news/updates
Zubiri assails biofuels doubters
By Butch Fernandez and Jonathan Mayuga
BusinessMirror
January 16, 2008
ADMINISTRATION Sen. Miguel Zubiri is challenging fellow Sen. Miriam Santiago and other biofuel pessimists to a debate when Congress resumes session on January 28 even as Zubiri charged that three big oil firms are fueling a strong lobby against full implementation of the country's biofuels program.
In a press conference yesterday, Zubiri lamented that Santiago was apparently "misinformed" about the alleged ill effects of local biofuel production on the country's food security, affirming that he would not back away from a debate with Santiago on the issue to straighten the facts on the Philippine biofuel program.
Meanwhile, environment watchdog Greenpeace is supporting the move to review the biofuels law in the wake of reports that the country's food security is in peril because of the expected shift from food to biofuels production.
Greenpeace Southeast Asia climate and energy campaigner Jasper Inventor said while bioefuels as an alternative to fossil fuel can partially address climate change, volatile oil prices and energy security, it is not the ultimate solution to the pressing energy and environmental issues.
Zubiri told reporters: "Alam ko me umiikot na (anti-biofuel) lobby [I know there's a lobby going around]." He said he received reports that “this lobby is the handiwork of the ‘Big Three' oil companies (Shell, Caltex, Petron)" and that he tended to believe it “unless they can prove otherwise."
According to Zubiri, foreign investors are now rethinking a planned $250-million biofuel investment on biofuel plants in Palawan in the wake of Senator Santiago's warning for government to go slow on the biofuel program.
He also complained that the $600-million investment commitments to boost the Philippine biofuel program that President Arroyo got during her recent European trip is imperiled by such statements from the senator.
"I am asking Malacañang to make a stand in favor of biofuel to allay concerns from foreign investors," Zubiri added.
Greenpeace's Inventor said: "Uncontrolled use of biofuels can also harm the environment. There are concerns regarding the environmental and social impacts of increased biofuel use, clearly indicating that this energy source must be used in conjunction with other measures, both political and social, to be sustainable." He said biofuels can contribute to the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions from transport.
Greenpeace said this should be limited only to those grown within the framework of sustainable agriculture and it does not directly or indirectly lead to the destruction of intact ecosystems.
Moreover, biofuels should not hinder the ability of any nation to achieve food security and sovereignty, he added.
"Biofuel crops have land-use implications. Development of biofuel plantations must not result in the devastation of intact forest areas which is among the unacceptable trends currently taking place in Indonesia," he warned.
Moreover, Inventor said available agricultural land is a finite resource and demand for bioenergy crops could inevitably lead to increased competition for land between food and nonfood uses.
Bioenergy crops should not compete with food crops in areas or countries where agricultural land is needed to ensure food security, he said.
Displacing biodiversity and food security needs in developing countries in order to feed cars poses serious moral question, he added.
"The plan by the government to review the biofuels law is a welcome development that can firm up needed measures to regulate biofuel development. The government, however, should not lose sight of the Renewable Energy Bill, which clearly presents a better and lasting no-regrets solution toward energy security and preventing the impacts of climate change," Inventor said.
"With the urgent demand for solutions to looming energy crisis, nothing less is expected of the Senate than the immediate passage of the Renewable Energy Bill," he added.
