What Kind Of Hair Does Miss Myamee Wear

skeptical United Nations to biofuels

few days ago did the United Nations published its first report on biofuels. A consortium 20 agencies and programs of the UN concludes, in essence, that although the ethanol-a biofuel, can help reduce global warming and create jobs for the rural poor, these benefits may be offset by serious environmental problems and rising prices of food for starving populations. ( http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/world/AP-Biofuels.html?_r=1&oref=slogin )

This organization joins a major wave of skepticism that reacts to the enthusiasm of governments and big investors who, for some time, promote the use of biofuels on behalf of environmental protection and to give opportunities to the rural population depressed. European leaders have set a target that by 2020 10 percent of fuels will be of biological origin. President Bush also raised the target for biofuels consumption in the U.S. for the coming years. As these major energy consumers do not have enough land for crops needed to produce, require that poor countries like Peru make available its own land for these purposes.

But the UN report warns that the "fad of biofuels" - as the world body called the - Can be as damaging to the environment as fossil fuels. Another risk is that rapid growth in biofuel production will increase significantly the demand for fertile land and water in the world at a time when growth has increased the demand for food and forest products. Adding to this that the expansion of large-scale monoculture can lead to significant loss of biodiversity, soil erosion and nutrient loss. We have warned about these risks in other papers (see The Journal of Agricultural March in www.cepes.org.pe ).

The speed in Peru - and other Latin American countries-is intro do "fashion for biofuels" by big investors backed by the government has left no time for weighing up the pros and cons expansion of sugar cane crops, oil palm and other crops that are their main inputs. It is a State duty to report objectively - not propaganda - to the public on the advantages and disadvantages of this aggressive campaign, and responsibility of civil society to inform and express an opinion on a process that can have negative environmental consequences that should be prevented.