Biofuel production should be carefully regulated

LAST week the Permanent Secretary in the Ministry of Food Security and Cooperatives, Paniel Lyimo, said that the government was in the final touches of coming up with a policy document to guide biofuel production in the country.

He said that his ministry together with the Ministry of Energy and Minerals were jointly preparing the policy so as to make sure that biofuel production does not cause food insecurity in the country.

The ministry is carefully making follow-up on the types of crops to be grown for the purpose so as to make sure that food production in the country is not negatively affected together with land use.

He was of opinion that production of biofuel should first begin by using leftovers from food and animals such as those produced after the making of sugar (from sugarcane) and sisal ropes and related products (from sisal).

The PS remarks came at a time when there is an ongoing debate in the country and the world in general over the likely implications of biofuel production to food production and land use patterns.

Some sections have associated the current food shortage in the world with biofuel production holding that many of the crops used as raw materials were actually food for human beings.

For instance, a report by the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO) concluded that conversion to biofuels such as ethanol is scarcely helping with energy efficiency and is exacerbating a global food crisis.

“The combination of high petroleum prices and the desire to address environmental issues is currently at the forefront of the rapid expansion of the biofuel sector which in turn affects food prices in the world market,” it says in its March 2008 report available on its website.

Around the world, governments have enthusiastically embraced ethanol and other biofuels in recent years. Fuel from plant sources would, the thinking went, greatly reduce carbon-dioxide emissions and, for some countries, would also reduce reliance on foreign oil.

A number of countries in the world such as Brazil are behind the fast growth of biofuel industry and have put in place national policies that aim to reduce greenhouse gas emissions that cause global warming.

Crops like sugarcane, wheat, maize, rapeseed, soybean, palm oil and other oil crops such as sunflower are used as raw materials in the process, FAO says in its World Food Situation report.

As a result, the boosting demand for agricultural crops used as feedstock in the production of alternative energy sources (e.g. biofuels) has resulted into food crisis whose pinch has already started being felt in many parts of the world.

Skeptics have long warned that ethanol is no miracle cure, offering slight energy gains at best. But in country after country, powerful farm lobbies have encouraged government subsidies for ethanol.

Now, however, the pendulum is swinging strongly in the other direction. For instance, recently the UN’s special rapporteur on the right to food, Jean Ziegler claimed that it was a ‘crime against humanity’ to divert corn from food to fuel.

This claim is now more vivid because of skyrocketing food prices and resulting unrest around the world. The enormous investment in biofuels in the U.S., the European Union, Canada and elsewhere, we are coming to see, is fuelling a food crisis in many poor countries.
These changes in food prices have not augured well with people in many countries in the world.

There might still be a major use for ethanol some day, and research should continue to see to it that the efforts to preserve the environment don’t negatively impact on the lives of billions of people across the globe.

A country like Brazil, for example, has made some good progress in using non-food plant material such as sugar-cane waste to produce ethanol. This is a very good initiative that other countries could emulate.

It’s true that there are no short-cuts to reducing oil use and greenhouse gas emissions. But appropriate precautions must be taken beforehand.

Being part of the global village, Tanzania has not been left behind in promoting biofuels as an alternative source of energy.

Many companies especially from the west have shown interest in growing crops such as starch crops e.g. grains, maize and tubers like cassava, sugar plants such as sugarcane, cellulose plants (agriculture residues), and oil seed crops (like Jatropha, Oil palm)

The government through the Tanzania Investment Centre, with support from other stakeholders, is on the forefront in encouraging such efforts.

For instance, it has planned to double sugar cane production between 2005 and 2010 and also to use all molasses resulting from the sugar industry’s projected production and the surplus cane for ethanol, among other initiatives.

Plans are underway to convert millions of hectares of arable land into biofuels and the justification for the promotion of large scale biofuels is that the country’s demand and price for petroleum products are growing rapidly at a rate of more than 30 percent per year.

While this is quite a positive move to the improvement of the country’s economy, it’s important to note that there are socio-economic and environmental prices that will be paid as a consequence.

“There are concerns that using land to grow fuel instead of food, rising grain prices, and the displacement of rural communities will lead to greater food insecurity in Tanzania,” says an environmentalist, Abdallah Mkindi.

In his paper titled ‘The Socio-economic and environmental impacts of a biofuels industry in Tanzania’ that he presented in July last year at a meeting in London, he says that forests, peatlands, mangroves and protected areas will be cut down, burned, and converted to farmland hence canceling any environmental benefit arising from biofuels.

Besides, with the National Biosafety Framework in place which allows trials for genetically modified (GM) crops, the GM industry may intend to use this as an opportunity to promote GM biofuels in Tanzania which could also negatively affect the environment and species therein.

He proposes a critical investigation on the socio-economic as well as the environmental impacts that the introduction of a biofuels industry will have in Tanzania before the idea is wholeheartedly embraced.

Most particularly, the impact on biodiversity, agriculture, food security and sovereignty, livelihoods, markets, land and territory with a specific focus on the impact on smallholder farmers and indigenous communities should be critically investigated, Mkindi suggests.

The following are some of the implications of biofuels production in the country;
Biofuels will increase pressure on Tanzania food supplies and further erode food sovereignty and that fact that Tanzania’s agriculture is predominantly rain-fed, with increased food shortages.

Converting the main sites identified as suitable for growing the biofuel crops will reduce land area devoted for food production so eroding local food security and sovereignty and further cause shortages.

Competition for land is also expected to be the outcome of the initiative because so far several investors have shown interest to invest on biofuels in the country.

According to Tanzania Investment Centre a Swedish company is looking for 400,000hectares of land for sugarcane production and Wami River basin has been identified for the purpose. This means that about a thousand small scale rice farmers could be evicted if the project goes through.

In Ruipa River valley, plans are underway to convert the basin into sugarcane plantation and hence over 1000 small scale rice farmers could be affected.

Promotion of Jatropha in the so called degraded land in Engaruka and Manyara and rice production in Usangu basin is forcing out the pastoralists out of their land.

Biofuels production in the country is also expected to cause conflict over water sources. Areas identified suitable for biofuels production are adjacent to rivers which small scale farmers depend on.

Large scale biofuels production will divert most of the water into their plantation, hence depriving small scale farmers’ access to water.

In Usangu basin, a thousand farmers were evicted and the river which is supplying water to their farms was diverted to an investor’s farm.

These, according to Mkindi, are some of the likely consequences of biofuels production and which he thinks thorough investigation is needed so as to ascertain the good and bad of the initiative to the country, people and the environment before it gets into a full swing.

As we have seen examples from other areas in the world, the rush for biofuels so as to save the environment and also the demand for self sufficiency in terms of fuel supplies by countries has turned into a mixed blessing.

Besides the socio-economic and environmental effects, production of biofuel like ethanol has caused more farmers to switch from food to fuel production. This is also likely to happen in Tanzania and the result will definitely be very detrimental.

Again, ample evidence has proved that through the major end result of the switch to biofuels was the protection of the environment, in the long run biofuels production contributes to environmental degradation in terms of large scale monoculture farming, deforestation, and emission of greenhouse gases during farming and processing.

So, all these should make us thing twice about the initiative. Yes we badly need affordable fuel and at the same time protect our environment but this shouldn’t be out of desperation with little attention to the socio-economic and environmental effects of biofuels production.

A policy document could help us control the production biofuels in the country and thereby save the country from such likely negative effects.