Voices from North and South against agrofuels

While the promotion of agrofuels -wrongly called biofuels- continues increasing and resulting in the establishment of more and more plantations in Southern countries to produce them, many voices of representatives from North and South denounce their impacts and intend to influence those who are taking decisions to promote them.

One of the decisions that is already causing a considerable increase in the production of agrofuels, is the one taken by the European Union which established the target that by the year 2020, 10 % of transport should be using agrofuels.

It is important to underscore that this decision was taken in spite of the documentation provided to the European Union proving that this decision would be affecting the majority of the world’s population, that lives in Southern countries.

By the end of June this year, more than 15 representatives of non-governmental organisations, Indigenous Peoples’ organisations and other social movements met with the European Parliament in Brussels, the Dutch Parliament in The Hague and with other representatives of European organizations and govermental representatives and participated at the XII Meeting of the Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice of the UN Convention of Biodiversity in Paris. Many were the testimonies about the direct and indirect impacts of agrofuel production on the global South.

Among others, representatives from Asia stated that oil palm plantations are a tremendous disaster for indigenous peoples and local communities in Indonesia and Papua New Guinea

Representatives from Latin America, described how sugar cane, soy and eucalyptus monocultures have caused massive migration, expulsion of small farmers from their lands and have increased rural and urban poverty in Brazil; how in Colombia agrofuel plantations are exacerbating the problems of sovereignty and land tenure, that are a key cause of conflict in the country; and how tree plantations -even the ones certified by FSC- are having negative impacts on people and the environment in Uruguay.

African representatives pointed out that water resources, biodiversity, local communities’ security, health and economies are being affected in those African countries where monoculture tree plantations are already a reality.

During the same days, organisations from the North and the South called for a moratorium on European Union imports of agrofuels from large scale monoculture plantations; and on their promotion through targets and incentives, including tax breaks, subsidies, and financing through carbon trading mechanisms, international development aid, or loans from international financial institutions such as the World Bank. Such a moratorium will allow time for the in depth study of the tremendous impacts of large scale monocultures already felt by their expansion serving other industries as pulp and paper.

In Paris, at a meeting of a UN scientific advisory body on biodiversity, the majority of government delegates expressed serious concerns about the risks of large-scale production of biofuels to forests, ecosystems, indigenous peoples and local communities. A large number of NGOs and Indigenous Peoples Organizations from around the world present at this meeting also expressed their concerns about the risks and made a call for their evaluation before continuing with the promotion of agrofuels.

While all this was hapenning in Europe, representatives from organizations at an International Meeting on Agrofuels and Food Sovereignty held in Quito from June 27 to 29 presented personally a letter to the Minister of Energy containing a strong message to his government:

“The present government faces two alternatives: to support a production model based on diversity, sustainability, that garantees food sovereignty, the continuity of the way of life of Indigenous Peoples, afro-descendents and peasants and the conservation of the biodiversity, or support agri-business. We hope that the government’s decision will be in favor of the people”.

That same letter is valid for all governments –North and South- that are currently taking decisions on the issue of agrofuels. The decision they take will show if they are in favour or against the people.

World Rainforest Movement

World's Biggest Palm Oil Trader Shamed

JAKARTA (INDONESIA) / AMSTERDAM (THE NETHERLANDS) - JULY 3 - Wilmar, the world’s biggest trader in palm oil, is illegally logging rainforests, setting forests on fire and violating the rights of local communities in Indonesia, according to a new report published today by Friends of the Earth Netherlands. [1]

Paul de Clerck, Corporates Campaigner at Friends of the Earth International, said: “This report reveals that Indonesian palm oil traded by Wilmar is scandalous and damaging the environment. Forests are being cut and burnt down illegally, Indonesian laws are being broken and local people are suffering.”

Europe is one of the world’s biggest palm oil importers, with palm oil used as an ingredient in many food products and cosmetics, and increasingly as a biofuel. Wilmar supplies multinational companies such as Unilever, Nestle and Cargill.

Rully Syumanda, Forest Campaigner at Friends of the Earth Indonesia / WALHI said: “Europe's growing demand for palm oil is leading to environmental and social devastation”.

The palm oil industry has attempted to market the trade as environmentally and socially sustainable, but this report exposes these policies as hollow and inadequate. Singapore-based multinational Wilmar is a member of the industry-led Round Table on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) and is funded by the World Bank’s private arm as well as private European banks which have codes of conduct against unsustainable palm oil. Rabobank and Standard Chartered Bank are the main European financers.

Anne van Schaik of Friends of the Earth Netherlands (Milieudefensie) said: “Rabobank apparently has a code of conduct for financing palm oil, but absurdly this doesn’t apply to the handful of general loans that the bank gives to Wilmar. The code of conduct is therefore meaningless – boosting Rabobank’s image but doing nothing to protect against illegal deforestation.”

The report demonstrates the danger of the European Union’s recent commitment to replace 10% of its transport fuel market with biofuels by 2020.

“If the European Union continues to promote palm oil imports in order to meet its recently-adopted 10% biofuels target, this will simply aggravate the severe environmental and social impacts in countries like Indonesia. The European Commission should accept that setting such a rigid target was premature and drop it until the situation in producer countries has been fully assessed,” de Clerck added.

Friends of the Earth Netherlands (Milieudefensie) and two Indonesian non-profit organisations investigated three plantations of Wilmar International Ltd. on West Kalimantan, Indonesia. Specifically, the report reveals:

* The Indonesian authorities are suing Wilmar for intentional and systematic illegal burning of forests to clear land for plantations

* Wilmar has violated an Indonesian law that requires approval of the Environmental Impact Assessment before palm oil development begins

* Wilmar is clearing forest beyond its allocated borders and without the legally required permits

* Wilmar has cleared areas of forest that local communities have customary rights to, without even consulting them

Friends of the Earth Netherlands (Milieudefensie) has filed complaints to the Round Table on Sustainable Palm Oil and to the private arm of the World Bank – the International Finance Corporation.

ENVIRONMENT: Clean or Not Thailand Sees Dollars in Palm Oil

By Marwaan Macan-Markar

KRABI, Jul 4 (IPS) - The new governor of this southern province has set his sights on another prize to add to its list of unique features. ‘’We are aiming to be the palm oil capital of Thailand,’’ says Siwa Sirisoawaluk who has been Krabi’s chief administrator for nine months.

He shares his ambition, standing within easy view of a grove of tall palm trees that produce the kind of bio-fuel that is increasingly in demand globally. These trees, locals say, were introduced some three decades ago and are found by roadsides along with the rubber trees that produce another valuable cash crop.

In the main, however, the area that Siwa presides over, is widely known for such attractive features as wide beaches washed by the Andaman Sea, spectacular limestone cliffs and nature trails through tropical forests.

Krabi’s oil palm plantations account for nearly 40 percent of the 320,000 hectares in Thailand where these trees are grown. Bangkok is hoping to have 1.6 million hectares under oil palm cultivation in the next two decades.

Krabi is expected to take the lead in the country’s oil palm expansion drive, adds Siwa. ‘’The supply here is not enough to cater to future demand. We want to remain the province having the largest oil palm plantations in Thailand.’’

It is a vision being advanced by officials at the ministry of energy, too. ‘’You save on oil imports, you help the local farmers growing the oil palm to get a better income and you help to improve the environment,’’ Panich Pongpirodom, director-general of the department of alternative energy development and efficiency, told IPS.

To make this case for the environment, the energy ministry confirmed that the estimated 10,000 petrol stations across the country have to convert by April next year for supplying bio-diesel for which palm oil is pivotal. Major car manufacturers such as Toyota, Honda and Mitsubishi ‘’have accepted our policy’’ to have regular fuel mixed with two percent of ‘’renewable fuel,’’ adds Panich.

Yet, as Thailand looks to the fortunes that palm oil offers other South-east Asian countries that are bigger players in the palm oil trade find themselves caught in an escalating debate.

Countries like Indonesia and Malaysia, two of the world’s leading producers of palm oil, are grappling with the question of exactly how green palm oil is. Environmentalists and grassroots groups are taking on governments in the developed and developing world and the private sector on this score.

Friends of the Earth International (FoEI), a global environmental lobby group, drove home this point Tuesday in a critical report about the devastating impact of palm oil plantations in Indonesia, where the government is planning to convert 20 million more hectares into palm oil plantations.

‘’Wilmar, the world’s biggest trader in palm oil, is illegally logging rainforests, setting forests on fire and violating the rights of local communities in Indonesia,’’ charged the FoEI report.

And it pointed an accusing finger at European countries for contributing to such havoc on the Indonesian environment, since Europe has emerged as ‘’one of the world’s biggest oil importers, with palm oil used as an ingredient in many food products and cosmetics, and increasingly as a bio-fuel.’’

‘’Europe’s growing demand for palm oil is leading to environmental and social devastation,’’ says Rully Syumanda, forest campaigner at FoEI’s Indonesia office.

Wilmar, the multinational company under fire, is based in Singapore. ‘’Wilmar has violated an Indonesian law that requires approval of the Environmental Impact Assessment before palm oil development begins,’’ FoEI researchers reveal after having studied three plantations owned by Wilmar International Ltd in West Kalimantan on the island of Borneo.

Malaysia-based environmentalist Jennifer Mourin is hardly surprised by the intensifying debate over palm oil and its global links. ‘’We cannot have a polluting industry like palm oil go on,’’ says Mourin, deputy executive director of the Pesticide Action Network (PAN), a non-governmental group that champions biodiversity across the world.

‘’There are a lot of concerns about the expansion of the palm oil business in this area. Some of the oldest jungles and places of biodiversity are being hit,’’ she said during a telephone interview from Penang. ‘’We are also worried about the acres of land being reduced to a monoculture.’’

Her group, in fact, was part of a broader coalition of 30 groups from across the world that called for a moratorium on the European Union’s ‘’rush for bio-fuels’’ by offering ‘’incentives for agro-fuels and agro-energy from large-scale monocultures.’’ This initiative, launched in the last week of June, warned that ‘’agro-fuel production for EU markets will accelerate climate change, destroy biodiversity and uproot local communities.’’

In Thailand, which is on the periphery of this debate and is far from being an exporter of palm oil, the environmental cost of palm oil production has still to sink in, particularly among the local communities. Those IPS spoke with are drawn by the financial gains they stand to make with expanded plantations.

‘’We can get a steady income from palm oil because we can work throughout the year, unlike rubber tapping which cannot be done during the rainy season,’’ says Wattana Rerngsamut, who also makes a living as a tour guide. ‘’We can work twice a month, every 15 days, with the palm oil tree.’’

The only concern is the investment palm oil groves require. ‘’We have to buy a lot of fertilizer; it is expensive,’’ he explained. ‘’This is a big problem.’’

PALM OIL DOES COME AT A HIGH PRICE

Rully Syumanda[1]

Diemont and Verhagen claim that it is possible to increase oilpalm acreage without a high price (De Volkskrant, DATUM). In Indonesia we have a lot of experience with oilpalm plantations and their impact on the environment and the people. It is from this background that I would like to react to their article.

Deforestation continues in Indonesia. Even though illegal logging often was pointed at as the major problem, the conversion for the large scale plantation basically was the main cause deforestation in Indonesia with the figure 2,8 million hectare per year in 2004, descended from 3,2 million hectare during 2001 - 2002[2].

The conversion of the forest until now generally is allocated for the development of the oil palm cultivation. Since becoming the supreme commodity, there’s millions hectare of tropical nature forest being cut down. Between 1995 to 2003 more than 15.6 million hectare of nature forest was cut down. During 2004, this figure increase to 15.9[3] million hectare. However, the concession that was planted did not experience the significant increase. From 3.17 million ha in 2000, only increase to 5.5 million hectare in 2004[4].Hence, 15,4 million ha has been converted with the excuse of setting up oilpalm plantations.

From the total area for the oil palm plantation in Indonesia, 90 percent among them was in Sumatra and Kalimantan. Often, oilpalm concessions oevrlap with logging concessions for timber and pulp.

For example, in Riau Spatial Planning 2001-2005 there was more than 400 thousand hectare the concession that mutual overlaps.

Many of the concessions conflict with local community's landrights and landuse. Some of these conlicts have remained unresolved for decades until today. In one example in North Sumatra, the community of Pergulaan village is struggling to get back a plot of a modest 130 hectares which was illegally taken from them and cleared for palm oil. Despite a court order confirming the rights of the village, the oilpalm company still has not returned the plot of land.

In the Province of Riau (Sumatra) alone, of the 654 conlficts over landuse that occurred between 1998 and 2003, over 70%[5] was caused by oilpalm developments.

Even in cases where the primary forest may have been gone, there is still local communities living off the land. Their free, prior and informed consent needs to be guaranteed before any expansion of oilpalm can take place.

The forest conversion for oil palm plantation and industry plantation basically achieved saturation point and exceeded/over carrying capacity. Since 2002 the expansion of the oil palm plantation entered High Conservation Value Forest area. [probably before that as well I guess?] Several among them were in catchments area and the rest were the peat swamp area with the depth more than 3 meter. Riau and Jambi in Sumatra as well as land typology in Kalimantan were the peat swamp with the varying depth between 2 meter to > 3 meter.

With the (logging for) plantations encroaching into natural forests, water catchments areas and peat swamps come under increasing threats.

The conversion in catchments area caused so many problem. The trivializing of the river [In catchments area that was clear cut, the soil and sand will be brought by the rain water to the river. The river will become shallow. During heavy rain, the river could not keep the amount of big water so as to flood the surrounding area (the flood)made the river no longer could accommodate the overflowing of water that emerged suddenly. The flood became the annual Sumatran menu and Kalimantan, nearby forest fire.

As the picture, during 2004, the flood that struck the Jambi province caused the loss of Rp. 204 billion. In the year before, the flood in Riau caused the loss Rp. 684 billion or was equal to 64% Riau Annual Budget in 2002[6]. Hundreds of people lost their house and thousands hectare failed to harvest.

This figure basically depicted not balanced between revenue from the oil palm plantation sector and the impact. Made peat swamp as the oil palm plantation also caused the problem that approximately similar

Peat swamp was irreversible. It kept water in large quantities but when being opened it no longer could catch water. Peat swamp also functioned as carbon storage. When opened, not only millions ton water being released but also millions cubic meter carbon was released to the air[7].

At least there were three main problems of the forest conversion in the peat swamp area. Firstly, clearing peat swamp will release millions ton of water. At the same time the intrusion of sea water could not be evaded. In the Inderagiri Hilir Regency, Province of Riau, hundreds of head of household could no longer make use of their well water because of being most polluted with sea water[8].

Secondly was the forest fire. Peat swamp was the area with the Ph 3 - 4. It needs special treatment with the big cost to increase the Ph level in order to accordance with oil palm. For example, PT Adei Plantation Manager was punished 2 years in prison by the Kampar District Court in 2001 because ordered burning the land to increase the Ph level to 5 - 6 in order to be able to be planted the oil palm.

The burning of the forest in peat swamp and, third, the opening of the peat swamp area region will cause the greenhouse effect and influenced the global temperature. With the rate of nature damage at this time, was estimated some Scandinavian regions will experience the decline in the temperature through to 6 degree Fahrenheit during 2012, caused drought and cold that forced the Scandinavian population to be migrating from Europe[9].

Climate Change in 2012 was estimated also will cause conflict within the EU over food and water supply leads to skirmishes and strained diplomacy relation. [10]

With several anomalies that emerged from clearing the natural forest for the oil palm plantation, it is important for all of us to reconsider the policy of the fulfillment energy need from the unsustainable source like oil palm. This was important remembering several impacts will emerge that not only caused a loss to the exporter's country like Indonesia but also against several countries in Europe, mainly Scandinavian.

Considering the huge negative impacts of the large scale oilpalm monoculture, palm oil cannot be considered a sustainable source of energy for imports into Europe by anyone concerned with sustainable development.

The Netherlands should rather look into energy savings and truly sustainable sources of energy, in stead of looking at the people and remaining forests in Kalimantan and Sumatra to solve the energy problems for them. Only a cynical approach would allow for oilpalm developments to expand into forested areas, water catchments areas, and community's territories.

Conversion of forests and peat swamps will release huge amounts of CO2 in the atmosphere, with associated effects on climate change. The effects will extend beyond Southeast Asia and affect European countries as well. It is therefore also in the interest of the Netherlands to seek real solutions rather than to increase their palm oil consumption.

Palm Oil, Biofuel and Deforestation

Rully Syumanda


Indonesian natural forest were in crisis point. Each year, Indonesia has lost forest around 2 million hectares. In 2006, more than 2,72 million hectares of forest were destroyed. This equal with one and half of Netherlands or four times of Bali Island! Damages also occurred in the protected areas. It was assumed that 30% of national parks were in the damaged condition. Even though illegal logging has often pointed at as the major problem, the conversion for the large scale oil palm plantation basically was the main cause deforestation in Indonesia.

Up until now, the forest conversion was generally assigned for the improvement of palm oil cultivation. Since it became a primadona, million hectares of tropical forest were cleared away. From 15,9 million hectares of forest that have been released for palm oil plantation in 2004, only 5,5 million of hectares were planted . In 2006, WALHI has assumed that 16,8 million hectares of forest were released for palm oil plantation and only 6,7 million of hectares were planted. That leaves the rest of forest areas in the damaged condition after they took the wood out of them.

It was not a secret anymore that the opening of a palm oil plantation was made to be a modus in gaining woods. This could be recognized from the composition of the palm oil companies that “by chance” also the same owner of timber industry, among others: Sinarmas and Raja Garuda Mas. Two conglomerates who dominated the upstream and downstream industries in the forestry and palm oil plantation in Indonesia.

Modus of gaining timber out of palm oil concession emerged and one of the reasons was corruption and the large gap existed between supply and demand in Indonesian forestry sector. In 2006, it was assumed that the demand in Indonesia’s wood industry has reached 96,19 million of meter cubic per year. Meanwhile, the ability of natural forest and timber plantation industry in supplying raw materials has only reached 46,77 million of meter cubic. Less than half of it, 17,04 million of meter cubic, were gained from the logging of palm oil plantation concession .

From 6,7 million hectares of palm oil plantation in Indonesia, more than 90 of it were located in Sumatra and Kalimantan. Sharing the spatial with plantation industry and logging concession. Reliable sources have stated that Papua for instance, has allocated 9 million hectares of its forest to be opened for plantation. Meanwhile the regional government in Kalimantan has also allocated approximately 5 million hectares. They were all made to be palm oil plantation.

The history of the development of palm oil plantation in Indonesia could not be discharge of the history of deforestation. Million hectares of forest were opened. After took the timber, they burned small trees and coarse grass that led to the forest fire. That has made Indonesia suddenly placed itself in the third position as carbon producer caused by the fire in the forest. WALHI itself prefer to use the term of the burning out of forests”. The incidents of the burning of forest and areas could not be discharge from the area cleaning practiced all this time. Fire was the cheapest way. The weak of law enforcement has made tens of companies have used fire in cleaning out the areas including increasing salinity of the soil.

In 2001, Manager of PT Adei Plantation, a Malaysian, was punished for 2 years of prison by State Court of Kampar, Riau in 2001 for the fact that he was proven given an order to burn out an area in order to increase salinity of the soil to 5 - 6 to be able for palm oil plantation.

Palm oil plantation also entering community territory and causing unsettled conflicts until now. The conflict often involved private security corps and or police department regarding the settlement of the conflict that often ended up with victims. In the past, the involved of military as security officers could not also be discharge from this sector .

The forest conversion for palm oil plantation was basically has reached its limit and it has exceed its carrying capacity. It has reached its limit for the fact that this industry has entered areas with high level of ecological susceptibility. Other than just entering the productive public areas, palm oil plantation has also entered the peat land. Sumatra and Kalimantan are two island that owned peat land with various depth between 2 meter - > 3 meter. All this time, conversion in cathment area and peat land has caused problems for the relevant provinces.

Peat is irreversible. It stores water in large amount however it would not keep the water if it was opened. Peat also stores carbon. If we opened this area, we’re not only released million tons of water, but we also would release million meter cubic of carbon to the open air. It would added the issue of global warming. The practice of area opening by utilizing fire for the peat land were oftenly took place. It was very difficult to put the fire out of the burning peat land. The fire was not visible on the surface, however it was spreading under the surface of the soil. Fire was not only utilized for landclearing, it was also to increase the salinity of the soil.


Rethink of Biofuel as a sustainable energy

With various problems emerging from the palm oil plantation opening,it is important for us to take a look once again to the policy of energy fulfillment from the source that up until today considered as sustainable energy, palm oil.

Palm oil was not a sustainable energy. The price that we had to pay for a sustainable energy from palm oil was very expensive. Million hectares of forest that was previously cut out further created the ecological dissaster where the people could live normaly has failed as a result of extraordinary dissaster, both because the natural dissaster or dissaster caused by human.

Indonesia is a sensitive country to dissaster, most caused by human behaviour. In the last seven years, 2000 – 2006, 392 flood and landslide have happened in the entire areas of Indonesia except Papua, Jakarta and other capitals. The number of victims has reached 2.303 people, more than 188.000 homes were seriously damaged and 502 thousand hectares of damaged areas and other half million hectares were failed to be harvested. Total loss has reached 36 quintillion of rupiah and indirect loss has reached 144 quintillion .

The exprts have called this as a dissaster of development, defined as a mixture between the environmental crisis as a result of development and natural indication itself, worsen with the damage of natural resources and environment and injustice of social development policy. Dissaster as flood, dryness and landslide often considered as natural dissaster and also fate. Whereas, the relevant phenomenon mostly happened because the missmanagement of environment and natural assets, that were accumulatively and continuously took place.
Beside flood, dryness was other form of dissaster beginning to happened in Indonesia. Lately, the dry season in Indonesia has become longer and not uniformed, although geographicaly and naturaly Indonesia located in the line of South Oscillation-El Nino (ENSO). 78 drynesses has recorded took place in 11 provinces. The main impact of dryness was the decrease of water supply, both in reservoir and the river of the body. Dryness also attached with the burned out of the forest, caused by dry weather has urged the expansion of fire in the forest and areas as well as the smoke.

Significant threat has threatening three fundamental sectors of pre-conditions of sustainable life, they are water, food and energy. Regarding water, the biggest threat came from the significantly increase of demand and the limits of water supply that could be consumed. The sovereignity of energy was also put on the line. Transnational Corporations has sucked 75% Indonesian oil reserve up until today. Meanwhile 58% total of natural gas production and 70% of coal per year have been exported. Meanwhile, 90% of the necessity of energy of Indonesian people was made to be depending on oil and gas and 45%of home have not been given access to electricity .

Meanwhile, the choice of cheap, accessable and clean energy has become a rare option. Today, when the state subject to the dictation of free market, the people who were already dependent have been forced to buy the energy with the price of world market. The increase of fuel price, according to a number of researches has increased poverty to the level of 11 %. The total Indonesian people who suffered poverty after the drastic increase of fuel price was 41%.

Generaly, ecological dissasters were marked by several indications and could be recognozed in our daily lives, such as: no more options to survive, the failure on function of the ecosystem, the decrease of quality of life in the form of exclusion and poverty, in the extreme point that led to death.

The entire abovementioned stories were originated from missmanagment of natural resources. The development of palm oil plantation has urged the emerged of a number of ecological crisis, not only in the areas where concession took place but also in the downstream areas. All the abovementioned stories also related to the consumption pattern of consumary countries along with leaving ecological footprint in Indonesia.

The palm oil plantation development has caused a number of anomalies caused by the forced opening of natural forest regarding the palm oil plantation. It took large number of areas and dan energy to create biofuel energy from palm oil. The opening of forest and the fire that had took place has provoked the change of climates. It was impossible to supress the climate out of biofuel when its creation process has also contribute to the global warming. It was important for all of us to re-analyze the policy of energy fulfillment of the unsustainable source as palm oil.

With wrong paradigm, we could stated that there still sufficient areas available in Sumatera and Kalimantan in term of fulfilling the necessity of energy in Europe made from palm oil. Also with wrong paradigm, the palm oil plantation paradigm could also be imrpoved in catchment areas and tenurial areas, as it was usually took place up until today.
There was still enough time to find more sustainable source of energy. It is about time for the European and American people would decrease the consumption of energy along with finding other alternative that would guarantee the decrease of greenhouse effect.

Palm oil plantation does created a number of work positions and urged the increase the income from export sector. However, the palm oil plantation also has trapped the people community in poverty and ecological dissasters caused by it were not equal with the gained economical value. Conversion of natural forest for palm oil plantation has caused misery, not only to the exporting countris like Indonesia, but also to the change of climate which its impacts would be felt by most of European people in the future.

What we want to plant is indeed important. However, the location of it was way more important. This colonialization has to be stopped.

Jakarta, June, 20th 2007