Brazilian rainforest, incredibly rich and globally important, is still under relentless attack. The latest threat is expansion of South American soybean fields. And much of this expansion is funded and encouraged by US-based agribusinesses. Soy is included to some extent in almost every food group these days, it feels like. There are many claims that all this soy is "American soy" -- but all too often that is only a half truth. It may be American OWNED soy, but it was NOT grown on US soil. Instead, it grew on land in Brazil that used to be lush rainforest, vital carbon sink, irreplacable wildlife habitat and source of dazzling biodiversity. Many major agribusinesses claim they will not have soy grown on cleared rainforest but law enforcement in Brazil is sparse and underfunded so actual follow-through is scarce.
A new effort has begun to pay Brazilian farmers and landowners to leave the forests standing. Many residents do not want to see their forest razed, but when faced with the choice of feeding their family or starving, well...it is not fair to expect them to choose the latter in the interests of conservation. I've said it
before and I'll say it again: HUNGRY PEOPLE DON'T GIVE A DAMN ABOUT ENDANGERED SPECIES. We have to give them a better option than short term "boom and bust" payoffs that are a result of typical rainforest clearing.
Cleared land can sell for about $1300 an acre (yes, these landowners are getting robbed considering the profits that the agribusinesses are making). If you had 100 acres, this would net you $130,000. That's still a hell of a lot of money if you happen to live in rural Brazil. A local environmental group is offering $12 per acre per year to leave the forest in place. For your same 100 acres, that is $1200 per year. You'd have to live 108 years to make your $130,000. We're going to have to do better than that. If they could get $50 an acre, that interval would go down to 26 years, a much more realistic time frame.
What can we do about it? Well, money even talks to rich agribusiness companies -- don't spend your money there. Try and avoid soy-based products when you can. Soybean oil is often used to make
"biofuels", particularly biodiesel as well. Just say no. Reducing demand is key, as is pushing for increased support of the conservation process. If you cannot support conservation financially, push your representatives and media sources to recognize and take action in the process. Be the squeaky wheel, wanderers, and demand the Right Thing!
So I've talked about the criminal scam that is corn-based ethanol
here.
And I touched briefly on the effects of world hunger
here.
Now I want to talk about cause and effect. We are rapidly spiraling into a global food shortage at the present. World stockpiles are at an all time low because, very simply, there are now more people on the planet than there is food to feed them. If you are reading (or writing) this blog, you are probably a person who pretty much takes food for granted -- you go to the grocery store and food is there for the taking. We, however, are in the minority and actions we take here DO affect what happens in the rest of the world.
Here is the heart of this particular travesty: the amount of corn used to produce ONE 25-gallon tank of ethanol could feed a person for a year. Can you please justify that to the family on the right? In 2008, 30% of the US corn harvest was used for this insanely inefficient fuel source that DOESN'T save energy and DOESN'T save fossil fuels. A THIRD OF THE CORN WE PRODUCED. If I had been eating ground up roots for a year just trying to stay alive, I believe I might be pushed into a murderous rage by that news.
The fact is, it's just wrong. It IS a crime, and even crueler, it is a crime that affects only the people suffering because of it. The perpetrators see no evil, hear no evil. Not only does it take food from the mouths of those who can least afford it, it also causes large amounts of resource destruction in countries where food is lacking. Put bluntly, hungry people don't give a shit about endangered species. And I can't blame them -- if you have to wonder if you will get your one meal of rice paste for the day, you are not going to spend one thought on the availability of natural resources that surround you. Even though those very resources directly affect the availability of neccessities like clean water, when one is struggling day to day to just SURVIVE, it is impossibile to consider the long term.
We all can think more about the results of the choices we make. Of course, perfection is impossible, we all make an impact and use resources just by existing. But each time a person chooses the ethical and the responsible, that DOES make a difference. People say money talks and it does. Where and how you spend your money shapes the flow of goods and services. So wanderers, let's shape it into a better place, shall we?
In the vein of the "biofuels" theme, let's talk briefly about palm oil. This goop is one of the primary ingredients of "biodiesel." Well, a perfect place to grow palm plantations is Indonesia, especially Borneo (home of the much-loved orangutan) -- they've got 15 million acres of previously incredibly diverse rainforest that are now under cultivation as palm monocultures. And a monoculture has virtually no value as wildlife habitat, carbon sink, food source, and is very vulnerable to disease -- when these large areas consisting of a single species take over, you can kiss the rest of the system goodbye. In addition, massive fires set annually to clear land for palm oil plantations have release HUGE amounts of carbon stored in the area's deep (up to 60 feet) peat soils.
From 1985 to 2005, a third of Borneo's rainforests, which contain a staggering 15,000 plant species and could be considered the most biodiverse in the world, have been mowed down for oil extraction, palm plantations, and mining. Large timber and resource extraction companies rape and pillage the landscape, stealing resources from hungry people knowing that, even if they get caught, there will be no one to hold them accountable or mete out punishment.
You can, at the least, reduce the demand for this type of product with your own use choices. Don't choose "biodiesel" for your truck and tell this industry that you are not willing to accept their short-sighted greed. Want an alternative to regular diesel fuel? Opt for a retrofit that will allow your engine to burn used vegetable oil, a recycled product that has virtually no additional impact between the restaurant fryer and your truck.
Ethanol -- one of the great marketing scams pulled on society. Supposedly the great savior to replace fossil fuels, corn-based ethanol was touted as the "green" alternative. Once again, good intentions pushing fast and hard into the market, unwilling to consider the big picture and the long term paved the road to hell for us. Just a few facts to consider:
(1) To produce a gallon of ethanol, it takes about 70% MORE energy than you actually get from burning the ethanol itself. So the overall process = net energy loss. This particular piece of genius *insert dripping sarcasm here* continues to baffle me daily.
(2) To grow and harvest an acre of corn to produce ethanol takes about 140 gallons of diesel.
(3) Corn itself is an incredibly water-hogging and destructive crop to grow. Producing it erodes soil about 12 times faster than the soil can regenerate and irrigating it drains groundwater about 25% faster than that water can refill and recharge.
Not to mention using a food source to power vehicles is just plain stupid. The acreage it takes to grow enough corn to power one average car for a year (11 acres) can feed seven people. I'll let you do the math. And I won't even mention what happens to people both domestically and abroad, when you drive up the price of corn, not only as a primary food source, but as feed for livestock.
Suffice it to say, any vehicle labeled "FlexFuel" or powered by ethanol is about the most environmentally UNfriendly choice you can make and you should run, run in the other direction. An agricultural expert from Cornell University put it well:
"Abusing our precious croplands to grow corn for an energy-inefficient process that yields low-grade automobile fuels amounts to unsustainable subsidized food burning."Are there better options out there that CAN effectively replace fossil fuels? Maybe! More to come on this topic....
Brazilian rainforest, incredibly rich and globally important, is still under relentless attack. The latest threat is expansion of South American soybean fields. And much of this expansion is funded and encouraged by US-based agribusinesses. Soy is included to some extent in almost every food group these days, it feels like. There are many claims that all this soy is "American soy" -- but all too often that is only a half truth. It may be American OWNED soy, but it was NOT grown on US soil. Instead, it grew on land in Brazil that used to be lush rainforest, vital carbon sink, irreplacable wildlife habitat and source of dazzling biodiversity. Many major agribusinesses claim they will not have soy grown on cleared rainforest but law enforcement in Brazil is sparse and underfunded so actual follow-through is scarce.
