[PAA-Discuss] FW: Interviews Available -- Are Biofuels the Solution?

[Lee Loe]

 How can we stop this? Lee Loe

-----Original Message-----
From: Institute for Public Accuracy [mailto:dcinstitute at igc.org] 
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 10:28 AM
To: Institute for Public Accuracy
Subject: Interviews Available -- Are Biofuels the Solution?

Institute for Public Accuracy
915 National Press Building, Washington, D.C. 20045
(202) 347-0020 * http://www.accuracy.org * ipa at accuracy.org
___________________________________________________

	Friday, June 29, 2007

	Are Biofuels the Solution?

	Interviews Available

RACHEL SMOLKER, cell: (802) 735-7794, rsmolker at zoo.uvm.edu,
http://www.globaljusticeecology.org
    Research biologist at the Global Justice Ecology Project, Smolker said
today: "In just the past week [the U.S. government] permitted field testing
of a eucalyptus genetically engineered specifically for biofuel production,
a $375 million DOE grant was made to fund three major bioenergy research
centers, BP and DuPont fronted most of $400 million for a 'world class'
biofuel plant in the U.K., and the U.S. Senate passed a bill to mandate a
target of 36 billion gallons of biofuel by 2022. The pace at which biofuels
are being promoted is staggering.
    "Behind the corporate 'greenwash' that biofuels will help solve the
problem of global warming is an unfolding environmental and social
catastrophe. The idea that we can solve our problems by permitting huge
multinational corporations to grab up agricultural lands and cut down
forests in order to install massive industrial plantations of fuel
feedstocks is ludicrous and extremely dangerous. The direct and indirect
impacts on food, soils, water, indigenous people and biodiversity are
already evident. Any greenhouse gas emission savings is far outweighed by
the emissions caused by deforestation and industrial agriculture. The oil,
biotechnology and agribusiness industries see massive profits and are
forging alliances to consolidate food and fuel production under one collosal
industrial roof."

MARIA LUISA MENDONÇA, cell until Sat. noon: (617) 935-2642, thereafter in
Brazil: 011-55-11-81-679-951, marialuisa1 at uol.com.br,
http://www.social.org.br/english_report.htm
    Maria Luisa Mendonça is based in São Paulo and is in the U.S. until
Saturday at the U.S. Social Forum in Atlanta. She is director of the Social
Network for Justice and Human Rights and co-wrote an article titled "The
Myth of Biofuels." She said today: "Now there is a real concern in the U.S.
about global warming and that's good because the U.S. is responsible for 25
percent of all air pollution, so of course it's important that the U.S.
public take responsibility for that. But no alternative energy source would
meet the current demands for oil in this country. Right now there are about
770 cars for each 1,000 people in the U.S., so this is not a sustainable
sort of society. So before we talk about alternative sources of energy, we
need to talk about massive good-quality public transportation -- and then
talk about the impacts of the current sources for biofuel and bio-diesel and
ethanol.
    "In the case of ethanol, the main sources now are sugarcane and corn,
and both have several problems in terms of environmental destruction because
any type of extensive agricultural process will have an impact in terms of
the amount of water you need, the soil pollution with pesticides, and of
course the ground water pollution. In the case of sugarcane there is also
the problem of burning sugarcane which causes air pollution as well. And in
the case of bio-diesel, which is mainly made from palm oil and soybeans,
this is causing a great deal of deforestation, destroying the rain forest in
Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, Malaysia and Indonesia. So using agricultural
land for biofuels is not really sustainable.
    "In addition to all environmental issues, we have also serious labor
rights violations in the case of cutting sugarcane. ...
    "Biofules can actually make global warming worse in the case of Brazil,
because in the case of Brazil carbon emissions are not as much because of
our lifestyle, like in the United States. Carbon emissions for Brazil are
for the most part because of the destruction of the rain forest in Brazil,
so putting more pressure on expensive agriculture will only mean more
destruction of the rain forest and therefore more emission of carbon and
more global warming."

For more information, contact the Institute for Public Accuracy at
(202) 347-0020; or David Zupan at (541) 484-9167.


_________________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     mediagen at lists.accuracy.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     mediagen-unsubscribe at lists.accuracy.org

For all list information and functions, including changing your subscription
mode and options, visit the Web page:
     http://lists.accuracy.org/lists/info/mediagen