- Posted April 16, 2012 by
New York City, New York
Palm oil and the green generation
That photo reminds me that our children mimic most of what they see in us—words and deeds.
God forbid that the children of the officials of “green” and “civil society” groups such as the Rainforest Action Network (RAN), Greenpeace, the Friends of the earth (FOE), the WWF and even zoos like the Melbourne Zoo, the Auckland Zoo and the Philly Zoo should mimic their parent’s actions and conniving ways, especially the way that these officials frame and drum up false charges of deforestation and orangutan extinction against palm oil.
Their kids would grow up all messed up and thoroughly confused. After all, the charges fly in the face of facts.
For one, palm oil is planted on only 0.23% of the world’s agricultural lands. However, it is interesting to note that despite this minute global footprint palm oil is the world’s market leader in the edible oil market supplying 30% of global edible oil supplies. This is due in no small measure to palm oil’s incredible inherent productivity. In fact, just one hectare of palm oil plantation typically produces 4-5 metric tons of palm oil, which is close to ten times that of its nearest competitors such as soy, rapeseed and sunflower. Current R&D too suggests that palm oil can ultimately yield 20 metric tons per hectare, whist its competitors have virtually reached their genetic yield limit. The kids would be wondering at the incongruity of an edible oilseed crop that is planted on only 0.23% of the world’s agricultural lands and producing a whopping 30% of the world’s supply of edible oils being accused of deforestation.
However, what would be a real mind bender would be the double standards on display. Referring to the attendance of Senator Nick Xenophon to a palm oil conference, the CEO of the Malaysian Palm Oil Council (MPOC), Dr Yusof Basiron says, “Malaysia looks forward to hearing his views as to why Australia, a developed country with a lower population (22 million according to the Australian Bureau of Statistics) as compared to Malaysia ( 28 million) has been deforesting at 3 to 5 times the rate that may have occured in this country over the last 10 years. Why then did he propose in the Australian Parliament to discriminatorily label palm oil as being associated with deforestation while not doing the same for ‘more deserving’ Australian agricultural products.”
However, “nothing comes close to the double standards practiced by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in their recent rejection of palm oil as a raw material for biodiesel in the USA. It even beats the double standards on palm oil acceptability for biofuel already formulated in the EU Renewable Energy Directive (RED). Selective science and creative economic modeling have been used effectively in these countries to disqualify palm oil from being able to participate and compete alongside local oils for use in their biodiesel industry. While some say this is green protectionism, to me it smells of green colonialism. In the past, European missionaries were deployed to create colonies; now the green NGOs are being paid by western governments as their agents to impose policies that hinder growth and economic development. The end game is the same: introduce double standards to deny developing countries their right to develop, or to rule their sovereign country and manage their resources (forestry included) and economy without outside interference and threats.,” Dr Basiron points out.
Oh, how my heart bleeds for the confused generation spawned by these “green” vigilantes.