It is about a year since I first got involved with Avaaz.org, when I signed one of their petitions about Zimbabwe. Avaaz.org is an international campaigning group working for
stronger protections for the environment, greater respect for human rights, and concerted efforts to end poverty, corruption and war.
I have signed several of Avaaz.org’s petitions. I don’t support all their campaigns, and I think that some of you my readers might not support some of the ones I support, especially related to climate change. But I would expect all of you, at least all who call yourselves Christians, to get behind the one for I have just received an e-mail, with the subject line
Biofuels: the fake climate change solution
Whatever your overall view on global warming issues, you should be concerned about rising food prices for the poor (and perhaps for yourselves!). So please join me in expressing your support for this campaign, through the main link for this campaign and in other ways.
By following that link you will find a summary of the issues. But oddly enough I can’t find online the text of the e-mail I received, although it is publicly available and not copyrighted. Also posting the text including the footnotes is the only way that I can link to the sources Avaaz.org quotes, which demonstrate that there is real research behind this campaign. So here is the whole message, except for the sidebar and the end matter (also I have replaced the visible URLs in some links with the word “link”, they should still work as links):
Dear friends,
Each day, 820 million people in the developing world do not have enough food to eat1. Food prices around the world are shooting up, sparking food riots from Mexico2 to Morocco3. And the World Food Program warned last week that rapidly rising costs are endangering emergency food supplies for the world’s worst-off4.
How are the wealthiest countries responding? They’re burning food.
Specifically, they’re using more and more biofuels–alcohol made from plant products, used in place of petrol to fuel cars. Biofuels are billed as a way to slow down climate change. But in reality, because so much land is being cleared to grow them, most biofuels today are causing more global warming emissions than they prevent5, even as they push the price of corn, wheat, and other foods out of reach for millions of people6.
Not all biofuels are bad–but without tough global standards, the biofuels boom will further undermine food security and worsen global warming. Click here to use our simple tool to send a message to your head of state before this weekend’s global summit on climate change in Chiba, Japan, and help build a global call for biofuels regulation:
http://www.avaaz.org/en/biofuel_standards_now/9.php?cl=60261136
Sometimes the trade-off is stark: filling the tank of an SUV with ethanol requires enough corn to feed a person for a year7. But not all biofuels are bad; making ethanol from Brazilian sugar cane is vastly more efficient than US-grown corn, for example, and green technology for making fuel from waste is improving rapidly.
The problem is that the EU and the US have set targets for increasing the use of biofuels without sorting the good from the bad. As a result, rainforests are being cleared in Indonesia to grow palm oil for European biodiesel refineries, and global grain reserves are running dangerously low. Meanwhile, rich-country politicians can look “green” without asking their citizens to conserve energy, and agribusiness giants are cashing in. And if nothing changes, the situation will only get worse.
What’s needed are strong global standards that encourage better biofuels and shut down the trade in bad ones. Such standards are under development by a number of coalitions8, but they will only become mandatory if there’s a big enough public outcry. It’s time to move: this Friday through Saturday, the twenty countries with the biggest economies, responsible for more than 75% of the world’s carbon emissions9, will meet in Chiba, Japan to begin the G8’s climate change discussions. Before the summit, let’s raise a global cry for change on biofuels:
http://www.avaaz.org/en/biofuel_standards_now/9.php?cl=60261136
A call for change before this week’s summit won’t end the food crisis, or stop global warming. But it’s a critical first step. By confronting false solutions and demanding real ones, we can show our leaders that we want to do the right thing, not the easy thing.
As Kate, an Avaaz member in Colorado, wrote about biofuels, “Turning food into oil when people are already starving? My car isn’t more important than someone’s hungry child.”
It’s time to put the life of our fellow people, and our planet, above the politics and profits that too often drive international decision-making. This will be a long fight. But it’s one that we join eagerly–because the stakes are too high to do anything else.
With hope,
Ben, Ricken, Iain, Galit, Paul, Graziela, Pascal, Esra’a, Milena — the Avaaz.org team
SOURCES:
[1] World Food Programme. “Hunger Facts.” Accessed 10 March 2008. link
[2] The Sunday Herald (Scotland). “2008: The year of global food crisis.” 9 March 2008. link
[3] The Australian: “Biofuels threaten ‘billions of lives'” 28 February, 2008. link
[4] AFP: “WFP chief warns EU about biofuels.” 7 March 2008. link
[5] New York Times: “Biofuels Deemed a Greenhouse Threat.” 8 February 2008. link
[6] The Times: “Rush for biofuels threatens starvation on a global scale.” 7 March 2008. link … also see BBC: “In graphics: World warned on food price spiral.” 10 March 2008. link
[7] The Economist: “The end of cheap food.” 6 December 2007. link
[9] Government of Japan. “Percentage of global carbon dioxide emissions (FY 2003) contributed by G20 nations.” link
Er Peter… I’m still planning to write something substantial engaging with you on Tesco, but can’t you see any tensions between your advocacy here and choosing to shop at Tesco??
There are several elements to this problem – and it’s one I’ve been teaching and preaching about for some time now (see eg here) but a core driver of it is the persistent level of western demand for fuel. In order to act justly in the ways you describe we need to act in ways that reduce our demand for such fuel, which means less driving ourselves, and less resort to purchasing which depends upon that fuel – so less use of supermarkets, especially the major ones with nation-wide distribution systems, and more resort to local food and local shopping. I know that our left hands aren’t supposed to know what our right hands are doing, but I don’t think they’re supposed to be engaged in an arm-wrestle behind our backs.
By the way, if you want to pursue the bio-fuels question further, I strongly recommend reading this article. The situation is MUCH more serious than most people believe, and the consequences are already having a major impact upon people world-wide.
Sam, I agree that we should drive as little as possible. I drive one mile each way to my local Tesco’s once every two weeks, which is hardly a lot. Other large supermarkets would be further. Farm shops etc would be even further, and the nearby ones don’t actually sell local produce. The small supermarket over the road still has a nationwide distribution system. I don’t have a large enough garden to live “The Good Life”. So I don’t really have a choice.
Peter, thank for the info.
I have always have my doubt about biofuel! I sent a message to my gouvernment (although as far as I know, my country won’t be at the meeting.)
As for this one mile, you could take a bike. Within my city I almost always take a bike for transportation.
Ruud, I would take a bike if this town was safe for cyclists. Unfortunately it is not, cyclists have to share narrow roads with cars, buses and big trucks and the roundabouts are really dangerous. I generally walk up to a mile or so, but Tesco is a little too far away to carry a lot of shopping.
That is because you English don’t drive on the right side 🙂
I’m not sure I shall sign this. I’m yet to be convinced there are ‘better bio-fuels’. Of course food should not be turned into fuel and land used to grow food should not be used to grow fuel and nor should forests in any part of the world be destroyed to grow the palms from which we get palm oil.
For Archer fans I tend to agree with Pat Archer concerning the ‘Ambridge digestor’. If it was fed merely with pig slurry, manure and general waste I’d be happy, but I don’t think Adam and Brian or any real British farmers should be growing acres of maize to turn into energy.
Pingback: Gentle Wisdom » How should Christians respond to poverty and injustice?