Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Saturday December 01 2018, @03:18AM   Printer-friendly
from the smoke-gets-in-your-eyes dept.

Palm Oil Was Supposed to Help Save the Planet. Instead It Unleashed a Catastrophe.

The fields outside Kotawaringin village in Central Kalimantan, on the island of Borneo, looked as if they had just been cleared by armies. None of the old growth remained — only charred stumps poking up from murky, dark pools of water. In places, smoke still curled from land that days ago had been covered with lush jungle. Villagers had burned it all down, clearing the way for a lucrative crop whose cultivation now dominates the entire island: the oil-palm tree.

The dirt road was ruler straight, but deep holes and errant boulders tossed our tiny Toyota back and forth. Trucks coughed out black smoke, their beds brimming over with seven-ton loads of palm fruit rocking back and forth on tires as tall as people. Clear-cut expanses soon gave way to a uniform crop of oil-palm groves: orderly trees, a sign that we had crossed into an industrial palm plantation. Oil-palm trees look like the coconut-palm trees you see on postcards from Florida — they grow to more than 60 feet tall and flourish on the peaty wetland soil common in lowland tropics. But they are significantly more valuable. Every two weeks or so, each tree produces a 50-pound bunch of walnut-size fruit, bursting with a red, viscous oil that is more versatile than almost any other plant-based oil of its kind. Indonesia is rich in timber and coal, but palm oil is its biggest export. Around the world, the oil from its meat and seeds has long been an indispensable ingredient in everything from soap to ice cream. But it has now become a key ingredient of something else: biodiesel, fuel for diesel engines that has been wholly or partly made from vegetable oil.

Finally we emerged, and as we crested a hill, the plantations fell into an endless repetition of tidy bunches stretching for miles, looking almost like the rag of a Berber carpet. Occasionally, a shard of an old ironwood tree shot into the air, a remnant of the primordial canopy of dense rain forest that dominated the land until very recently.

[...] Most of the plantations around us were new, their rise a direct consequence of policy decisions made half a world away. In the mid-2000s, Western nations, led by the United States, began drafting environmental laws that encouraged the use of vegetable oil in fuels — an ambitious move to reduce carbon dioxide and curb global warming. But these laws were drawn up based on an incomplete accounting of the true environmental costs. Despite warnings that the policies could have the opposite of their intended effect, they were implemented anyway, producing what now appears to be a calamity with global consequences.

The tropical rain forests of Indonesia, and in particular the peatland regions of Borneo, have large amounts of carbon trapped within their trees and soil. Slashing and burning the existing forests to make way for oil-palm cultivation had a perverse effect: It released more carbon. A lot more carbon. NASA researchers say the accelerated destruction of Borneo’s forests contributed to the largest single-year global increase in carbon emissions in two millenniums, an explosion that transformed Indonesia into the world’s fourth-largest source of such emissions. Instead of creating a clever technocratic fix to reduce American’s carbon footprint, lawmakers had lit the fuse on a powerful carbon bomb that, as the forests were cleared and burned, produced more carbon than the entire continent of Europe. The unprecedented palm-oil boom, meanwhile, has enriched and emboldened many of the region’s largest corporations, which have begun using their newfound power and wealth to suppress critics, abuse workers and acquire more land to produce oil.

[...] The central problem, of course, is that the goals of Paris — slowing planetary warming just enough to allow humans time to adapt to excruciating and inevitable changes, including flooding coastlines, stronger hurricanes and perpetual famine and drought — are unlikely to ever be achieved without stopping deforestation. The planet’s forests have the potential to sequester as much as a third of the carbon in the air. Right now deforestation globally contributes 15 percent of the planet’s total emissions, the same as all the cars and trucks and trains across the globe. On paper, biodiesel is a way to make all those modes of transportation produce less carbon. But in the world as it is, that calculation is far more likely to lead to catastrophe.

[Ed note: The original article is on the long side (8,000+ words), but well worth the read. One of the key problems is that in order to quickly clear the land for a palm plantation, growers log the existing trees and then burn everything that remains — most importantly, the peat lands on which the jungle forests had grown. Peat is a huge carbon sink; burning it releases tremendous amounts of carbon back into the atmosphere. So much so that it would take decades if not centuries of reduced pollution from using biofuels to even come close to balancing out all the carbon released by burning the peat.

tl;dr Removing the USA's biofuel mandate would greatly reduce global CO2 emissions.]


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by takyon on Saturday December 01 2018, @05:02PM (2 children)

    by takyon (881) <takyonNO@SPAMsoylentnews.org> on Saturday December 01 2018, @05:02PM (#768657) Journal

    Arcologies!!!!! [wikipedia.org]

    For meat, consider cultured meat:

    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-shapiro-meat-commentary/commentary-science-fiction-no-more-can-lab-grown-meat-feed-and-save-the-world-idUSKCN1GA25H [reuters.com]

    In recent years, so-called “clean meat” — a term first popularized by the nonprofit Good Food Institute as a nod to both “clean energy” and to the meat’s food safety benefits — has moved out of the realm of science fiction and become scientific fact. The first "clean burger" debuted in 2013, thanks in part to research and development funding from Google co-founder Sergey Brin. Since 2014, I've had the good fortune to eat clean beef, duck, fish, chorizo, liver, and yogurt, all of it grown without animals. (Perhaps unsurprisingly, clean meat tastes like meat since, well, that's exactly what it is.) And I'm not the only one interested. These products are starting to get serious attention from traditional meat processors, with agribusiness giants Tyson [forbes.com] and Cargill [cargill.com] investing in Memphis Meats, a clean meat start-up based in San Leandro. "It’s not a threat to us, it’s an opportunity,” Sonya McCullum Roberts, president of growth ventures at Cargill, recently told Fortune magazine [fortune.com].

    [...] Growing only the meat we want won’t require all the resources needed to produce entire animals. A 2011 study [ox.ac.uk] by Oxford University researcher Hanna Tuomisto estimated that clean beef production could require 99 percent less land and 96 percent less water while producing 96 percent fewer greenhouse gas emissions than conventional beef production. Such early studies are admittedly imprecise, since the technologies that will make clean meat commercially viable are still under development. But most analysts believe that even large-scale production of lab-cultured meat is likely to be far more resource-efficient than traditional livestock production.

    --
    [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by Immerman on Saturday December 01 2018, @05:21PM

    by Immerman (3985) on Saturday December 01 2018, @05:21PM (#768666)

    Indeed. Though I would argue those all count as drastic technology and/or lifestyle changes from the current status quo. Just as moving to predominantly non-fossil power will be, despite many of the requisite technologies already being in widespread use.

  • (Score: 2) by Pslytely Psycho on Sunday December 02 2018, @07:27PM

    by Pslytely Psycho (1218) on Sunday December 02 2018, @07:27PM (#768952)

    "Arcologies!!!!!"

    Hmm, they didn't work out so well for Mega-City 1.
    At least we get flying motorcycles!

    Kidding aside however, what a horrid way to live.
    I rather like the mountains, streams, lakes, rivers and forests that are only less than a thirty minute drive from my front door. I don't think I would enjoy living sardine can close.

    --
    Alex Jones lawyer inspires new TV series: CSI Moron Division.