Fuel or food?

Following pressure from an Italian company, Nuove Iniziative Industriali SRL, established by a local company, the Kenyan government approved the conversion of a significant part of the Dakatcha area into a farm for growing jatropha

Some time ago I wrote about the "wonder tree".Jatropha Its fruits contain a high concentration of oil that is used as fuel (diesel), and I also addressed the problem water consumption of the jatropha.

In retrospect, it turns out that the calculations of the viability and the reduction in GHG emissions are not accurate). Following the publication of the list, I received inquiries and offers to advise on the development of jatropha fields for fuel production. I rejected most of the proposals after it became clear to me that the designated areas could be used for growing food plants, or designated areas that were covered in forest because as I wrote then and later "it is not right to grow fuel instead of food".
I did not reject a consulting request for a jatropha farm that is developing in an arid region in Ethiopia when the entrepreneurs intend to allow the farm workers to grow vegetables among the jatropha trees. I also advised a grower who is testing the possibility of growing jatropha in the Western Negev in combination with olive trees and vegetables. That is, if the conditions allow, it is possible to combine growing fuel and food on the same area, only when the conditions do not allow growing food and there is no environmental damage to growing fuel.

In the meantime, the debate about growing fuel grew and expanded as the (negative) model of growing corn for fuel production (in the USA) causes food prices for livestock and humans to rise. Companies and entrepreneurs who see only the $ signs, only the immediate profit, are taking over areas in South American and African countries while suppressing the locals and harming the environment, this under the "positive trend" of "increasing fuel with the intention of reducing greenhouse gas emissions from the use of mineral fuel" …… is that so?

Kenya is known as a destination for tourists who want to see the raw African nature, one of the areas (which I have visited for a long time) that is less known to travelers is an area of ​​huge forest north of Malindi that partly touches the Indian Ocean and penetrates to the west in areas where about 20 thousand live. Giriama) and Watha. These engage in seasonal fishing, a little agriculture and gathering food in the natural grove.
The Girayama and Wata people have been living in the area for hundreds of years, where they have achieved a balanced existence that does not harm the natural environment, springs, trees and hilltops have been consecrated and preserved for the well-being of the environment. The forest stretches over round hills and valleys where streams flow.
Near the coast, the forest turns into an equatorial rain forest, the entire area of ​​which the (small) part is declared a reserve is known as Dakatcha. In Dakatacha there is a huge variety of flora, some of which have not yet been identified (botanically), some of the plants are used for traditional medicine (their properties have not yet been scientifically tested),
A unique variety of birds, some of which are endemic, among them: owl (sukuk), puffin (sukuk), khivai (girdle), turako, org (clark), reptiles and mammals, some of which are unique and unknown from other places and some are in danger of extinction. There are no large mammals and/or carnivores in the area, a "lack" that makes it possible to travel on foot,
The huge variety of groves makes Dakatcha a paradise for birders whose visits allow the locals an additional source of income and an impetus to maintain the existing ones.

Following pressure from the Italian company Nuove Iniziative Industriali SRL, which established a local company Kenya Jatropha Energy Ltd., the Kenyan government approved the conversion of a significant part of Dakatacha into a farm for growing jatropha. In the first phase, 100 square kilometers will be planted as an experimental model (pilot), while in the next phase another 500 square kilometers will be planted. A factory will be built near the farm to process the seeds and produce the fuel.
Additional farms are being established throughout Africa: in Senegal, Mozambique, Ethiopia, Ghana, some of the farms are already active and supply fuel to well-known European companies, more than 10,000 square kilometers are in various stages of lease and development for jatropha planting.
The pressure of European companies to develop jatropha farms stems from the European Union's trend to "reduce dependence on imported fossil fuel and lower the level of greenhouse gas emissions by 35%".
In accordance with The Renewable Energy Directive (RED), a trend expressed in the decision that "by 2020, 20% of fuel must come from a sustainable source" (directive which states that by 2020, 20% of fuel should be from sustainable sources.) This is the decision of The European Union and questions are being asked, is the production of jatropha fuel (always) sustainable? If so (and if not) why should the directive of the European Union have a (negative) effect on the lives of the residents of African countries?

Back to Dakatcha, the residents of the area do not want the farm, according to them the development will harm their sources of livelihood, remove them from their place of residence where their ancestors were born, lived, died and were buried for many generations. The entrepreneurs claim that the farm will provide employment for the locals and enable a standard of living, education, medicine, etc. in areas that were not accessible until now, but the residents do not see the development... as positive.
According to them, "Today they live in the field, earn a living and grow their own food, why should they grow fuel for Europe? Why should they provide "food" for cars instead of growing food for themselves? Of course, the company's spokespeople reject the locals' claims, what's more, they have the government permissions and official approvals.

According to the "environmental watchdog" in the government of Kenya, the deal has not yet been finalized and there is room for a re-examination of the environmental impact. "An anti-poverty activity group" ActionAid together with the "Royal Society for the Protection of Birds" (RSPB) (hereinafter the group) publishes a research report that asks "how green is the jatropha project"? And "is jatropha the green alternative to mineral fuel"? The groups tested how green the jatropha project would be in the Dakatacha grove.
By referring to the position paper of The study by the consultancy group North Energy and according to their opinion the project will cause the emission of DETH at a rate between 2 and 5 times more than fossil fuel (?) (this is compared to the land uses before the jatropha planting) .
The increase in emissions is mainly due to the large amounts of carbon that are "stored" in the vegetation of the forest and in the soil, the planting of jatropha is spread out in the forest canopy, an action that will result in the release of carbon into the atmosphere, to which must be added the emissions following the processing and extraction of the oil, i.e. damage to the natural environment and the emission of GHG. According to the group's spokespersons, "the report shows that the European Union's policy ... is stupid, since it does not reduce emissions as the Union declares"!
The group's spokespersons also claim that "the project will destroy the forest, endanger the existence of unique birds and deprive the livelihood and lifestyle of thousands of people." That means not only environmental destruction but also climate damage and damage to people.

In response, the spokespeople of the European Union claim that: "The biofuel development policy of the Union is comprehensive, advanced and sustainable (in the whole world)" what's more, the project will enable the establishment of schools for the locals, provide jobs, connect the villages to water and electricity and much more.

A teacher in one of the villages responds and says that: "The project will cause the evacuation of people from their place of residence and therefore there will be no students in the schools that will be established"! "Jobs without a home is not an answer, a farm without a home is not a solution". As soon as the appropriate approvals are received, the residents of the area will be at the mercy of the entrepreneurs, who are only interested in large and quick profits.

The transition from mineral fuel to renewable sources must not be at the expense of harming the environment, as well as at the expense of harming the residents of the area. Biofuel, however positive it may be, does not constitute the "silver bullet" for climate problems.

The biofuel produced in Dakatacha is intended for Europe, because of the policy of the European Union a generous subsidy is given to producers of biofuel, it turns out that a subsidy given without supervision and inspection of the sources, causes fatal damage to the natural environment and its inhabitants, a damage that probably does not prevent the emissions of death... After all, this is the initial intention!

One of the residents of Dakatcha said that "I don't understand why I have to stop growing food for me and my family in order to grow food for cars? "If the European Union's intention is to save 35% of greenhouse gas emissions by growing jatropha in Dakatacha... There is a big "miss" here!

In many cases, I conclude my lists with "The time has come that: instead of controlling the environment for the sake of the human population, there will be control of the human population for the sake of the environment!"
However, this time it is appropriate to add that: the control must be applied in the place from which the trend to destroy the environment originates, as it turns out that: the European Union's initiative to reduce HTP emissions does not reduce HTP but causes damage to the natural environment and its inhabitants.