To Conclude.

Today is the today, when this blog unfortunately comes to end :-(  I have thoroughly enjoyed this opportunity to explore the palm oil industry and the diverse impacts it is having socially, economically and environmentally.

Through analysing the literature and media posted in this blog, it is evident that palm oil plantations have undoubtedly caused large scale damage to the environment, particularly impacting on vulnerable species and local communities. Environmental damage is still prevalent, however, continuing efforts by governments and organisations such as the Malaysia Palm Oil Council (MPOC),  RSPO, FELDA are ensuring that steps are being made to reduce the environmental damage and make a move towards greater sustainability in the industry.

Ensuring sustainability in the industry is critical as the versatile nature of palm oil has led to extensive consumer reliance on the product and therefore, banning the production of palm oil is simply not an option. Additionally the income Indonesia and Malaysia receive from palm oil exports is a significant proportion of their GDP and in many cases has alleviated poverty. However this blog, has highlighted that unless everyone participating in the palm oil industry is supportive of a move towards sustainability, it is unlikely to be achieved. It is not a problem limited to the supply side but one that consumers must participate in, e.g. through demanding products that contain sustainably sourced palm oil.

Attention was drawn to the Greenpeace campaign that illustrated Nestle to be utilising unsustainable palm oil resources. Whether or not Nestle was as guilty as they were portrayed, in the interest of the entire globe, it should be stipulated that large companies have no choice but to source all their resources, not just palm oil from sustainable projects.

I feel my experience volunteering in the village of Batu Puteh, Borneo has allowed me to empathise with the impacts discussed in the academic literature, newspaper articles and videos. adding a personal perspective to this blog. I hope by adopting this angle, it has enabled all you followers to grasp a better understanding of the complexities of the palm oil industry.

This is end, the day we should stop palming off the earth.....

Past, present and future of energy sources

                                                                            The Industrial Revolution, London

Past:

Hundreds of thousands of years ago, when man first gained mastery over fire, wood was his primary fuel; the first biofuel of them all!!! Wood was used until the discovery and exploration of fossil fuels, which in turn powered the Industrial Revolution of the 18th and 19th centuries that began in the UK. The discovery of fossil fuels revolutionised the globe, improving industry, transportation, heating etc.

However, it is common knowledge that the extensive exploitation of fossil fuels particularly during the Industrial Revolution, released a high concentration of greenhouse gases, predominately carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. 

                                                                                    Glacial Collapse, Argentina 

Present:

In turn, this had a colossal impact on the environment, with the globes inhabitants experiencing serious changes in climate and global warming today. There is a large need to find alternative sources of energy in an attempt to mitigate climate change and ensure a sustainable energy resource as the finite fossil fuels are severely depleted. To exacerbate the situation the world's population is expected to increase to 8 billion in 2028!!!

We have once again turned to biofuels in our hour of need, as a source of alternative energy. Although, can they actually act as our saviour or are they just a scape goat for civilisations that do not want to change their ways? The success of biofuels have varied across the globe, particularly due to difference successes of the feedstocks used to produce the biofuel. Brazil has achieved great success in reducing its reliance on biofuel with the achievements of its sugarcane-ethanol industry. In spite of this, it has been reviled that many biofuels are not 'green' energy resources and require huge fossil fuel input during production and transportation around the globe.


I touched upon the complexities of clearing forests for biofuel production and the 'biofuel carbon debt' in a previous post back in November. If you have forgotten the issues raised, please refer back to the post of read the full article of the literature I reviewed written by Fargione et al. (2008), Gibbs et al. (2008) and Danielsen et al. (2008). 

                                                                                                   Future??
Future:

So I ask now what does the future hold for the possibility of palm oil becoming a sustainable feedstock in the production of biodiesel?


Currently the majority of biodiesel produced worldwide is from rapeseed oil, which cover 84% of total production. However as previous mentioned palm oil is relatively cheap, yields are high, far greater than all other agricultural crops and additionally it requires substantially less land to produce. Despite the environmental problems that Fargione et al. (2008) highlighted on paper palm oil looks good.


Furthermore the production cost of palm oil is relatively cheap in comparison to other agricultural crops and is seemingly more sustainable and self-sufficient than other crops. This is highlighted in an article written by Tan et al. (2009) that draws attention to the fact that palm oil mills require little or no fossil fuel as palm biomass and its shell can be utilised as a source of energy during the processing of the fruits into palm oil.


An addition quality of palm oil that may favour an increase reliance on the crop as a source of biodiesel is its low need for fertilisers and pesticides that are essential to other nitrogen-demanding crops such as sugarcane and soybean, particularly if they are to be grown on nutrient poor. degraded land.


It is a given that the globe cannot function without channeling an energy resource be that crude oil, coal or gas or more sustainably solar, wind, hydro, biofuels. Because of this I feel our reliance on biofuels will certainly increase and biodiesel could be favoured, especially given the increasing demand for land to satisfy the growing global population. Biofuels are far from flawless but with extensive monitoring and further commitment at all levels from the individual to governments to multinational organisations, they do stand as an attractive option and I believe that growth in the biofuel industry will inevitably grow. Its impact on the environment will depend on its regulation.  

Western agriculture, better or worse than palm oil plantations??

It was evident through Basiron (2007) article that he strongly believes that palm oil is sustainable and portrays the industry is a very good light. Although I didn't agree with everything stated in his article I did like how he made comparisons with other agricultural crops, displaying the positives of producing palm oil over soybean and rapeseed for example.

I decided in light of this, to look in greater depth at other crops grown globally. Through doing so it led me to consider what damage western agriculture has done and is still doing to our globe. Everyone has the right to develop land, so I wondered was palm oil plantations damaging the globe to a greater extent than the west have done over the last few centuries? 

A fantastic blog has been written by Megan Smith which has explored the history of agriculture and intensification over the last century. Although it focuses on agricultures ability to feed a growing population over the course of the last few months it has displayed large environmental issues of intensive agriculture in the west.

The blog highlights that intensive agriculture:

• Requires large amounts of energy input to produce, transport, and apply chemical fertilizers/pesticides
• Alters and often destroys the natural habitat of flora and fauna.
• In many cases has led to extensive soil erosion.
• The use of fertilisers and pesticides often remove useful insects that naturally act as a biological control from other unwanted pesticides
• Additionally if fertilisers and pesticides are washed into nearby water sources they can have disastrous impacts completely altering the habitat within the lake or river, leading to the death of many aquatic flora and fauna.

All of which display western agriculture to be hugely environmentally damaging and potentially just as bad as palm oil plantations. Literature surrounding the topic, led me back to an article written by Basiron (2006)  comparing the proportion of total virgin forest cover and agricultural land in both Malaysia and the UK. Shockingly it highlights that 64% of Malaysia is covered by rainforests, with agricultural land standing at 19%. Whereas forests in the UK only occupies 12% of total land mass, with nearly 70% of land being used for agriculture!!!

If these figures are taken on face value, this would mean that in terms of forest destruction western agriculture has been far worse.  In spite of this it must be taken into consideration that Malaysia is more than 100,000 square kilometres bigger than the UK and therefore data present in this way, portrays the Malaysian situation in a far better light.

So really what is sustainability? Is the palm oil industry sustainable?

Over the years people have expressed differing views to what they feel sustainable development is. In turn, this has led to the emergence of a wide variety of contrasting definitions.

Therefore, for the purpose of this post, the definition below will be used. I have chosen this definition as it seems to be the most widely used and highly regarded.

"Development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs."

— from the World Commission on Environment and Development’s
(the Brundtland Commission) report Our Common Future

With this in mind I would like to review an article written by Basiron (2007) entitled 'Palm oil production through sustainable plantations'. Contrary to many blog entries I have made, the article concludes that the palm oil industry is very much a sustainable industry. The article is focused around analysing sustainability against the universally accepted criteria of benefitting the 3 Ps:- Profit, People and Planet that was established at the Rio Earth Summit in 1992, along with the recognition of the right to develop land in developing countries. Although in hindsight developed countries, can appreciate the damage of extensive cultivation and industrialisation, however I think it is unfair to not allow developing nations to progress economically and socially.  


Comparisons are made throughout with other agricultural crops, ultimately displaying palm oil to be far superior in terms of long term sustainability.


Profit:
In terms of profit, Basiron (2007) brings to light that due to the plant physiology and extensive research and development oil palm needs a smaller area of land to yield a target quantity of oil. He supports this claim using the following example:

• To produce 31.8% of global oils and fats, palm oil plantations occupy 9.2 million hectares of agricultural land.
• To obtain a similar output from soybean cultivation would require 92.5 million hectares!!!

The example clearly illustrates the high yield of palm oil, that I have mentioned in a previous post of 3.68 tonnes/ha/year. Additionally Basiron (2007) states that with further research and development through intensive breeding, future yields are set to double.

In terms of the 3Ps criteria with the evidence provided, palm oil is certainly sustainable on the profit front, however I feel that this blog has already displayed this. I believe that although the figures, across the board, not just in this article, display how profitable the industry is, is it actually sustainable because of it. I say no. If the profits do not feed down to the plantation workers and middlemen and executives reap the benefits and do not reinvest, I would claim that it is not sustainable.

This nicely brings us on to the next of the 3Ps...

People:

The article states that palm oil has contributed to uplifting the quality of life of people, mainly through landless Malaysian farmers participating in schemes managed by the Federal Land Development Authority (FELDA). The schemes consolidate smallholdings into an estate of an economic size and provide management and infrastructural support.

As this blog has previously touched upon, this can be the case, with some villages gaining funding and support to develop infrastructure such as roads and schools. In spite of this, previous academic literature, in addition to news articles I have read, have highlighted many of the failings of the palm oil industry in terms of aiding communities and truly alleviating poverty. (If you can't remember the examples of this I provided check out the table I posted on the 27th October, as well as the news article posted on the 9th December!! ) 


Although Basiron (2007) displays the industry to be sustainable in regard to benefitting the people, I wouldn't agree and believe that there is much room for improvement in this area, with more support from governments, FELDA, RSPO and other NGOs


Planet:


Through the statistic obtained through a personal communication with K.W. Chan, shown below Basiron (2007) determines that oil palms contribute back to the planet and therefore is a sustainable crop.

• It is estimated that the crop emits eight to ten times more oxygen and absorbs up to ten times more carbon dioxide per hectare per year compared to annual crops grown in temperate latitudes.

However I believe this is viewing the issue with tunnel vision and does not consider the wider environmental issues palm oil plantations have caused. It completely ignores the advantage of maintaining primary forest in terms of carbon dioxide emissions and global biodiversity, nor does it deviated between establishing plantations on different types of land e.g. degraded land, drained peatland. As was highlighted in my literature review of Fargione et al. (2008), the environmental impact of establishing a plantation is highly dependant on the type of land that is being developed.

With this said I do think Basiron (2007) paper does raise some important issues that display that some areas of the industry are sustainable and does meet the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. Although I feel that many areas are severely lacking in their current level of sustainability. Despite this, I do believe that some of the fundamentals are already in place, that over time will aid the industry in becoming completely sustainable.

Taking into account all the literature I have posted on this blog, how do you interrupt the palm oil industry's ability to develop sustainably?? 

Take a Break?

I think the video is really powerful at conveying a strong and memorable message to viewers.

I ask once again, is this a case of ignorance or unawareness?

Fancy Tucking into a Bar of Fruit and Nut?

Or should we say: 

Friends of the Earth 

Ignorance or Unawareness?

Teddy, thanks for your comment earlier today. I extended my search and have two more thought provoking images for you!!

Greenpeace

Additionally I felt that it would be a good time to explain why Nestle is centre to many of these images. 

In March 2010, the company faced a huge crisis that could have ruined their public reputation over accusations made by Greenpeace that the company was sourcing its palm oil from Sinar Mas plantations, of which had caused widespread rainforest and organutan habitat destruction. The news article below was published in the Guardian and gives a more in-depth description of the accusations made by Greenpeace and how Nestle dealt with the claims. Greenpeace evidently made Nestle central to their campaign to raise public awareness of the actions of large multinational companies and the part they can play in contributing to large environmental issues such as this. There was a shift away from people being genuinely unaware of products containing unsustainable palm oil.  Those who continued to buy Nestle products were viewed as ignorant.

Nestle stars in smear campaign over Indonesian palm oil