilise and breath again?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IxHFidiSC9U