Tag Archives: european
The EU’s Misallocation Of Biomass
Monday, 09 September 2013 The EU’s Renewable Energy Directive (RED) is hindering the development of materials use and consequently the entire creation of a bio-based European economy, according to Michael Carus, managing director of Germany’s Nova Institute. As a consequence, companies like DSM and BASF are choosing to make investments in other countries such as the USA and Brazil, as well as Asia. “The EU’s bioenergy and biofuel policy, as embodied in the ambitious objectives fixed by RED, leads to the systematic allocation of biomass to energy to the disadvantage of material use,” Carus told Il Bioeconomista . “RED has triggered the development of national action plans and support systems for bioenergy and biofuels and this in turn has driven up biomass prices and agricultural leases, making it far more difficult for other sectors to get their hands on biomass and distorting prices. “The ‘misallocation of biomass’ is the right phrase here, since this is blocking higher value material uses like chemicals and plastics from coming to fruition. RED-linked developments on the ground will have a considerable impact on the future availability of biomass for the materials industry.” Bioenergy and biofuels are expected to make up roughly 60% of the overall EU’s RED quota and about 90% of the transport quota by 2020. “We urgently need a new political framework for the most efficient and sustainable utilisation of biomass,” Carus said. “This means especially a level playing field between material and energy use. Five years ago this was a worldwide problem – today it is mainly a problem for Europe. In America and Asia the political framework for bio-based chemicals and plastics is now much more favorable than in Europe. Accordingly, most of the new investments are going to the US, Canada, Brazil, Thailand, Malaysia and China.” Continue reading
Palm Oil Industry Key Culprit Behind Deforestation, Haze In Indonesia
New report by Greenpeace details the failure of RSPO in halting deforestation, and highlights Wilmar, Genting and Surya Dumai as firms with concessions behind the recent haze crisis in Singapore and Malaysia The palm oil industry is destroying Indonesia’s forests, said Greenpeace International in a new report on Tuesday, as the Roundtable for Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) is set to meet for its first European Summit in Berlin. In the investigative paper, “Certifying Destruction”, Greenpeace higlighted the failure of the sustainable palm oil and certification body in halting deforestation. RSPO concessions accounted for as much as 39 per cent of the fire hotspots on palm oil concessions in Riau during January to June 2013, when the most severe haze outbreak in history affected neighbouring Singapore and Malaysia. The report, which gives a mapping anaylsis of the concessions, charged that RSPO standards are severely lacking, leaving members “free to destroy forests” that contribute to more greenhouse gas emissions, human rights violations, loss of endangered species such as the Sumatran tiger and orang-utan and the Borneo orang-utan, and the yearly regional haze. RSPO members account for about 40 per cent of global palm oil production. With the launch of the report, Greenpeace is calling for the industry, especially those gathering at the summit, where the future of palm oil sustainability will be discussed, to take action against deforestation. Bustar Maitar, Greenpeace International’s head for the Indonesia Forest Campaign, told Eco-Business: “We want to see the companies, palm oil producers and the buyers to act more to stop deforestation … We want to see the customers make sure that their product is not associated with deforestation. Customers can’t just say that because they are buying from RSPO companies then they have no relation with deforestation and peat land destruction…” According to Indonesia’s Ministry of Forestry maps, the country has lost 1.24 million hectares of forest from 2009 to 2011. In the same period, about 300,000 hectares or a quarter of this total forest loss was due to identified palm oil concessions, said Greenpeace, making the palm oil sector the largest driver of forest destruction in Indonesia. Illegal land clearing and unsustainable sourcing “ Even among the RSPO’s own members, dirty palm oil remains the common currency – RSPO standards are inadequate, poorly enforced and offer palm oil consumers no guarantee that the oil they buy has been produced responsibly Greenpeace International “Year after year, Indonesia’s forest fires and haze wreak havoc on the region, and the palm oil sector is a main culprit,” said Maitar. He added, “While RSPO members might have no-fire policies, the peat land they have cleared and drained is like a tinderbox – one spark is all it takes.” According to anaylsis by Greenpeace, Singapore-based Wilmar International, the world’s largest palm oil trader, along with Genting and Surya Dumai, are “the three privately-owned RSPO members with the largest areas of identified deforestation”. Wilmar prohibits burning on its own plantations, but it sources more than 90 per cent of its crude palm oil from third-party suppliers. Some of palm oil products it has received come from illegal plantations inside the Tesso Nilo National Park in Riau as recently as 2012, according to a WWF investigation, cited the Greenpeace report. While the agribusiness firm denied this and mentioned of procedures stopping such practices, the lax criteria on third-party supply does not promote the strict use of clean palm oil into global supplies, said Greenpeace. This fresh fruit bunch (FFB) or palm oil products sourced from third-party suppliers could have been produced through illegal land clearing, they added. Inadequacies of RSPO The RSPO lacks standards encouraging transparency in sourcing or mechanisms that offer traceability throughout the entire palm oil supply chain, from plantation to the end consumer product sold on supermarkets and other retail stores. The report showed a visual flowchart of the RSPO supply chain illustrating three different supply systems – segregated supply, mass balance, and book and claim – that translate to different palm oil products, as well as different claims of palm oil certification. “Even among the RSPO’s own members, dirty palm oil remains the common currency – RSPO standards are inadequate, poorly enforced and offer palm oil consumers no guarantee that the oil they buy has been produced responsibly,” said Greenpeace. In fact, of the 250 palm oil consumer companies interviewed by the environmental group , those who replied stated they still rely on RSPO’s sustainability measures. Procter and Gamble, one of the respondents, said, “By 2015, 100 per cent of our palm oil purchases will be confirmed to have originated from responsible and sustainable sources… [We are] aiming to source certified sustainable palm oil and PKO (palm kernel oil) via the RSPO Mass Balanced Supply Chain model, but will also be source via the Book and Claim model.” However, Greenpeace emphasised that the RSPO is “not fit for this purpose”. The report outlines how the RSPO faces criticism from consumer companies and non-government organisations, despite having recently revised its principles and criteria and having the support of the Consumer Goods Forum and the Sustainable Palm Oil Investor Working Group. Kellogg, the company behind well-known cereals and energy bars, recently received backlash from consumer activist group Sum of Us due to its joint venture with Wilmar International. Campaign director Rob Wohl, in an article with trade website Bakery and Snacks, said, “Sourcing RSPO-certified palm oil is nice, but Kellogg’s (and really, all global corporations) need to be doing everything in their power to stop deforestation. Ideally, Kellogg should follow Nestlé’s lead by adopting strong deforestation-free principles and allow independent oversight of its supply chain.” Going beyond the RSPO Greenpeace likewise named the Swiss multinational company as an example of a consumer goods firm that has taken palm oil sustainability seriously. The environmental NGO, back in 2010, lambasted the firm’s use of unsustainable palm oil from Indonesian supplier Sinar Mas for its Kit Kat chocolate bar. Since then, Nestlé has addressed its sourcing, even including a goal on the use of sustainable palm oil by end of the year on its list of published environmental targets for 2020. Golden Agri-Resources, New Britain Palm Oil and Agropalma are the other exemplary companies cited by Greenpeace in the report. According to Areeba Hamid, the NGO’s forest campaigner, “The only solution for palm oil consumers and producers is to go beyond the RSPO – as some members are doing already. This is the challenge we set to the industry.” The Palm Oil Innovation Group, an initiative by some palm oil firms and NGOs including Greenpeace, is an example of industry efforts outside the RSPO. The group is for the conservation of high carbon stock forests and also secondary forests, which the RSPO does not protect in its stipulated forest clearance ban. Greenpeace, in the report, recommended what other actions the RSPO should take to improve its standards. They also listed their solutions and demands for palm oil consumer companies, traders and processors, and producers. Hamid said, “Brands must find out where their palm oil comes from, and guarantee consumers around the world that forest destruction is not making its way into our products.” Wilmar, as well as Golden Agri and Kuala Lumpur Kepong Bhd (KLK), showed that having questionable business operations has repercussions. Norway’s sovereign wealth fund, the richest in the world at US$737 billion, sold its investments in the palm oil producers last 2012, citing concerns on deforestation. Continue reading
EU divided entering days of Syria talks
EU divided entering days of Syria talks (AP) / 6 September 2013 European Union nations enter high-octane talks on Syria as divided as ever, split between moral outrage over the use of chemical weapons and the obligations of slow and burdensome UN diplomacy. France, like the United States, is preparing possible armed action against the regime of Syrian President Bashar Al Assad. Britain has been surprisingly hamstrung by its parliament. And Germany says it will not take part in an attack and would limit itself to a backseat role at most. While EU leaders are in St. Petersburg with Russian leader Vladimir Putin and US President Barack Obama during the G-20 summit ending Friday, the EU’s foreign and defence ministers are meeting in nearby Lithuania through Saturday, seeking to broker a common stance that statements on Thursday indicated would prove elusive. Speaking in Russia, German Chancellor Angela Merkel said: “I do not believe yet that we will reach a joint position.” And while EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton cautiously said in Vilnius that she had been “of course, carefully talking with our colleagues and allies,” EU President Herman Van Rompuy — speaking in St Petersburg — bluntly insisted upon UN cooperation, upsetting the French and widening divisions further. Rebuffing French urgency, Van Rompuy told reporters that EU nations had to underscore “the need to move forward with addressing the Syrian crisis through the UN process.” That involves further delays as UN inspectors prepare a report on the August 21 chemical attack and the diplomatic quagmire at the Security Council, where Russia and China have veto power over military action. By invoking UN approval, Van Rompuy appeared to be isolating France, the lone EU member actively looking at military intervention. French President Francois Hollande came to the G-20 summit in hopes of rallying other European countries to support military action, if not with warplanes then at least with logistical or other symbolic help. Van Rompuy’s comments echoed those of Merkel — and upset the summit’s French contingent. French Defence Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian held bilateral meetings with several EU counterparts in Vilnius on Thursday, aiming to make them fully aware of the “unacceptable nature” of the chemical weapons attack, an official in his office said. He was pushing for tough language against Syria in a statement expected from Ashton on the crisis in coming days. On Saturday, US Secretary John Kerry will be coming to Vilnius to confer with his EU counterparts for a tougher stance against Assad. The US said it has proof that the Assad regime is behind attacks that Washington claims killed at least 1,429 people, including more than 400 children. Obama, however, finds himself slowed on taking action as he seeks congressional authorisation for the use of force in a vote expected after Congress returns to work September 9. British Prime Minister David Cameron stunningly lost such a parliamentary vote on military action last week, strongly reducing any chance of a US-British alliance such as the one that dominated the Iraq war a decade ago. Now, Cameron is on the defensive as he faces world leaders in St. Petersburg. In the face of such problems, Nato Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen urged “the international community to overcome its divisions.” “Not to act would send a dangerous signal to dictators all over the world that they can use chemical and maybe other weapons of mass destruction without any reaction from the international community,” Rasmussen said. Continue reading
