rigorousintuition.ca

From The Guardian, Via GNN:

Secret report: biofuel caused food crisis

Biofuels have forced global food prices up by 75% - far more than previously estimated - according to a confidential World Bank report obtained by the Guardian.

The damning unpublished assessment is based on the most detailed analysis of the crisis so far, carried out by an internationally-respected economist at global financial body.

The figure emphatically contradicts the US government's claims that plant-derived fuels contribute less than 3% to food-price rises. It will add to pressure on governments in Washington and across Europe, which have turned to plant-derived fuels to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases and reduce their dependence on imported oil.

Senior development sources believe the report, completed in April, has not been published to avoid embarrassing President George Bush.

"It would put the World Bank in a political hot-spot with the White House," said one yesterday. (More at link)

.

Was just about to post.

Disgusting. The suppression of the report, for starters.

Secret report: biofuel caused food crisis

Internal World Bank study delivers blow to plant energy drive
Aditya Chakrabortty
The Guardian, Friday July 4, 2008
Article history

A handful of corn before it is processed. Photograph: Charlie Neibergall/AP



Biofuels have forced global food prices up by 75% - far more than previously estimated - according to a confidential World Bank report obtained by the Guardian.

The damning unpublished assessment is based on the most detailed analysis of the crisis so far, carried out by an internationally-respected economist at global financial body.

The figure emphatically contradicts the US government's claims that plant-derived fuels contribute less than 3% to food-price rises. It will add to pressure on governments in Washington and across Europe, which have turned to plant-derived fuels to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases and reduce their dependence on imported oil.

Senior development sources believe the report, completed in April, has not been published to avoid embarrassing President George Bush.

"It would put the World Bank in a political hot-spot with the White House," said one yesterday.

The news comes at a critical point in the world's negotiations on biofuels policy. Leaders of the G8 industrialised countries meet next week in Hokkaido, Japan, where they will discuss the food crisis and come under intense lobbying from campaigners calling for a moratorium on the use of plant-derived fuels.

It will also put pressure on the British government, which is due to release its own report on the impact of biofuels, the Gallagher Report. The Guardian has previously reported that the British study will state that plant fuels have played a "significant" part in pushing up food prices to record levels. Although it was expected last week, the report has still not been released.

"Political leaders seem intent on suppressing and ignoring the strong evidence that biofuels are a major factor in recent food price rises," said Robert Bailey, policy adviser at Oxfam. "It is imperative that we have the full picture. While politicians concentrate on keeping industry lobbies happy, people in poor countries cannot afford enough to eat."

Rising food prices have pushed 100m people worldwide below the poverty line, estimates the World Bank, and have sparked riots from Bangladesh to Egypt. Government ministers here have described higher food and fuel prices as "the first real economic crisis of globalisation".

President Bush has linked higher food prices to higher demand from India and China, but the leaked World Bank study disputes that: "Rapid income growth in developing countries has not led to large increases in global grain consumption and was not a major factor responsible for the large price increases."

Even successive droughts in Australia, calculates the report, have had a marginal impact. Instead, it argues that the EU and US drive for biofuels has had by far the biggest impact on food supply and prices.

Since April, all petrol and diesel in Britain has had to include 2.5% from biofuels. The EU has been considering raising that target to 10% by 2020, but is faced with mounting evidence that that will only push food prices higher.

"Without the increase in biofuels, global wheat and maize stocks would not have declined appreciably and price increases due to other factors would have been moderate," says the report. The basket of food prices examined in the study rose by 140% between 2002 and this February. The report estimates that higher energy and fertiliser prices accounted for an increase of only 15%, while biofuels have been responsible for a 75% jump over that period.

It argues that production of biofuels has distorted food markets in three main ways. First, it has diverted grain away from food for fuel, with over a third of US corn now used to produce ethanol and about half of vegetable oils in the EU going towards the production of biodiesel. Second, farmers have been encouraged to set land aside for biofuel production. Third, it has sparked financial speculation in grains, driving prices up higher.

Other reviews of the food crisis looked at it over a much longer period, or have not linked these three factors, and so arrived at smaller estimates of the impact from biofuels. But the report author, Don Mitchell, is a senior economist at the Bank and has done a detailed, month-by-month analysis of the surge in food prices, which allows much closer examination of the link between biofuels and food supply.

The report points out biofuels derived from sugarcane, which Brazil specializes in, have not had such a dramatic impact.

Supporters of biofuels argue that they are a greener alternative to relying on oil and other fossil fuels, but even that claim has been disputed by some experts, who argue that it does not apply to US production of ethanol from plants.

"It is clear that some biofuels have huge impacts on food prices," said Dr David King, the government's former chief scientific adviser, last night. "All we are doing by supporting these is subsidising higher food prices, while doing nothing to tackle climate change."

Is there no end to "Bush's" "incompetence"?

Yet another rolled-gold market failure, nice to have such clear evidence of it.

RightThinkers will try to blame it all on naive greenies or on unstopable market forces, but this is due to for-sale politicians allowing greedy farmers to loot govt for subsidies. It could be stopped this week by cutting the subsidies, but theres too much money to be made.

this is reckoned to be a secret?

just what species of nitwit do these bozos suppose us to be? next they'll be leaking a secret report on the wetness of water, the blueness of the sky.......

Its the biofuel which did it.

Honest, a "leaked" unpublished report by the world bank proves it.

I must be going fucking nuts.

By the way "riggies":

I dont know if you know this ( some of you dont seem to know much), but for the last umpteen fucking years, the EU have been paying farmers millions in subsidies in England NOT to grow crops on their land.

But never mind that," the biofuel" did it.

Hilarious.

But dont believe me. Read Wintlers signature instead

PS - next step in the "problem reaction solution" chain - We MUST have GM food to save us all.

.

slimmouse:

You certainly have a point about the way EU and US subsidies have skewed the food market.

I don't understand how this underplayed World Bank report about the impact of crop-derived biofuels is supposed to promote GM crops, and there is no indication of that in the article, though perhaps that is the case in the 400-page World Bank report. It would seem to me this story is cause to critique the push for crop biofuels, and in no way related to promotion (or critique, for that matter) of GM.

JackRiddler wrote:.

slimmouse:

You certainly have a point about the way EU and US subsidies have skewed the food market.

I don't understand how this underplayed World Bank report about the impact of crop-derived biofuels is supposed to promote GM crops, and there is no indication of that in the article, though perhaps that is the case in the 400-page World Bank report. It would seem to me this story is cause to critique the push for crop biofuels, and in no way related to promotion (or critique, for that matter) of GM.

Heres my point.

We CAN feed the world. We can do it for buttons.

We are deliberately steered thru mass media to understand that this isnt the case.

Im telling you now, dont take my word for it, just listen to the GM food being pushed , and pushed BIG time. Read about Codex Alimentarius FFS


As for the Bio fuel thing. Im surprised that Wintler doesnt see a big oil influence when he sees one - he seems to see them everywhere else.

But of course, the trouble with accepting A big Oil influence, is that this kind of "leak" also benefits the GM guys, not to mention ( in the long run) the world Bank themselves.

In other words, precisely the same elite, that according to Wintler, dont exist.

But Ive always said hes full of shit anyways.

In the same way that the oil shock of the 70s made North Sea oil a viable prospect, and the way recent price increases since 2000 has made tar sands (or whatever they are) projects economically viable, this recent food price increase will shift the burden of paying EU and US farmers away from government subsidies and back directly to the consumer. Not that I'm saying that's the reason behind it, but that's a factor to keep in mind.

Biofuel sure seems to have been the lever which has allowed this ramping-up of prices to occur. It all seems to be part of an overall demand destruction strategy. People in poor countries needn't worry any more that their hopes of an oil-energy rich lifestyle have been priced out of existence, because they have more than enough to worry about trying to pay the increased prices for food. Ditto for poor people in rich countries. Rich people all over the world will barely notice the increased price for either food or fuel.

I can see slim's point about the GM push inevitably being connected to these events. The rich (the bourgeoisie, rather) still seem to have a George Jetson lifestyle as one of their visions of a probable earth future. And the scientists (technicians, rather) are chomping at the bit. Their shares are currently on the rise.

erosoplier wrote:
I can see slim's point about the GM push inevitably being connected to these events. The rich (the bourgeoisie, rather) still seem to have a George Jetson lifestyle as one of their visions of a probable earth future. And the scientists (technicians, rather) are chomping at the bit. Their shares are currently on the rise.

And meanwhile, Prince Charles has some serious organic farming operations going on.

But rest assured, none of the Proles will be eating that. That produce is specifically reserved for the chosen few.

A few years ago we had royalty visit my hometown. Their food was flown in by helicopter. They sure wont eat the same shit that we are fed.

The proles meanwhile will be sold the "organic" food. Food that is anything but organic, but labelled as such by the codex team.

Go figure.

The world population continues to increase faster than the world's supply of resources. Previously third-world countries are experiencing rapid economic growth, and consumer demand has increased accordingly.

Yes, shortages are just beginning to appear. And each shortage will create other shortages, and in the end all prices will increase.

Malthus, anyone?

Yes, biofuels will drive up food prices--from many different perspectives. It is inevitable.

But we are, I presume, unwilling to forego fuel.

I have to go with slimmouse on this one. When I saw that article I just laughed...Biofuel crops causing the food crisis? That makes me giggle....

The price of food is directly tied to oil as we know. Governments have been literally paying farmers NOT TO GROW FOOD for decades.

Geez doesn't anybody remember Willie Nelson and Farm Aid when they drove the poor farmers out of business too?

There are reasons for the food problem, but biofuel "ain't it"....

And I also suspect this may be a covert push for GM food crops, as it wouldn't surprise me a bit. And the military industrial complex rolls on big mamma.......

I also believe that we could easily feed all the worlds people if there was any incentive to do so, but making food scarce and having control over it has been a population control technique since the dawn of time....and a huge money maker.

Ethanol is not the grand savior of alternative energy, but a lot of the "food vs. fuel" chatter is pure bullshit, and I wish more people would see that.

Consider that most food is transported across long distances from its point of origin to its final destination, and a large portion if not all of this transport is fueled by petroleum-based products. And the price of oil has gone from below $30 per barrel to more than $140 per barrel in the last few years. And just as alternative methods of fuel generation begin to become cost effective and begin to become more prevalent in forms like corn ethanol and soy biodiesel, those agricultural crops get blamed for food price increases and demands are issued to stop corn and soy fuel production. Meanwhile, the prices of corn and soybeans are subject to the same type of speculation in the futures markets as oil, yet otherwise intelligent people who recognize the manipulation in that arena fail to see it in the arena of agricultural commodities. And people believe the crap that the rice shortage is because of ethanol. No one is making ethanol out of rice.

Of course, the "food crisis" couldn't be due to anything so ordinary as the population outgrowing the food supply.

Of course, the "food crisis" couldn't be due to anything so ordinary as the population outgrowing the food supply.

Well sure, it could be, but when the "facts" supporting the need for depopulation fit the previously professed aims of racist eugenics-loving bastards, it deserves a little extra scrutiny in my mind.