Castro criticizes U.S. biofuel policies

[Bacchus39]

Source: AP

HAVANA - Fidel Castro lashes out against U.S. biofuel plans in an op-ed piece published Thursday, a sign Cuba's 80-year-old leader may be taking a more active role in public affairs after months sidelined by a still undisclosed illness.

President Bush's support for using crops to produce ethanol for cars could deplete food stocks in developing nations, the article in the Communist Party daily Granma asserts.


"The sinister idea of converting food into combustible was definitively established as the economic line of the foreign policy of the United States," he writes.

"Apply this recipe to the countries of the Third World and you will see how many people among the hungry masses of our planet will no longer consume corn," the article said. "Or even worse: by offering financing to poor countries to produce ethanol from corn or any other kind of food no tree will be left to defend humanity from climate change."





Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070329/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/cuba_castro;_ylt=Agofe5sWIipZPB_882g4PrhvaA8F

[BushOut06]

1. K&R - this bears watching

When people started talking about using corn and other foods into fuel, I thought the same thing. We have people starving all around the world, and we're going to burn FOOD?

[Bacchus39]

4. in Brazil its sugar cane

think of all the rum that is going to waste.

actually, I believe that Mexico has experienced a large price increase in corn and thus their tortillas. Just a few weeks ago I think there were some protests in Mexico.

The price of corn in the US has shot up.

I don't necessarily agree with El Commandante. Furthermore, the net engergy production from corn is somewhat low like 1.4:1 output to input. On the other hand, sugar cane is very productive at about 10:1. Researchers in the US are looking at alternative plants that could be mass produced with a higher energy output. From what I've seen they are non-food plants so that Fidel's mind can be at ease.

[Pharaoh]

14. that doesn't matter

if your using the land which would otherwise be used to grow food is the main point I think.

[Bacchus39]

15. happens all the time

someone else noted tobacco. Cuba grows that. why not convert to a food source then?

[bilgewaterbill]

71. Chew tobacco? How novel. nt

[Marrah_G]

23. It's not a lack of food

It's the corrupt governments of those countries refusing to allow the food to get to those who so desperately need it. This has been happening for a very long time.

[semillama]

2. Once again, Castro embarasses the US by being right

Total conversion to biofuels is not the answer. Electric cars and widespread mass transit are probably going to be the only acceptable solutions.

[MadHound]

46. Actually you, and Castro, are both wrong

The current hot thing in biodiesel is using algae as a feedstock. Using this method, we can provide fuel for all of our transportation needs, without using one acre of land needed for food crops<http://www.unh.edu/p2/biodiesel/article_alge.html> Oh, and the extra added benefit is that much of this algae can be grown in wastwater treatment ponds as part of the initial wastewater treatment. In addition, it is not a fuel intensive crop to raise, and would provide a bonanza for our cities and small farmers.

And actually, the biodiesel that is currently being made is a by product of cattle feed production. The oil is extracted from the beans as the beans are made into cattle feed. In addition, most home biodiesel makers are recycling fryer grease.

Biodiesel is a clean, renewable energy source that can save our ass. It's high time that we started using it.

[Mika]

53. How was Mr Castro wrong?

He was referring to the proposed massive use of corn as a fuel source instead of a food source for poorer peoples.

The topics your refer to are in agreement with the statements made by Mr Castro - that being the use of corn would be to the detriment of mankind.

How was he wrong?

[MadHound]

54. He was demonizing corn specifically,

But from the tone of his general remarks it seemed to me that he was blasting any fuel derived from a plant source:shrug: Perhaps it is all in one's interpretation of his remarks.

[Mika]

57. Oh, I see. It was the "tone" of his op-ed.

:rofl:

[SpiralHawk]

3. "He does not belong to MY occult cabal, so I'm not listening." - Commander AWOL

"He's a socialist commie bearded hippie.
Why would any American listen to anyone at all, unless they
belonged to a special, 'elite' darkside occult cabal, like
me and my patrician Skull & Boner republicon cronies?

"Screw all this talk about people and food. What about
talking up a way to maximize profits for the patrician class?" - Commander AWOL

[razzleberry]

5. is F.C. against all crop usage that is non-food?

or only in US.

[Bacchus39]

8. I think he is worried that crops will be exported to the US to satisfy

the energy demand which will result in food shortages and high prices in developing countries. however, as another poster mentioned switch grass and other non-food plants are being experimented with and corn will probably be overtaken soon. It has a low engergy output to input ratio compared to sugar cane anyway. Fidel is behind the times. imagine that.

[razzleberry]

9. getting rid of tobacco planting would fix the food shortages

that FC seems concerned with.

[Bacchus39]

10. good point!!

and also while it pains me to say it, rum (sugar cane) is not one of the main food groups.

[wordpix]

75. FC is no doubt aware that poor countries now export lots of food to US

I was in FL recently and could barely find any FL-grown crops. Most tropical fruits came from places like Costa Rico and Mexico.

[GOPBasher]

6. Biofuels need not compete with food.

Right now biofuels compete with food, because we're insanely using corn to produce ethanol, which is stupid for about a million reasons that I can't get into right now. But eventually, we can make ethanol and biodiesel from plenty of crops that won't compete with food. A couple examples include swithgrass, which can be grown on land that is not arable for farming, and algea, which grows in water.

[papau]

7. Algea seems the easiest to use - no real transport needed n/t

n/t

[razzleberry]

12. are non-food crops unethical?

who really needs leather or wool?

[twiceshy]

13. What about hemp?

I seem to remember the mexican stuff I used to buy was loaded with oily seeds. And the stuff grows anywhere in great perfusion.

[endarkenment]

25. So if I replace 1000 acres of corn with 1000 acres of switchgrass

How exactly is that 'not competing with food' production?

[Bacchus39]

29. Castro could replace his tobacco crop with food too

n/t

[rman]

48. No reason to do so because Cuba is not short on food

[Bacchus39]

60. well what's he complaining about then?

n/t

[Mika]

63. Unlike the US's H.O.S., he's intelligently reflecting his concern for poor peoples around the world.

One thing that can be said of Cuba(ns).. their concern and care for the poor & needy is unparalleled for such a small nation - as exemplified by their medical and ed exports.

[rman]

47. You don't replace it if you don't use the same land -

which would apparently be the point of growing switchgrass, or algae.

Otoh the question is just how energy rich crops are that grow on land not suitable for food crops.
In that respect sugar cane is more suitable for bio fuel that corn - but then you'd be replacing food crops with fuel crops, and we're kindof tight on food supplies as it is.

[GOPBasher]

67. Apparently, you didnt' read my post. I specifically stated that switchgrass

doesn't need arable land to grow. So, you don't use the same land to grow switchgrass as you use to grow corn. If it's not the same land, I don't see how it is "competing with food."

[ProudDad]

42. Follow the money

There are two GREAT reasons why they're doing it to corn in the U.S. of A.

Cargil and ADM...

[gorbal]

11. I can't seem to find the actual article.

It is supposed to be somewhere here-

http://www.granma.cu/INGLES/

But I can't seem to locate it. Did any news agency actually print anything he said, or are they afraid of his influence?

[gorbal]

16. Found a Prensa Latina article, still not entire article-

http://www.plenglish.com/article.asp?ID={C9450838-EA01-475A-93E1-CED737EDE465})&language=EN

[formercia]

17. Food will always be available

to those who can afford it.

One thing I noticed in the Third World was the cost of basic commodities compared to what we pay here in the States. Unless there is some subsidy or donation program, the cost of basic foodstuffs such as vegetable oil, is very close to what we pay if not higher due to transportation, distribution and corruption costs. The problem is that those people don't make anywhere what even the lowest paid worker in the US does.

Much of the grains grown in the US goes to feed for the production of meat, a very inefficient conversion. Then there is the waste and pollution burden the environment suffers as a result.

[donsu]

18. they don't have to use food crops - hemp is perfect

grows fast and tall and will give all the bio mass needed

plus hemp has many, many other important uses.

[endarkenment]

26. they have to use land.

Fixed resource, not all of it good for growing. It isn't what crop you are producing so much as what use you are making of good land.

[Critters2]

30. Tell that to the "developers" who keep buying up great farm land

in Illinois and other places to build McMansions for suburbanites who don't think beyond their own personal desires. This so infuriates me!!!

[endarkenment]

32. Indeed, but even so planting houses is a minor problem.

Of course as the energy crisis deepens and our dependence on transporting food over huge distances become economically nonviable, a lot of those house farms are going to have to consider changing crops.

[Critters2]

34. Yep, if you work in the city and live in the ex-urbs, expensive fuel to get to work

will be just the beginning of your problems.

[wordpix]

76. "We need that farmland for food and fuel security!" Shout it whenever developers come your way

You need to fight like hell to get the land out of developers' hands and this is one way that is gaining steam across the US---in the East, at least.

Congress really needs to pass some tax incentive bills for landowners to preserve farm and woodlands.

[MadHound]

49. The thing is that hemp actually grows where other crops won't

And in the process of raising hemp crops, you are actually enriching that soil for later use raising food crops. Natural rotation cycles, so many people have forgotten them in these days of chemicals.

[donsu]

65. yes, when I was young everything was about rotating crops, etc.

much was written, and tried and talked about.

[joshcryer]

70. Hemp is an amazing crop, I've read that it can go 20 seasons.

Without rotation before any appreciable depreciation in growth occurs.

[hunter]

19. U.S. ethanol promotion is economic warfare against Latin America.

Our rat bastard leaders know exactly what they are doing. They believe they will have more leverage against leftist Latin American leaders if rising food costs contribute to the political instability of these nations.

What our leaders don't realize is that the United States itself is a Latin American sort of country, rife with exactly the same sorts of rich-get-richer corruptions and class separations.

We are Mexico dressed in fancy clothes, and carrying a big gun. But inside the same sort of rot eats away at us. We can only pretend to be a Western European sort of democracy.

[DanWithAngel]

38. When did America become founded as a Western European sort of democracy?

I believe a war between America and the British settled that bit of historic notion.

[Amused Musings]

20. If it competed with food production, then why do we

subsidize agriculture in this country so heavily? Other than the corporate farm lobby of course (or is that the difference?). If the world wants lower prices of food to feed the hungry, we need to end farm subsidies in the US and Europe as well.

[Bacchus39]

subsidies keep US food prices low

other nations that wish to export to the US cannot compete because the price of their food is higher due to the subsidies. developing nations want to export to the US because they receive higher profits than from their country of origin. subsidies do not increase food costs.

[Amused Musings]

22. Woops, you are right-not

sure what I was thinking. I guess what I was getting at is subsidized farms in America leave so much waste or uncultivated land that there should not be a food shortage problem

[endarkenment]

27. If there is a mass transition to ethanol

the demand for land put to ethanol production would be enormous. I think that is Castro's point.

[Bacchus39]

28. I think circumstances will pass this issue by

higher energy yield plants that are not food sources will be developed. I heard a seminar recently where even if we planted corn and soy on all arable land it would only meet 20% of our energy requirements.

[endarkenment]

31. Once again, it ain't the plant used, it is the land used.

Of course if the plant used doesn't compete with land used for food production then there is no problem. I do not think such a plant exists.

[Bacchus39]

33. many things compete with food for land including your house

under your argument everything competes with at least a potential food source. I do not find biofuels particulary nefarious considering the fossil fuel alternative. Now I would say that more high yield energy plants are desirable so you get alot more output per acre than soy or corn.

[endarkenment]

35. Right now it is not a problem.

Yes of course every land use that consumes agricultural land competes with food production. That is not the point. The point is that if biomass is used to replace a significant proportion of fossil fuel energy, the demand for land for biomass will be huge. House planting is a minor issue.

[joshcryer]

45. It's a good policy, nations should not be exporting their food.

That only allows the status quo in those nations to exploit them further. They resort to growing "money crops" and then you wind up with, say Cuba, creating sugar cane as their only food crop. It's like how Iran practically only grows pistaschios.

Castro is of course wrong on this mark because it's not hurting the world for biofuels to be implemented.

[Mika]

56. Cuba's only food crop is sugar cane?? WTF?

Hey joshcryer, a simple google search will reveal otherwise and refute your "expertise" on Cuban agriculture. In your rush to condemn Mr Castro's informed op-ed, you reveal how uninformed you are on the subject.

http://earthtrends.wri.org/text/agriculture-food/country-profile-46.html

http://www.indexmundi.com/cuba/agriculture/

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/280951_focus13.html?source=mypi

http://www.harpers.org/TheCubaDiet.html

http://www.sustainer.org/pubs/columns/03.24.03Hamilton.html

[joshcryer]

68. Statist communist reading comprehension isn't very good is it?

What did you think I was saying?

Did you read what I was saying?

If Cuba went to a "money export economy" then you risk losing the wonderful decentralized organic gardens and then you have pre 90s sugar cane export. I mean, governments are all about the money. And one crop exports are the most effective ways to make money.

[Mika]

78. Hypothetical irrelevent.

Point made about cash crops. :thumbsup:

But Cuba has been moving away from one crop (sugar)for decades.

Mr Castro is not wrong in that he's pointing out that food crops as energy is dangerous for the 3rd world's poor and hungry.

Sorry about the misunderstanding (as my statist communist reading comprehension is usually OK ;) ).

[joshcryer]

80. I support Cuba, just not cash crops.

And I fear that Cuba will forget what things were like when they were growing only sugar cane. Money isn't everything.

[Bacchus39]

21. subsidies keep US food prices low

other nations that wish to export to the US cannot compete because the price of their food is higher due to the subsidies. developing nations want to export to the US because they receive higher profits than from their country of origin. subsidies do not increase food costs.

[Judi Lynn]

36. The grave destruction of Mexican farms began years ago, after CAFTA,

when US deeply subsidized corn started flooding Mexican markets with a product Mexican farmers working on farms owned for generations by their families, and their employees learned quickly they could NOT AFFORD to raise corn and sell it in Mexico at the prices the US corn could get.

There was a complete blow landed against people who have been deriving their entire livelihood for their whole lifetimes, throwing huge numbers of these people out of work.

These subsidies have put more than a million corn farmers out of business in Mexico, shut down hundreds of cotton plantations in Africa and wrecked agriculture in many third world countries while keeping prices higher in America. That is not "free" trade.

http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/11/15/153146.php

That sent a lot of the former farm owners to the United States.

Now the final stages of NAFTA are being completed which will also flood Mexico with cheaper beans and rice than they can afford to grow, and the ordinary people left farming there are very deeply upset. There have been articles written about the anguish and dread with which they are facing the final installment of NAFTA.

(The sugar subsidies to South Florida enable the Cuban "exile" Fanjul family to become the United States' First Family of Corporate Welfare, for their plantations on land converted from swamp by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The sugar subsidies raises the cost of ordinary products a HORRENDOUS amount.)

[Bacchus39]

61. talk about old news!!

there is a corn shortage in Mexico!! http://www.fortwayne.com/mld/journalgazette/news/nation/16576845.htm


"Mexico is in the grip of the worst tortilla crisis in its modern history. Dramatically rising international corn prices, spurred by demand for the grain-based fuel ethanol, have led to expensive tortillas. That, in turn, has led to lower sales for vendors such as Rosales and angry protests by consumers."



The sugar subsidies to South Florida enable the Cuban "exile" Fanjul family to become the United States' First Family of Corporate Welfare, for their plantations on land converted from swamp by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The sugar subsidies raises the cost of ordinary products a HORRENDOUS amount.)

yeah, I paid $0.69 for a two pound bag of sugar the other day. its killing me.

[Judi Lynn]

64. It's easy to attempt to be flippant when you don't know what you're talking about.

Providing actual information which contributes to a clearer understanding takes more time:

It is not news that sugar is richly subsidized, or that the Fanjuls have profited so handsomely. Even as recently as 1995, when Congress passed legislation to phase out price supports for a cornucopia of agricultural products, raw sugar was spared. Through a combination of loan guarantees and tariffs on imported sugar, domestic farmers like the Fanjuls are shielded from real-world prices. So in the U.S., raw sugar sells for about $22 a pound, more than double the price most of the world pays. The cost to Americans: at least $1.4 billion in the form of higher prices for candy, soda and other sweet things of life. A GAO study, moreover, has estimated that nearly half the subsidy goes to large sugar producers like the Fanjuls.
(snip)

http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/time/1998/11/16/sweet.deal.html

[endarkenment]

24. Whatever else you think about Fidel, he is right about this. nt.

[MadHound]

50. No, he's not, and neither are you. See post 46 above n/t

[rman]

52. So Castro is right, since US bio fuel policy is not to use algae,

but to use a food crop (corn) for production of bio fuel.

And it is that, not bio fuel in general, that Castro is rightly concerned about.

[MadHound]

55. Actually US biofuel policy is involved with both ethanol and biodiesel

And it seems that in his general remarks that Castro is condemning both.

[rman]

59. the issue is with the crops used, not with the kind of bio fuel

Castro is condemning using food crops (and/or land used for food crops) to produce bio fuel. Castro is being quite specific about it. He is not condemning bio fuel as such.
Unlike what you argue in post 46, the fact that algae can be used to produce bio fuel, does not change anything about this.

[Chemical Bill]

69. Seems to me he's against our exploitation of the third world.

I think that, anyway. I think he's just fixated on this one example.

Bill

[rman]

72. Of course he is, and this is just one current example of it

On other occasions Castro has addressed other aspects of that exploitation.

I'm assuming you don't think there's anything wrong with "fixating" on any topic that one discusses...

[DanWithAngel]

37. castro is a complete and utter moron

<i>"The sinister idea of converting food into combustible was definitively established as the economic line of the foreign policy of the United States," he writes.</i>

The human body and every living thing on earth converts food into energy by combustion.
Using fuel for cars and trucks to carry people and goods is considered a good thing. There
is more food produced than can be consumed by animals and you need vehicles that use energy
to deliver it.

[hunter]

40. The problem is we could convert ALL our food to fuel...

...and it would not satiate any large fraction of our demand for fuel. We could always do much, much better, for much less money, by simply raising fuel economy standards, no matter how much ethanol we produced.

So what is the purpose of making ethanol? It can't replace gasoline in any significant way, so why subsidize it?

Personally, I do not think agriculture is a good thing. It's a dirty dangerous business that is bad for the environment. We should only do it to the extent that we must. A reduction in farm acerage would be a good thing so long as everyone had food to eat, clothes to wear, and a roof over their heads.

Castro is not a "complete and utter moron." He is very smart, and he has been making the United States dance for many years now. If he is simply a "moron," but we still regard him as a very serious threat, what does that say about us?

[rman]

51. About half the global population is suffering from malnutrition.

(Which is not a secret)

So there is certainly not "more food produced than can be consumed by animals" - unless you exclude humans, but why would you do that?.

So replacing food crops with fuel crops might not be such a good idea.

[Qutzupalotl]

39. Combustible comestibles?

[ProudDad]

41. No wonder ADM and Cargil hate Fidel

This is just another VERY good reason why the bush "idea" of using food crops for ethanol is bullshit.

The other being that Cargil and ADM would be the MAJOR beneficiaries of this policy.

"The sinister idea of converting food into combustible was definitively established as the economic line of the foreign policy of the United States," Castro wrote of Bush's discussions of biofuels with U.S. automakers this week.

He noted that Cuba has also experimented with extracting ethanol from sugar cane, but said there could be disastrous consequences if rich nations imported key food crops such as corn from poor countries to help meet energy needs.

"Apply this recipe to the countries of the Third World and you will see how many people among the hungry masses of our planet will no longer consume corn," the article said."


We should be working on

1) Conservation
2) ethanol from switch grasses
3) Conservation
4) bio diesel
5) Conservation

[Mika]

58. Interestingly, ADM and Cargil are prime Big Ag forces in the 'end-the-Cuba-sanctions' efforts.

:shrug:

[Pavulon]

43. Tough titty

said the kitty..

The us maintains massive reserves of resources which can be renewed, and wealth can be put in to the mid west rather than oil whores pockets. This is a cross isle issue. Run b50 wherever i can get it.

Brasil did it so can we, let the oil mongers starve.

Blah blah, we might miss our cut. (esad)

[Bacchus39]

62. agreed

biofuels even as a percentage of energy needs is better than total dependence on fossil fuels

[unkachuck]

44. Fidel is right....

....on the politics but could we not produce ethanol from vertical hydroponic strutures producing rapid growing grasses using little new farmland or space?....

....right now, isn't our annual fossil fuel consumption 5 times greater than what our present corn harvest could yeild thus requiring new ideas and methods for viability anyway?

....another problem is in the otto-cycle engine the air/fuel ratio drops from about 15 to 1 for gasoline to about 7 to 1 for ethanol which means we need more ethanol to do the same job....

....on the very-big plus side, ethanol is carbon neutral, replaceable, much less polluting and is a fuel inwhich our vehicles and fuel distribution network would have to change very little to yield basicly the same performance....

....ethanol is a very logical choice to replace fossil fuels with many benefits if we could develop it's full potential without the capitalist boogering up the process, it could work....

....this is off the top of my head and may be incorrect....

[Mika]

66. ActionAid: US/Brazil Biofuel Plans May Destroy Livelihoods, Promote Food Shortages

DUer nofoil posted this LBN thread earlier.. http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=2787566&mesg_id=2787566

Source: ActionAid - Earth Times

US/Brazil Biofuel Plans May Destroy Livelihoods, Promote Food Shortages, Says International Charity

WASHINGTON and RIO DE JANEIRO, March 30 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- US/Brazil biofuel plans may have severe repercussions on millions of rural poor, the international anti-poverty agency, ActionAid, warned today.

This Saturday, Presidents George Bush and Lula Da Silva will meet in Camp David to continue discussions on increasing ethanol production and trade. Under proposed plans, the fuel would be derived primarily from Brazilian sugarcane sources.

Ethanol represents a viable alternative energy solution. However, ActionAid urges governments to take into account that the production of such biofuels has thus far resulted in the concentration of land, resources and income into the hands of the few, the destruction of endangered rainforests, contamination of soil, air and water, and the expulsion of rural populations from their homes.

"We are talking about unfair trade-offs. Increasing ethanol production through land grabs, reducing the amount of farmland for food crops, and harming the environment will only serve to increase misery," said Celso Marcatto, Food Rights Coordinator at ActionAid Brazil.

Read more: http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/news_press_release,82913.shtml


______________________________________________________



It looks like Actionaid's position is in accordance with Mr Castro's.

[Bacchus39]

74. and your thoughts on oil??

n/t

[Mika]

79. Better to sell oil than the food hungry people could eat.

Cuba is developing an extensive alternative/renewable energy infrastructure. Slowly, because it is expensive to do so, but surely.

[wordpix]

73. he makes some good points---warm, sunny locales should be going solar, anyway

Our own hot spots like Fl, SoCal and Gulf Coast states should be retrtofitting every roof for solar and building solar arrays for EV electricity sources.

Coastal towns should have wind plants. Other cities and towns should have a combination of wind, solar, geothermal and biofuels. I think we need to decentralize our power plants to provide electricity with whatever renewable sources are available.

Farmers will not be able to plant corn in every field forever b/c it needs too much nitrogen to grow and eventually, the soil becomes depleted. Soybeans, otoh, fix nitrogen in the soil and are good for soil. Soybeans are also a great source of protein in food.

[SKKY]

77. Ok, this is one issue where we can't have our cake and eat it too...

...either we develop new farming techniques to produce more crops for Biofuel, or we continue to destroy wildlife preserves by digging for oil, or continue purchasing oil from countries who openly and brazenly sponsor terror. Personally, I'd like to see a few more farmers get paid, but that's just me.