Agroenergy: myths and impacts in Latin America.

Agrofuels are promoted as an answer to global warming and Latin America is considered to be a suitable region to provide the world with cheap, sustainable fossil fuel substitutes. Yet expanding agroenergy production in tropical regions to meet the rich world's needs will increase the agricultural frontier, accelerate global warming, and increase violations of people's basic access rights to land, food and water. Generating cheap energy for rich countries is a new phase of colonization, preventing land reform, increasing inequity, and hunger. Rich countries must reduce their consumption, car use and massively invest in public transport to reduce global warming emissions and stop growing inequity. Part one of two articles abridged from the report Agroenergy. Myths and Impacts in Latin America, published by the PASTORAL LANDS COMMISSION, and NETWORK FOR SOCIAL JUSTICE AND HUMAN RIGHTS, Sao Paulo, Brazil.

Studies about fossil fuels negative impacts have contributed to agrofuels now being considered to be a most important issue. Currently, the global energy matrix consists of petroleum (35%), coal (23%), and natural gas (21%) with just ten of the wealthiest countries consuming nearly 80% of the world's energy and the United States (US), responsible for 25% of atmospheric pollution from fossil fuels.

Brazil is the fourth largest carbon dioxide producer in the world, its global warming contribution largely a consequence of deforestation of the Amazon rainforest, accounting for 80% of the country's carbon emissions. Expanding monocultural agriculture tends to exacerbate deforestation increasing the agricultural frontier, placing ever larger pressures on the Amazon and the Cerrado (savannah).

Brazil is nearly self-sufficient in energy production, so the aim of expanding agroenergy production is to meet other countries energy needs. This will accelerate global warming instead of helping to preserve the planet Accelerating global warming, places all life on our planet at risk. Consequently its necessary to demystify the propaganda of corporations on the supposed benefits of agrofuels as a solution to climate change. 'Renewable' energy should be discussed from a broader perspective with its negative effects considered. Large agricultural corporations, biotechnology companies, oil companies and the automotive industry are taking advantage of legitimate international concern and are now pursuing agrofuels as a key source of profits.

As no alternative energy source is capable of meeting current energy demands, a shift in current consumption patterns, principally in rich industrial countries, is vital. Yet the potential to reduce consumption has been practically excluded from official debate as a means to reduce atmospheric pollution. A first step should be massive investment in public transport, far beyond rationalisation policies, waste containment, and energy efficiency. Developing a diversity of genuinely alternative renewable sources is imperative.

During the 1920s, after the First World War, a phase of capitalism known as 'Fordism' was created, based on the powerful automotive industry created by Henry Ford. The industry had strong ties to oil companies. "Humanity during the industrial era sacrificed time, space, natural resources and sometimes their own lives to machines, to which public relations campaigns attributed magical qualities," describes journalist Antonio Luiz Costa, in the magazine Carta Capital. In 1973, vehicles were responsible for 42% of carbon dioxide emissions. This increased to 58% in 2000, and the trend continues. Analysts estimate global demand for oil, natural gas, and coal will increase by 80% within 25 years.

In 2004, The World Health Organization reported 1.2 million people die, and 50 million people are injured yearly due to car accidents. An update from WHO in 2008 warns these figures will rise by around 65% over the next 20 years without preventative action. In the US, car accidents are the main cause of death for those younger than 44 years and vehicles occupy 43% of all urban space; 33% in streets, 10% being parking lots, and there are 770 cars for every 1000 persons. To think the solution to saving life on our planet is to continue supplying the same number (or more) of vehicles with agrofuels is at least ingenuous. Extensive agrofuel production also causes serious environmental problems.

Energy wars

Control of energy sources has been the major aim of most wars fought in previous decades, with the US and European countries including armed conflict or invasion of foreign territories as policy options. The US government has also sought to guarantee to large corporations a monopoly over energy sources, traditional or alternatives. Armed conflicts and militarization are also involved in controlling natural water sources, which, among other functions, can produce energy.

According to the United Nations (UN) estimates, 1.2 billion people do not have access to potable water. Each year, about 2 million children die from illnesses caused by contaminated water. In the poorest countries, one of every five children dies before they reach five years old due to illnesses related to water contamination. The UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, Jean Ziegler, called this a 'silent genocide'. Water is an irreplaceable natural resource. If current destruction rates of natural water sources continue, half the world's population will have no access to potable water within the next 25 years. Increased agroenergy production tends to increase violations of people's basic access rights to water for human consumption.

Lifestyles based on high-energy consumption are guaranteed for privileged sectors of central and peripheral countries, while most of the world's people are left without access to basic services. According to the World Energy Statistics Institute, per capita energy consumption in the US is 13,066 kilowatt hours (kwh), while the global average is 2,429 kwh. In Latin America, the average is 1,601 kwh. With privatization of these services, transnational corporations are even more interested in profiting from these policies. Private monopoly of energy sources is guaranteed through clauses included in Free Trade Agreements, bilateral or multilateral, in policies implemented by the World Bank, and by the International Monetary Fund (IMF), which stimulate commercialisation of natural resources. In Latin America, the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) stimulates agrofuel production with the idea our "enormous potential in arable land, climate conditions, and labor costs" should be utilised. The Bank recently announced its intention to invest US $3 billion in private agroenergy projects.

The Initiative to Integrate Regional Infrastructure of South America (IIRSA) also promotes various large energy projects. Generating cheap energy for rich countries is a new phase of colonization. Current policies for Latin America are sustained by the same factors that characterized colonization: exploitation of territory, natural resources, and labour.

Harmful impacts: sugar cane and corn

* To cultivate and produce sugar cane-based ethanol, large amounts of chemical products are used which pollute the soil and potable water sources.

* Each litre of ethanol produced in a factory, in closed circuit, consumes close to 12 litres of water and irrigation consumes even more water, so agroenergy production greatly reduces natural water resources.

* Ethanol distillation produces a toxic residue called stillage. For each liter of ethanol, between lo and 13 litres of stillage are produced. One part of stillage may be utilized as fertilizer, if diluted in water. Researchers warn stillage may contaminate rivers and underground water sources. If annual ethanol production in Brazil is 17 billion litres, the result is at least 170 billion litres of toxic stillage deposited in sugarcane fields.

* Burning sugar cane helps the labour process during cane harvesting, but it destroys microorganisms in the soil, pollutes the air, and causes respiratory illnesses.

* Sugar cane processing in factories also pollutes the air through burning of bagasse, which produces soot and smoke. The National Institute of Spatial Resources (INPE) declared an alert in the sugar cane fields of Sao Paulo (the largest producer of sugar cane in Brazil), as sugar cane burnings diminished relative air quality to extremely low levels of between 13% and 15%.

* Sugar cane monoculture will also dominate some of the best agricultural lands, substituting lands meant for food production. In Brazil, sugar cane production has invaded the lands of Indigenous communities and lands meant for resettlement under Land Reform.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

Food sovereignty/security impacts

Corn-based ethanol is a major threat to food sovereignty. Corn is different to other crops being one of the most common grains used in human food consumption. Its use as fuel should increase prices for a variety of food products using corn. Recently the US government announced it would substitute 20% of its gasoline consumption with ethanol. Currently corn is the basis of ethanol production in the US. The goal of the Bush administration is to achieve annual production of 132 billion litres of ethanol by 2017. To reach this amount, the US (the largest corn producer in the world), would have to use its entire production (268 million tons of corn) and would still need to import close to no million tons, equivalent to Brazils total annual corn production.

In 2006, cords price on the global market rose by 80%. In Mexico, cords diversion to the US ethanol market caused a 100% increase in tortilla prices, the principal food source for Mexicans. Chinas government foreseeing a food supply problem, prohibited corn-based ethanol production.

The March 2007 edition of the magazine Globo Rural published an article saying:

   In global terms, corn cultivation will advance into
   areas of soy, wheat, and cotton production, which
   will cause a generalized increase in these products
   prices in a true domino effect.

Wheat and rice prices have already risen, as people looks for alternatives to high-priced corn, thereby increasing demand for these cereals. High corn prices will also affect costs of avian, cow, and pig production, as corn provides 75% of grains used as animal rations. This will increase the prices of products from livestock, such as milk, eggs, cheese, butter, etc. According to Clovis Puperi, director of the Brazilian Union of Aviculture: "No cereal has the capacity to rapidly substitute corn without causing an earthquake in the market."

Another threat is the large quantity of water used in corn production. According to Professor Pimentel of Cornell University in New York, for each kilo of corn produced, 500 to 1500 litres of water are used and to produce one liter of corn-based ethanol, 1200 to 3600 litres of water is needed. Also, ethanol factories in the US are fuelled by coal or gas energy, causing more carbon emissions into the atmosphere.

Vegetable diesel fuel from soy and palm oil

Optimistic estimates for diesel from soy indicate the balance of renewable energy produced per unit of fossil fuel energy used in cultivation is 0.4 per unit, due to high oil use in fertilizers and agricultural machines. Soy expansion has also caused enormous devastation of forests and savannah, destroying biodiversity in various countries, including Brazil. Yet soy has been presented by the Brazilian government as the main crop for agrodiesel production. "The cultivation of soy sticks out like a jewel in the crown of Brazilian agribusiness. Soy could be considered the cradle for the opening of biofuel markets," say researchers from the Brazilian Business for Agricultural Research (Embrapa).

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

The government estimates over 90 million hectares of Brazilian land could be used to produce agrofuels. In the Amazon alone, the proposal is to cultivate 70 million hectares of palm for palm oil, known as the 'diesel of deforestation', as it has already devastated large areas of forest in Colombia, Ecuador, and Indonesia. In Malaysia, the largest producer of palm oil in the world, 87% of forests have already been destroyed. In Indonesia, the government is attempting to expand palm oil production to 16.5 million hectares of land, which may destroy 98% of its forests. Diverse environmental organizations warn that monoculture expansion in forest areas is a far greater global warming factor than emissions from fossil fuel combustion.

Besides destruction of agricultural lands and forests, there are other polluting effects from agrodiesel production like construction of transport and storage infrastructure, which demand large amounts of energy. There would also be increased use of agricultural machinery, agricultural inputs (fertilizers and pesticides), and irrigation to guarantee increased supply. A December 2006 study by the Deli Hydraulics Institute shows each tonne of palm oil releases between lo and 30 tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions, at least lo times as much as petroleum produces and if emissions from peatland drainage and degradation including fires are included, emissions are much higher.

Cellulosic biomass production

New research is attempting to introduce a so-called 'second generation' of agrofuels to the world market, developed from cellulosic material to be available in about ten years. The idea is agrofuels produced from food crop sources could be rapidly substituted by cellulosic material, avoiding risks to food security and food sovereignty. But if current rates of expansion of corn, sugar cane, soy, and palm plantations continue, the impacts within the next ten years will be enormous. According to the International Food Policy Research Institute, food prices could rise from 20% to 33% by 2010 and from 26% to 135% by 2020, if current agrofuel expansion trends continue. According to the PAO (Food and Agriculture Organization), around 824 million people do not have access to adequate food. This number may rise to 1.2 billion people as a result of rising food prices.

It's a mistake to think cellulosic agrofuels derived from organic residues of corn, sugar cane, and other crops will not utilize agricultural lands. Organic residues are actually natural fertilizers that nourish and protect the soil. If this material is used for other purposes, chemical and petroleum-based fertilizers would be necessary, cancelling any positive effects for global warming. Biomass based on cellulosic material is being developed mainly to produce genetically-modified (GM) trees, which are a great threat, potentially contaminating other crops, as it's impossible to control pollination. Tropical forest areas are also at risk from GM tree expansion.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

Genetically modified agrofuels

Corporations producing genetically modified crops are developing non-consumable types of crops meant only for agrofuel production. But with no way to stop GMOS contaminating native species, this practice puts food production at risk and could increase hunger across the world. In the US, ethanol production is based on a type of genetically modified corn, different from corn for human consumption. Farmers admit there's no way to control contamination, as they use the same areas to grow corn for ethanol production and food consumption.

Agroenergy expansion is of great interest to companies producing GM organisms, like Monsanto, Syngenta, Dupont, Dow, Basf, and Bayer. The companies hope to get greater public acceptance by promoting GMOs as 'clean' energy sources. In Brazil, the group Votorantim has developed technology to produce GM sugar cane for ethanol production with two companies, Alellyx and CanaVialis, which have formed a partnership with Monsanto. This will allow Alellyx and CanaVialis access to Monsanto's GM soy and cotton genes and to apply the technology in sugar cane production.