The logic of Agrofuel
- What is it? -

Ramananda Wangkheirakpam *

Like in most places, particularly in non-industrialized regions, North East India has been witnessed to aggressive jathropa promotions and plantations. Ranging from governments, corporate bodies, railways, Indian army NGOs, journalist and even some academics going at length how Jathropa will give fuel that can run their future automobiles.

There are already reports of extensive jathropa plantations going on in all the states in NE with funding from different sources including huge oil companies such as British Petroleum (BP) or the tea planters Williamson Magor aggressively converting agricultural and forest-jhum land to agrofuel plantations.

The frenzy of agrofuel expansion worldwide, catapulted by global corporations and finance, is considered alarming as this has direct and indirect linkages with loss of agricultural and forest land.

This global trend is beginning to manifest in the NE region, which calls for an urgent engagement with the issue before local economy, food sovereignty and environment are beyond redemption. It is considered important therefore to understand this frenzy.

There are three primary interrelated justifications by agrofuel promoters on why Jathropa is being promoted aggressively globally.

The first one assumes that oil extracts from Jathropa will be used as additive or alternate to oil thus reducing use and extraction of fossil fuel.

The second follows from the first argument that by reducing the use of fossil fuel there will be less emission of carbon dioxide (CO2) contributing to the fight against global warming.

And third, it is also argued that the plantation will also act as a carbon sink further mitigating climate change.

Before we go into details of agrofuel, it is critical to know where Agrofuel fits in the current mechanisms to deal with climate change.

Under the Kyoto Protocol, which is a progenitor of the Rio conference, countries who are signatories came out with certain mandatory emission cuts - this was applicable to industrialized countries where they have to limit emissions to approximately 95 % of 1990 level by 2008-2012.

One key strategy, particularly on the usual insistence of the US, that was 'adopted' was the technological fix where opportunities are opened up for large corporations (usually from the West) where crops, trees are planted (usually in the southern countries) to soak up unhindered carbon emissions for their industries and lifestyle or to fuel the ever increasing cars and industries.

How does this work?
Under the (mandatory or otherwise) emissions cut requirement of a country, companies are allowed (allocated allowances) only certain emission limits. If a company does not want to reduce its emission to meet the allowance provided, it is provided the possibility to invest abroad in projects that 'reduce' or absorb emissions of carbon dioxide (in order to meet the allocated limits)

The extraction and use of fossil fuel or oil, gas and coal has reached an unprecedented level, that the trappings of carbon dioxide which is released in the atmosphere by burning these fuels has led to the phenomenon known as climate change. With unpredictable cost of petrol sometimes touching 200 USD a barrel, there is frantic search for alternatives and/or additive to in order to have a secure source of the life force of the current un-sustainable economic growth.

Biofuel, or more correctly termed as agro-fuel, came to be seen as a possible alterative fuel that can act as an additive, if not an alternative, to use of fossil fuel. The rosy picture drawn for us is that cars will now run on fuel derived from plants (which has already absorbed the now dreaded CO2), farmers will get more money from their crops/fields by sub-planting food crops with fuel related crops/trees, each country will have enough energy produced and most importantly the threat of global warming will be greatly reduced!

However, this argument has hidden an important element: automobile industries, corporations and governments, particularly of the northern countries that contributes almost 90% of the carbon emissions, does not question the model of development that burns fossil fuel at an alarming rate. Without addressing the high production and consumption pattern, agrofuel such as Jathropa extracts cannot replace fossil fuel use.

It is predicted by the International Energy Agency (IEA) that even the transport fuel consumption will increase faster than what can be replaced by agrofuel. In another report "2006 International Energy Outlook", published by the US government, marketed energy consumption will rise by 71 % by 2003-2030, and that oil use will rise by 50 %.

The same report also points out that by 2030, a mere 9 % will comprise the renewable energy including agro-fuel! This demolishes the central justification for further promotion of agrofuel unless there is radical change in the way development takes place.

In India, according to the new National Action plan on Climate Change, the current fossil fuel use constitutes the main GHC emission and is estimated to be 66 % of the total energy generated. This fossil fuel will no doubt increase as the current growth pattern at 8-10 % will demand more oil and coal.

It is not just fossil fuel which is getting over, everything else is getting over, but this has not deterred those usual suspect and there is now renewed strength in opening land locked areas in search for fossil fuel and raw materials that will serve the ever growing growth and consumption, and this design is being replicated and expanded in all nook and corners of this earth.

In short, with the visible current pattern of growth, it is unlikely that CO2 and all other GHG emissions will stabilize or reduce. Debates and negotiations at international forums and with the legally binding instruments like the Kyoto Protocol under the UNFCCC clearly shows that member countries' are unwilling to make radical change that can help reduce their emissions.

In straight talk, large scale agro-fuel cannot be a substitute for biodiversity or homelands for displaced indigenous peoples. Feeding cars rather than people is another global current issue arising out of the recent food crisis. Jean Ziegler, a UN expert on right to food calls biofuel race as a "crime against humanity".

The idea behind growing more forest inorder to absorb carbon dioxide emissions lies in the credit and trading system as espoused by those countries and industries who does not want to change the way they do things – i.e., business as usual. In order words, they 'believe' that planting more trees will take care of the enormous emissions their industries, lifestyles make.

It is argued by several credited experts that destroying large forest which in fact is a store house of carbon itself is a problem, and that even to absorb the current emissions would require really vast areas that covers many countries.

They further say that, equating fossil carbon with biotic carbon (carbon sequestration through tree plantation) and trading is nothing but a science fiction, and that carbon trading is a mechanism that allows the continued exploitation of colonialism and exploitation of the natural resources.

The next article will explore further on the impact of agrofuel, followed by an exploration of agrofuel expansion in NE.