|
Greenpeace and FOE’s Palm Oil Agenda: Agents for Change or Agents of Soy? |
|
|
|
Written by Jon Tomczyk
|
|
Friday, 09 January 2009 |
 Dramatically portrayed as the greatest crisis in the history of civilization, global warming has had some bad press. Stories on it occupy the front pages of prominent newsmagazines such as Time and Newsweek and are featured prominently in countless media around the world.
The question that the Palm Oil Truth Foundation would like asked is whether such hysteria and headlong spending on extravagant CO2 cutting programs at exorbitant prices is the correct response. This is definitely debatable in a world where billions live in abject poverty and millions die each year of diseases that could have been cured if the billions that have been poured into CO2 mitigation programs had been diverted towards more sensible poverty eradication and disease prevention programs. Just think of the lives that could have been saved, societies strengthened and clean water supply improved at a fraction of the cost.
In the view of the Palm Oil truth Foundation, it is important to keep the numbers of malnourished and hungry in this world in context. How many hungry people the world ends up with depends much less on climate than on demographics and income. In this scenario, it is obvious that social policy decisions are far more important than climate choices. These are decisions that would have an impact on the scale and distribution of global and regional resources.
Thus using climate policy to obtain a small reduction in hunger is simply not the best strategy. If we implement Kyoto, this would reduce malnutrition by 2 million people in 2080 for about a whopping $180 billion ANNUALLY. However, if we really care about helping the hungry, we can do much better. We could focus on simple measures like investing in palm oil agriculture such as improved soil health, water management, and palm oil agricultural technological research – and direct policies such as school meals and nutrient fortification (such as adding iodine to salt). The UN estimates that we could reduce hunger by 229 million people by 2015 for about just $10 billion annually!
That should be a no-brainer. Yet we have so-called environmental organizations such as Greenpeace and the FOE calling for restrictions on palm oil agriculture alleging that the crop was causing massive deforestation and thus contributing to global warming and threatening the extinction of exotic animals in the wild such as the orang utan.
The problem with Greenpeace and the FOE’s allegations is that palm oil happens to be the most productive of all the oilseed crops such as soy, rapeseed and sunflower, often yielding 4.5 metric tons per hectare, a good ten times the productivity of the competing oil seeds. What this effectively translates to in real terms is that palm oil requires ten times LESS land to produce the same unit of edible oil as its competitors, which exposes the lies spread by the likes of Greenpeace and FOE.
It is also well known that palm oil is inherently healthful packed chocfull with heart friendly nutrients like Co-Enzyme Q10, beta-carotenes and tocotrienols ( a superior form of Vitamin E). Its high productivity and consequent price competitiveness also ensure its popularity with multinational food manufacturers and processors.
In fact, it is precisely these virtues and the high productivity of palm oil that could be attracting these attacks from “environmental organizations” like Greenpeace and FOE. A pertinent question to ask is this: “Could Greenpeace and FOE be hired guns by some competing oilseed lobby, to keep palm oil cultivation from further expansion?”
The Palm Oil Truth Foundation is of the view that such blatant misrepresentation of the facts and gross misuse and abuse of the environmental movement by Greenpeace and FOE will not help resolve any issues. It is time that the main stream media dismisses the hysterical catastrophism that is so all pervasive with environmental extremeists such as Greenpeace and FOE and brings to the debate intellectual rigor to consider the sober economic options and ethical considerations that really matter! THE END. |
The FBI should be called in to investigate how Greenpeace and FOE amass their funds!
Posted by MacDissed, on November 26, 2009 at 6:58
I agree that improved soil health and water management are better things to look at and would provide more long term benefits than what the media have been proposing. I never knew it was just a smokescreen!
Posted by Sally T, on January 14, 2009 at 8:57
The lame stream media should remember that old adage about playing with skunks. You play with skunks like Greenpeace and FOE, you begin to smell like them!
Posted by J. Neuharth, on January 11, 2009 at 7:02
You see Boy Named Sue,all the monies have disappeared into an unaccountable rat's hole! That's how these crooks at Greenpeace and FoE can operate for so long. But their days could be numbered and the ball and chain awaits the top officials, thanks to sites like this!
Posted by Gator, on January 10, 2009 at 5:48
The money that Greenpeace and FOE have amassed from all this palm oil bashing should be accounted for. There should be a long line of officials at these organizations waiting to be processed and fitted with orange jumpsuits, but they're all busy living it up at their country clubs, drinking fine wine and Dom Perignons...all at the expense of the gullible public donors!
Posted by A Boy Named Sue, on January 10, 2009 at 5:42
A sobering and eye-opening look at the antics of Greenpeace and FOE.
Posted by Zender, on January 10, 2009 at 1:48
Now it figures. FOE and Greenpeace are definitely hired guns, beyond a shadow of a doubt!
Posted by Fred Fox, on January 9, 2009 at 21:29
Leave your comments
Please login to leave your comments.
Greenpeace and FOE’s Palm Oil Agenda: Agents for Change or Agents of Soy? 
