Review and Edit Message

Biofuels from Cleared Rainforests Harm the Climate  (link)

Message Title - please edit title and personalize message below (no URLs)
Please End Europe's "Deforestation Biofuel" Energy Policy

Your Message:
Dear Sir/Madam, I understand that on 10th January the European Commission will make an announcement about the review of the Biomass Action Plan and the European Biofuel Directive. I urge you to not endorse plans for an expansion of Europe's biofuel industry at this stage, and strongly demand that the plan not support environmentally destructive industrial biofuels that come at the expense of ancient rainforests. The European Parliament has recognised that the lack of clear environmental standards and safeguards could have significant negative effects, such as an increase in tropical deforestation and agriculture intensification and biodiversity losses in Europe and abroad, while failing to reduce greenhouse gas emissions significantly. Furthermore, research has shown that palm oil from South- east Aisan peatlands is linked to carbon emissions ten times greater than those from using an equivalent quantity of mineral oil. No mechanisms exist to prevent biofuels linked to rainforest destruction, forest fires and peat drainage from being expanded as a result of the EU Biofuel Directive. The furthest-developed certification scheme is the Roundtable for Sustainable Palm Oil: After years of discussions there is not even a time-table for it certifying any sustainable palm oil, and some of the companies involved continue to clear virgin ancient rainforests with impunity. I am also very concerned that the European Commission did not consult with NGOs and community organisations which represent the people who will be directly affected by the greater demand for palm oil, soy, sugar cane or jatropha. Latin American groups have just issued their own declaration, saying 'We Want Food Sovereignty, Not Biofuels', and many southern African NGOs in the CURES network say that they want biofuels to meet the needs of their communities, rather than an export-oriented biofuel strategy. Finally, I am very worried about reports that the European Parliament have recommended that peat should be classed as a long-term renewable source of bioenergy. Peat should not be classed as either renewable or as a form of bioenergy as its carbon content is as high or higher than that of other types of fossil fuels, and it is not renewable on a human time scale. Those are very serious issues which cannot be resolved between now and 10th January. I would therefore urge you to take more time and not to issue a final policy declaration right away. In the longer term, I believe that the following measures are needed to avoid serious negative impacts from industrial biofuel production: Put a moratorium on the targets and obligations until the sustainable sourcing of biofuels can be guaranteed; Fully consult with local communities and NGOs in the producing countries; Take all possible measures to stop imports of biofuel feedstocks for bioenergy where crop production is linked to deforestation, peat drainage, biodiversity loss, pollution or human rights abuses; Do not sacrifice European biodiversity by abolishing compulsory conservation set-asides. The European Environment Agency has found that abolishing set-asides will greatly harm biodiversity. It would make it impossible to meet the EU's target of halting biodiversity losses by 2010. Ensure that peat is classed as a fossil fuel, not as bioenergy. Amend Directive 2003/96/EC, which excludes peat from those hydrocarbons which have to be taxed for energy production. This Directive is already being used by Finland and Sweden to subsidiese high-carbon peat as 'green energy'. Efforts to address climate change and energy security must not lead to deforestation, or resultant biofuels may do more harm than good. Many thanks in advance. Yours faithfully,

bcc: YOU