|
Comments: DR Congo has great potential for biofuels says U.N. official
Back to news.mongabay.com/2008/0109-congo.html
Please note
- Inappropriate and "frivolous" (i.e. First!) comments may not be posted and spam will not be tolerated. "Trolling" attempts will be deleted.
- Comments are approved manually at the discretion of the mongabay.com administrator. Mongabay.com tries to approve comments on a timely basis, but in some cases, comments may take a few days to be approved.
- The comment system is not a way to communicate directly with the author of the article or the site administrator. Please contact the author for requests and corrections.
- Links (urls) are not active in posted comments.
Add a comment:
Back to news.mongabay.com/2008/0109-congo.html
News index | RSS | Add to MyYahoo!
Advertisements:
Organic Apparel from Patagonia | Insect-repelling clothing
| |
|
MONGABAY.COM
Mongabay.com seeks to raise interest in and appreciation of wild lands and wildlife, while examining the impact of emerging trends in climate, technology, economics, and finance on conservation and development (more)
CONTENTS
WEEKLY NEWSLETTER
INTERACT
SUPPORT
Help support mongabay.com when you buy from Amazon.com
|
|
POPULAR PAGES
T-SHIRTS
Madagascar Wildlife
Dancing lemurs
Don't fall asleep the sloths will eat you
Sucking on this frog may make you insane
CALENDARS
Mount Kenya
East Africa Safari Wildlife
Kenya's Turkana People
Peru
African Wildlife
Alaska
China
Madagascar Chameleons
CANVAS BAGS
Hallucinogenic frog bag
Madagascar wildlife bag
|
|
Now it's time to show all stakeholders and especially potential biofuel investors, that there is absolutely no need to convert forests for fuels. There is more than enough potential non-forest arable land to plant energy crops.
The idea that we can stop any investments in biofuels in a country like Congo is naive, and Congo could even benefit environmentally from biofuels produced for local use.
But it's beginning to be clear that there doesn't have to be a conflict between fuels and forests.
Someone should develop a clear scenario for a country like Congo, showing how much fuel you can produce without cutting a single tree. Then use this information to demonstrate to those who still want to venture into forests for fuels, that they are being completely irrational.
This sounds like a case of "we can, therefore we should" with some pretty dire potential consequences.
While it is certainly possible biofuel crops can be grown outside the rain forests, there is no guarantee that's where it would happen. And, while it is also certainly possible that abandoned arable land could be used to grow new crops, it is entirely more likely that the first biomass that's used will be the existing vegetation--rainforests--because it is more economical to pluck the low-hanging fruit.
Mostly, though I question how turning the DRC's resources into a source of fuel for China, France, or the US will help the Congo any more than the exploitation of any other resource for major country consumption. Job creation? How much good have sugar and palm oil plantations done in that regard?
The economics of biofuels aren't necessarily positive for the Congo, although I'm sure they would be for the Chinese or whomever. Biomass becomes fuel only in expensive processing plants--sold to the
Congo by whom and paid for with what?. They also require surface transportation to the end user (which uses energy, too). To make biofuels economically viable, raw feed stock costs have to be excruciatingly low--and that's the end of the stick the Congo would be holding. It's the same economic scenario as any other natural resource exploitation scheme in Africa's history.
<a href="http://www.heartofdiamonds.com"--Dave Donelson, author of Heart of Diamonds, a novel of the Congo</a>