20 east

I’m currently struggling to understand the factors that connect bio-fuel to starvation but it does seem there is a connection (or at least the media would like there to be one) and no doubt somewhere in the upcoming frenzy I’ll become enlightened.

I have to say it is mildly amusing, in a black humour kind of way, that the developed world shot off on the whim of a few scientists only to find that in their rush to save the planet they are killing off the inhabitants!

Even more amusing to find that the original idea – bio fuel saves the planet – appears to have been poorly founded anyway.

Many interesting points raised by this saga;

1. How can bio fuel get so far down the line without the concept being thoroughly thought through? Certainly in terms of whether it really does save the planet, even if not on the issue of starving people.
2. If I read this correctly, some countries are planting bio fuel products in favour of those needed to feed the population. Why? Is this just pure greed and if so, what is happening to the money and why isn’t it being used to buy the food they need?
3. How did the UK government, and possibly others, get to the point where they are insisting that this apparently useless, if not ultimately dangerous, product is used? Okay, using the word ‘government’ makes this a rhetorical question.
4. How many people, companies, are going to be hurt by the apparent U-turn on bio fuel? Are we to now see a worldwide bio fuel crunch?
5. Who’s really responsible for making the decision to not plant, lets say rice, in favour of inedible bio fuel crops (palm oil or whatever)? The government, the company, the farmer?
6. Is there a U-turn on bio fuel at all, or is this just a slow month for the media?

Fascinating stuff. Just when we thought we might get closer to our ‘green’ targets and feel good about ourselves, we find we’re starving the people of Haiti, and elsewhere. I suppose this raises another question – can the government of Haiti be trusted to get anything right?