Is biofuels‏ the answer to sustainable environment?

I received an alert from Greenpeace. Biofuels might be the answer for our future. But are we ready when food is running scarce?

Dear Friends,

There's a poll today on the European Commission website you might like to participate in right now: " Should the EU stick to its target to reach 10% biofuels by 2020?"

Greenpeace and the environmental movement's answer is clearly "No".
Emerging research shows that it is most probably not possible to produce 10% of the EU's transport fuel from crops in an ecologically sound way. There's a high risk that such a target (10% by 2020) will lead to enormous pressure on increasingly scarce land, and detrimental environmental and social effects, such as massive deforestation, a sharp increase in the use of GMO's and the shift from food production for the poor to car fuel production for the rich.

Furthermore, the Commission's proposal for biofuels sustainability criteria are -- put simply -- a joke. Let's send a clear "No" message now. Vote HERE. Vote for NO.

Industry would use a "yes" result in this e-poll to say there is public support for their goals, when clearly there is not. It's only an online poll, but we've got to win it. Please vote and pass the message on, by email, IM, facebook or whatever way you can.

Many thanks,

Everyone at Greenpeace

Email the Commission before May 7th GMO vote

Let us do something before GMO becomes a menace in years to come. It won't affect you now but it will happens to your children, grand children and future generations.
Read this plea from Greenpeace.
Then read my letter I just sent to the EU's commission.

Please help the world from environmental disasters...

To:
sg-web-president@ec.europa.eu,Mariann.Fischer-Boel@ec.europa.eu,Neelie.Kroes@ec.europa.eu,joaquin.almunia@ec.europa.eu,peter.mandelson@ec.europa.eu,V.Spidla@ec.europa.eu,Guenter.Verheugen@ec.europa.eu,stavros.dimas@ec.europa.eu,Cabinet-Borg@ec.europa.eu,androulla.vassiliou@ec.europa.eu,viviane.reding@ec.europa.eu,Charlie.Mc-Creevy@ec.europa.eu,franco.frattini@ec.europa.eu,Cabinet-Huebner@ec.europa.eu,Laszlo.Kovacs@ec.europa.eu,cab-archive-barrot@ec.europa.eu,cab-rehn-web-feedback@ec.europa.eu,CAB-KALLAS-WEB-FEEDBACK@ec.europa.eu,cab-piebalgs-archives@ec.europa.eu,Louis.Michel@ec.europa.eu,cab-grybauskaite-commissaire@ec.europa.eu,benita.ferrero-waldner@ec.europa.eu,Cab-FIGEL@ec.europa.eu,janez.potocnik@ec.europa.eu,maglena.kuneva@ec.europa.eu,CAB-ORBAN-CONTACT@ec.europa.eu,
mailto:gmovote.int@greenpeace.org,

Date : Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 10:57 AM
Subject : May 7th GMO vote

Dear Sirs/ Madams,

Good moning.

For the past few weeks I have been reading about the impending "food crises" happening around the world. Rice getting scarce and prices increasing by day. Fuel increases, crops failing and hunger throughout the world. This is surely very alarming.

I would like to take this intiative to congratulate you as the capable and knowledgable heads of EU to find ways to overcome this "food crises". However, there are several concerns that I would like you to know before you vote on May 7th.

1. The maize varieties that produce their own pesticide is a worrying phenomena. I believe this maize varieties have not been tested long enough to ascertain the health effect. Currect practises of testing pesticides for 2 years should be applied to these maize varieties too. I know that we have time constraint but long term effect on homosapien - your children, my children and future generations should make us think twice before embarking on this dangerous experiment.

2. I understand that GM potato contains a gene that makes cells resistant to antibiotics! Remember Murphy's Law, "if anything can go wrong, it will". Are we sure that this gene that makes cells resistant to antibiotics will not affect human race? Can these resistant strain not pose serious problems in treating diseases (like tuberculosis)?

3. There will be pro and con to any scientific views. Most scientists who are paid by food manufacturers to increase food production will have views that cater to produce more foods. The side issues and problems of consequences arising from these GMs food become unimportant. However, another group of scentists (non-food production category) should know about the consequences and their views should be taken into consideration. Have the recent 37 scientists who wrote a letter to the Commission pointing out from a scientific point of view the many gaps and uncertainties in relation to GMOs being look through? Please take a second look before you vote - for our children ok?

4. There must be something wrong if there are people opposing the use of GMOs for the past 10 years or so. Surely as a well educated person like your goodself, I am sure you will listen to the people on the danger and consequences.

5. Food industries are profit earning companies and their objectives of promoting GM crops to feed the hunger world is understandable. However, we should be awared that there are other ecologically sound farming models and methods that show real potential. Have we really looked into these eco-friendly agriculture methods or are we taking the short cut?

6. I do not want to dispute the European Food Safety Agency (EFSA). Sirs/Madams, you must understand that EFSA are paid by the food industries and they have to protect their masters. There should be another independent body to look into the assessment of the findings on health and environment impacts of GMOs. We just cannot rely on information provided by EFSA.

Sirs/Madams, with the reasoning above, I hope you as a learned person will surely make a good justment on this GMOs. I hope you will vote favourably for human's FUTURE, our children, our generations to come. PLEASE find other alternatives that are sustainable and that can protect our environment.

Thank you very much for reading my plea.
Forest Ang


-- "Few are those who see with their own eyes and feel with their own hearts." -- Albert Einstein http://forestexplorers.blogspot.com

Open Letter to Dove

Dear friends,

Your campaign to save Indonesia's rainforests, the climate and the orang-utans that live there, starts here. Watch video below.

The palm oil industry is the problem.

We've made maps, videos and reports to identify the emergency facing the forests. Now we're turning to the company who needs to help stop the destruction: Unilever, the huge multinational corporation behind Dove soap and other household brands containing palm oil.

Unilever buys its palm oil from suppliers who destroy Indonesia's rainforests for their palm plantations, leading to further climate change and killing orang-utans and other endangered species in the process. By their own admission, Unilever is the biggest single user of palm oil in the world, which is why they can't wash their hands now of this problem. We mustn't let them.
A truly responsible company would not buy from suppliers who trash forests. But Unilever needs to be moved into action, which is what the international Dove campaign is about.

To sign the open letter to Dove link here: http://www.greenpeace.org/international/campaigns/forests/asia-pacific/dove-palmoil-action