±«Óătv

Food problems? The problem is not feeding the world but how inefficient eating meat is. From a recent FAO/UN report: ...raising animals for food generates more greenhouse gases than all the cars and trucks in the world combined.'

"Food grown directly for human consumption occupies 60 million acres. Food grown to feed livestock occupies 1.2 billion acres." "It takes 16 pounds of grain and 2,500 gallons of water to produce 1 pound of meat. Yet 16 people can be fed on the grain it takes to produce that pound of meat. Growing that amount of grain requires only 250 gallons of water.

or even better:

John Robbins, author of Diet for a New America and The Food Revolution:

"It is increasingly obvious that environmentally sustainable solutions to world hunger can only emerge as people eat more plant foods and fewer animal products. To me it is deeply moving that the same food choices that give us the best chance to eliminate world hunger are also those that take the least toll on the environment, contribute the most to our long-term health, are the safest, and are also, far and away, the most compassionate towards our fellow creatures."

It is just a question of killing animals, other people and the environment to satisfy a few taste buds...

Biofuels are not 'good' or 'bad' of themselves - there are 'good' (ie sustainable and give useful reductions in carbon emissions) and 'bad' biofuels. It is absolutely crucial that we only use 'good' biofuels and any legislation the Government introduces should ensure that they are the only ones allowed. There should be really strict criteria for measuring the carbon footprint reduction and robust auditing of sustainability, including indirect land use change and any effects on food availability. We must then try to convince the rest of the world to follow suit!

There was a time when Newsnight could spell. Bio Diesel is spelled 'I' before 'E'

Newsnight spelled it incorrectly
BIO DEISEL.

Standards are dropping everywhere

From what I understand reading Jack Herers "The Emporer Wears no Clothes", if there was any serious debate from Governments about sustainable plants for bio fuel, then Hemp would be the only plant on the list. Learn your history, Bring back Hemp!.

Biofuels are not the way forward we are using food as fuel.

The combustion engine has only been refined since it was invented.
Compared with the computer it is still in the dark ages.

By now we should not be using liquid fuel to drive our transport
it is inefficient. Cylinders still going up and down??

Come on somebody save the world, no biofuels, no petrol, no cylinders!

The environmental mantra of reduce reuse recycle also applies to Biofuels and should be considered in this debate, I have run my car on vegetable oil ,which has already been used for cooking, for the last 4 years.
There are many other ways in which organic waste could be converted into fuels.

It seems to me that biofuels have to form part of the solution until alternatives are found. If alternatives were found tomorrow the present fleet of vehicles would take some time to reach the end of there useful lives.

Why is the ±«Óătv, and particularly Jeremy Paxman, continuing to refer to global warming caused by man as if it were an undisputed fact? This is not so, it is disputed by many eminent scientists. Also there has been no warming for the last 8 to9 years, despite a sizeable increase in CO2 over that period. In an earlier news item, CO2 was called a pollutant, which it definitely is not. Without this gas in the atmosphere there would be no life on Earth. The higher levels of recent years have contributed towards a 17% increase in crop yields per hectare overall.

Biofuels are not the way forward we are using food as fuel.

The combustion engine has only been refined since it was invented.
Compared with the computer it is still in the dark ages.

By now we should not be using liquid fuel to drive our transport
it is inefficient. Cylinders still going up and down??

Come on somebody save the world, no biofuels, no petrol, no cylinders!

The environmental mantra of reduce reuse recycle also applies to Biofuels and should be considered in this debate, I have run my car on vegetable oil ,which has already been used for cooking, for the last 4 years.
There are many other ways in which organic waste could be converted into fuels.

It seems to me that biofuels have to form part of the solution until alternatives are found. If alternatives were found tomorrow the present fleet of vehicles would take some time to reach the end of there useful lives.

Hold on a minute Jeremy, why should the Government bail out banks with "good" money when these bankers have got us into this mess?

More so they then want the public to make up for their mistakes by not giving us any benefit in the cut of interest rates, continue to pay themselves huge bonuses even when they fail.

They write off their mistakes to the tune of ÂŁbillions yet "cream" the savers or those who are in debt, mainly because of their past activities by making us to get into debt at now exhorbitant interest rates.

As to the global problems of food costs and bio fuel, nothing is mentioned about the OPEC countries ripping us off when they could easily turn up their production so we don't rely on food products to supplement fuel.

As to Brown being the cause of all our ills, grow up! The probelem the now sensible electorate take is that they may rightly be lashing out at this Government, but left in a quiet and darkened room do they honestly see any solution from the Tories?

Political opputunists who will be rumbled when it comes to election time.

I'm an engineer at the center for renewable energy (CREST) at Loughborough University. Sustainability is the key first of all, and biofuels are ineffective (that’s educated personal opinion, because biofuels require alot of space and resources that are limited already) but the verdict is out. Hydrogen based transport system will not have that same constraints. The technology for hydrogen storage is the stumbling block so far.

The question that is not raised, (which I’d love newsnight to look into) and which I consider to be the vital question is why are we not using the feed-in tariff mechanism, (like most European countries) but instead are using ROC system. It's a boring argument, but the point is that here in Britain we don't empower the people. Therefore there isn’t a change in consumer behavior or awareness. The government really really doesn't seem to take climate change serious, (looking at the results not the words). We are worst big Europe country as far as renewable energy is concerned. Look at what Germany, or Spain or Italy or Denmark or GREECE EVEN have achieved in last decade. We on the same level, currently, as Hungary and Poland, and only Malta and Luxembourg are worse. We get 2% of our electricity for renewable sources. It’s simply unacceptable.

Source: Key World Energy Statistics 2007- International Energy Agency (IEA)

why waffle on about bio-fuel when water power exists!!! you guys didn't even acknowledge it, I'm ashamed, please feel free to go to you tube & do a search for "water powered car" there are clips of both usa & japanese models of car, also the american clips include this tech as a cutter that burns hotter than the surface of the sun yet cool to the touch!!! surely your station should be a news for the people that stand to protect & inform the people not mock them!!! I'm very, very disappointed!!!

Speech in Brussels on Climate Change by Graham Booth (April 10th, 2008.)

The EU is proud of its commitment to the IPCC's recommendations on how to combat "Global Warming" by persuading its member states to inject massive funding into "carbon emission control" projects.

But have you backed the wrong horse?

Last month many eminent scientists and climatologists from around the world met in New York and, after two days of serious discussions issued the "Manhattan Declaration" which states categorically:

"That there is no convincing evidence that CO2 emissions from modern industrial activity has in the past, is now, or will in the future cause catastrophic climate change";

"That adaptation as needed is massively more cost-effective than any attempted mitigation".

And they recommend:

"That world leaders reject the views expressed by the United Nations IPCC as well as popular, but misguided works such as "An Inconvenient Truth";

And "That all taxes, regulations and other interventions intended to reduce emissions of CO2 be abandoned forthwith."

Finally, Lord Lawson, who was a member of the House of Lords select committee on Climate Change says this:

"The average temperature in Helsinki is less than 5°C. In Singapore it is in excess of 27°C - a difference of 22°C. If humans can successfully cope with that, it is not immediately apparent why they should not be able to adapt to a change of some 3°C, when they are given 100 years in which to do so."

I recommend that you take the advice given in the Manhattan Declaration.

The Newsnight report of Mon 18th April on biofuels lacked properly sourced references on the subject. As a result, the report was polemical and misleading at best.

What kind of source is Frank Field ? A whinger about the NHS ? Try our national academy literature on the subject - the Royal Society published a report in January 08 recommending certain sources of biofuel. Try the UN's IPCC report on climate change of late last year. Both are available in full on the internet for lazy hacks.

The scientific community agree that intensively growing crops for any purpose (food or biofuels) is not sustainable. It is also agreed that replacing rainforests with biofuel crops will increase climate change rates not reduce them. No debate.

Fossil fuel powers the transport of fertilizer, water, seed and crop. Fossil fuel effectively subsidises food production and also causes global warming. So, as fossil fuels run out, societies reliant on it face the eventual reality of climate change and acute starvation.

Food price rises are inevitable, biofuels or no biofuels, as current fossil fuel costs fail to subsidise the true cost of growing food. This price rise is happening now in the UK as well as in developing countries but is not entirely due to "cheap" biofuel alternatives derived from plants.

If sourced correctly, biofuels can help slow climate change but will merely delay an inevitable decline.

What should cause us to stop and look at the ±«Óătv's standards is not primarily that they now often make spelling mistakes (another recent howler was the use of "Columbia" throughout a Panorama on Colombia). It is that those spelling mistakes are an indicator of a general lack of knowledge, depth, understanding and effort in their reporting. And a perspective which cannot be bothered even to get a country's name right and so uses the nearest US version instead. Absolutely sums up the attitude.

I have seen two examples of this recently from Latin America - the programme on Hugo Chavez and the "Columbian" Panorama, both of which were horribly superficial and grossly coloured by the current US govt world view. The Panorama actually had a superannuated pop singer wandering around "Columbia" suggesting that "Columbians" should be growing guess what, biofuels,

The biofuel disaster has been growing across Latin American countries for several years and the ±«Óătv has steadfastly refused to cover it. When and where have they even touched on the brutal treatment of small and medium sized farmers in Paraguay, Uruguay, Argentina and Brazil? The huge numbers of these people forced off the land and into destitution in the cities? The terrible damage inflicted by mass use of pesticides and the role of Monsanto? If you want to know anything about this you have to turn to material in French or German - ie Marie Monique Robin's "Le Monde Selon Monsanto" - much of which is in English, the language of the perpetrators - available from Arte - or the German/Paraguayan short film which can be viewed via the Biofuelwatch website. From English-speaking media, there is only silence.

I remember that in the late 80's, my brother who is a very large arable farmer in Essex, built many enormous grain storage silos on his land. These are temperature controlled and were exempt from planning permission. He bought grain from any one who would sell to him at a lowish price. His intention was to store wheat for years until there was a shortage. I can only think that he is a business man just speculating on the market with his commodity.

For our own sake let's stop putting so much emphasis on global warming when it's the ever increasing population levels that are the fundemental problem.

Even without global warming we are still in very serious trouble because of it. Global warming, however caused, is no more than a factor making the effects of this problem worse.

If we all want to have a good standard of living there has to be less of us, it's that simple.

While our leaders lack the courage and vision to tackle the population issue our children and grandchildren will be lucky to survive, never mind prosper.

Fat chance though, they do not seem to care much about the future of even their own offspring.

Why didn't George Osborne answer Jeremy's question? Jeremy gave up in the end but is this what we are going to get if Cameron got in? The skulking figure in the background, hovering behind Lamont on that infamous day in 1992 was Cameron, it was him, I saw him, and now he is trying to distance himself from that debacle but he cannot. Labour will exploit his association (if they have any sense left...which I doubt)and make him come out of the closet, financially, I mean. Paxman could have nailed Osborne on this one but let it pass. A good interview in the art of not replying.

Whenever any species has an abundance of food and no natural predators, its population expands until it devastates its habitat, food becomes scarce, and much of the population lives in a state of permanent semi-starvation. I see no reason why the human experience should be wildly different to that of elk in Yellowstone National Park, or elephants in India. Maybe we should just accept that this is the way nature works, that the human population is unsustainably high, and short of culling (as they do with the elk in Yellowstone), there's very little we can do about it.

For our own sake let's stop putting so much emphasis on global warming when it's the ever increasing population levels that are the fundamental problem.

Even without global warming we are still in very serious trouble because of it. Global warming, if only partly caused by our current numbers and excesses, is of course a factor compounding the population problem further.

If we all want to have a good standard of living there has to be less of us, it's that simple.

While our leaders lack the courage and vision to tackle the population issue our children and grandchildren will be lucky to survive, never mind prosper.

Fat chance though, they do not seem to care much about the future of even their own offspring.

The ±«Óătv has an obligation to be impartial and honest, so why did JP:-

Talk about CO2 as a pollutant? - it is nothing of the kind. It is a naturally occuring gas essential to life.

Accept without question man made climate change alarmism? Recent satellite measurements show a plateauing of temperatures since 1998 - why isn't this ever mentioned?

Forget to mention that the mad rush to bio fuels is not the governemnt's decision but the result of an EU directive? At least the UN representative did acknowledge this in the interview.

Come on, you should and can do better!

Regarding food problems. The meat eating versus vegetarian comparison is not always relevant. Many animals are kept on land that is unsuitable for any other crop. Would the Masai, the huge Australian farms in the outback, millions of poor farmers in developing countries with a few animals grazing on scrubland etc etc, be able to plant arable crops on the land with their animals?
The UK need to be able to produce as much food as possible itself. I know a farmer in Devon who has got no increase in the price for his sheep for 10 years. 600 sheep at ÂŁ30 each only gives him a gross income for his farm business of ÂŁ18,000! Even before feed and fertiliser prices shot up this year he needed government income support to survive. The situation is crazy. Supermarkets are strangling British farm production. The chain between the farmer and the supermarket shelf is making huge profits at the expense of the farmers and consumers. The farmers unions and government are giving no support. The government is in fact encouraging farmers to change to other means of income.

Steve (blog19) you are correct. All Cameron and his mouthpieces can do is have cheap belly laughs at Brown's expense and tell us all what he WOULD have done, of course with hindsight. The 7 years of plenty followed by 7 years of famine is a familiar line to trot out. I didn't hear him trot out these mantras before the American and Northern Rock crisis. Soon he will be telling us that he had second sight and foresaw all this coming.

As I wrote earlier, party politics apart, the public are fed up with the political point scoring and want action on all that is happening, whether it be food prices/shortage or the economic mess, which I repeat lies at the feet of the Banks and City of London, plus other"get-rich-quick" (and run) entrepreneurs.

I have yet to hear of the Tory plan to get us out of this mess. We still await to see what lead Brown takes or is he about to disappear again?

Steve (blog19) you are correct. All Cameron and his mouthpieces can do is have cheap belly laughs at Brown's expense and tell us all what he WOULD have done, of course with hindsight. The 7 years of plenty followed by 7 years of famine is a familiar line to trot out. I didn't hear him trot out these mantras before the American and Northern Rock crisis. Soon he will be telling us that he had second sight and foresaw all this coming.

As I wrote earlier, party politics apart, the public are fed up with the political point scoring and want action on all that is happening, whether it be food prices/shortage or the economic mess, which I repeat lies at the feet of the Banks and City of London, plus other"get-rich-quick" (and run) entrepreneurs.

I have yet to hear of the Tory plan to get us out of this mess. We still await to see what lead Brown takes or is he about to disappear again?

Are Bio crops really the root cause for rising food prices.

Why not pay famers in Latin America who grow cocaine, money to grow bio crops, in the same manner that China are offering to rebuild infrastructure in The Congo for the natural resources.

The farmers will be better off and it will decrease the amount of crack on the streets.

We have a Mayor in London who is willing to take money from Venuzuela so that people can travel on the buses in London for free.

Are Bio crops really the root cause for rising food prices.

Why not pay famers in Latin America who grow cocaine, money to grow bio crops, in the same manner that China are offering to rebuild infrastructure in The Congo for the natural resources.

The farmers will be better off and it will decrease the amount of crack on the streets.

We have a Mayor in London who is willing to take money from Venuzuela so that people can travel on the buses in London for free.

ANTHONY BROWN:
has 100% of the vegetable oil in your car really already been used for cooking?

Really? 100% of it already used in the kitchen b4 entering your car?

I know a lot of people who use vegetable oil, rapeseed oil, and darn biofuels. (I prefer the fuel in my leg muscles on my bike.) But not a soul who has cooked with it all b4.

Do you deep fat fry a lot? Enjoy tempura?

Another guilt trip on the way. 'How GUILTY UK families are, for wasting food' So please donate to the same agencies who will then send (after they take their cut) supposed billions into the bottomless pit, with the same result year after year.
To solve the issue of overpopulation, all western countries send supposed billions of dollars to overpopulated, underdeveloped countries, and at the smae time, bring in a net of millions of people from the overpopulated countries. Net result?
Continuing overpopulation in the very same countries.
To summarize with questions:
'Where does the 'charitable donation' money really go to help overpopulated countries deal with their overpopulation issues'?
'Why do western countries continue to aid world overpopulation, by bringing in more immigrants, when the net result appears to be continued overpopulation in the same countries'?

The world is desperate for research and education in all food matters, yet we allow our Universities (such as Imperial College and Plymouth) to close down their agriculture faculties simply because of a temporary dip in young people coming on to their courses, an dthe hope of quick financial gains. In Devon, one of the world's leading centres of agricultural education and research is under threat of being sold for housing, whilst there are alternative substantial bids on offer based on creating a University for sustainability and sustainable food production. Surely our leaders should be able to specify what is important to this country and the world and encourage education and research rather than housing development of green-field research farms.

As was eventually said, landfill tax was supposed and MUST be used to build the plants that are a sustainable alternative to landfill. To discuss this as a problem looking for a solution for more than 10 seconds is a waste of broadcasting time.

Why are we not looking at home-based solutions for recycling ie mini incinerators, aero digestion units etc that will generate energy for every household and at the very least will be a virtuous circle...surely common sense!!

on the more strategic level of food... planning and control of supply is the answer is clear...we need to plan on a global scale and that flies in the face of the free market principles...throw into the pot climate change and it's clear that global, state or region based planning is completely inevitable if we are to survive as a species and not descend into ever more visious conflicts over ever diminishing resources...it's so clear...we need to start thinking a little bit more utopian!!

As a biochemistry student at University College London I met Dr Margaret Kerly who riding round on her bicycle collected single-handed much of the information upon which the rationing system in WW2 was based. By today's standards it would be far too rigorous although with a little aid from the black market we youngsters all developed into slim, fit and healthy adults.
I think that limited food rationing, particularly on the so-called convenience foods and sweets would solve at the stroke the waste problem and the obesity problem and reduce the CO2 production in the bargain. Petrol rationing would work on the guzzlers and persuade us to use public transport and other fuel economic ways of getting around.

As was eventually said, landfill tax was supposed and MUST be used to build the plants that are a sustainable alternative to landfill. To discuss this as a problem looking for a solution for more than 10 seconds is a waste of broadcasting time.

I wathced tonights interview on Newsnight with great interest.

Regarding the report Agriculture the need for change.

Why is it not available anywhere for download?

I have tried ±«Óătv, IAASTD, UN, and several broadsheet Webistes all with out success.

Is it being sold to cover it's costs or is it to be made availabe to the public?

I was on a Farmwalk lastnight(14/4/08)in Suffolk where The Farmer was recieving ÂŁ167,000 from D.E.F.R.A. NOT TO GROW FOOD So much for Pro. Watsons claim that the C.A.P.is being reformed!
Foodwaste should be processed into Animalfeed.Previuos Generations called it SWILL. Petfood was unheard of in My Cildhood Days.

Biofuels are not the magic bullit to sustainability. Energy needs to be obtained from renewable sources, and this includes provision of large industrial scale offshore Wind Turbines, as well as other technologies and building designs to make better use of thermal solar energy, and geothermal energy. The impacts of using such renewable sources of energy do not reduce the availability of energy for something as important as food production. If biofuels need to be used, a new generation of non-food crop based fuels need to be used, from grass based biomass production. Something as important as energy supply deserves the attention of a Commission of experts. Not a bunch of reporting hippies jumping on a ship with a hole in the keel. And history has proved that energy security is fundamental to a healthy economy and harmonious society, with food to eat, and power to use. The impacts the Coal mining unions had on the UK are too great to ignore and too important to politically bury. It's time some experts sorted this problem out.

ANTHONY BROWN:
has 100% of the vegetable oil in your car really already been used for cooking?

Really? 100% of it already used in the kitchen b4 entering your car?

I know a lot of people who use vegetable oil, rapeseed oil, and darn biofuels. (I prefer the fuel in my leg muscles on my bike.) But not a soul who has cooked with it all b4.

Do you deep fat fry a lot? Enjoy tempura?

Just to add a comment as to how the current global economic crisis affects sustainability. Surely the so called credit crunch shows the whole notion of free market economics was and is fundamentally wrong. The one country that is economically successful at the moment is China, the ultimate centralised stste run economy. The fact that the country is so polluted that athletes at the Olympics will be damaged by competing is another matter.

Great Britain had the same problems during the Industrial Revolution and we have vast tracts of polluted land in this country dating back to Victorian times. Sustainability only seems to matter when we realise that economic resources have not been properly regulated by free market economics; where the main aim is profit for shareholders, involving free market plundering of resources, not long term economic sustainability and strategic planning around resources, and food supply.

Just to add a comment as to how the current global economic crisis affects sustainability. Surely the so called credit crunch shows the whole notion of free market economics was and is fundamentally wrong. The one country that is economically successful at the moment is China, the ultimate centralised stste run economy. The fact that the country is so polluted that athletes at the Olympics will be damaged by competing is another matter.

Great Britain had the same problems during the Industrial Revolution and we have vast tracts of polluted land in this country dating back to Victorian times. Sustainability only seems to matter when we realise that economic resources have not been properly regulated by free market economics; where the main aim is profit for shareholders, involving free market plundering of resources, not long term economic sustainability and strategic planning around resources, and food supply.

Just to add a comment as to how the current global economic crisis affects sustainability. Surely the so called credit crunch shows the whole notion of free market economics was and is fundamentally wrong. The one country that is economically successful at the moment is China, the ultimate centralised stste run economy. The fact that the country is so polluted that athletes at the Olympics will be damaged by competing is another matter.

Great Britain had the same problems during the Industrial Revolution and we have vast tracts of polluted land in this country dating back to Victorian times. Sustainability only seems to matter when we realise that economic resources have not been properly regulated by free market economics; where the main aim is profit for shareholders, involving free market plundering of resources, not long term economic sustainability and strategic planning around resources, and food supply.

On the subject of food waste and other organic waste, Anaerobic Digestion plants are URGENTLY required. ÂŁ10 million now pledged by government for this purpose is absolutely laughable if it were not so tragic. The Holsworthy Biogas Plant cost ÂŁ8 million and it services [or serviced] around 30 farms around the township in Devon. Biogas energy is good energy and the process also yields good free fertiliser.

Dump incinerators, nuclear power stations, wars in Iraq and Afghanistan [both energy related IMHO] and a whole host of other useless expenditure and invest heavily in decentralised Anaerobic Digestion plants throughout the UK.

I've been banging on about this technology for many years now and it feels strange to see the issue become live and in the mainstream.

This technology alone will not save our position on the planet but it is a vital part of the overall survival/sustainability strategy.

Well done Newsnight, you have understood the essence of the technology.

On the subject of food waste and other organic waste, Anaerobic Digestion plants are URGENTLY required. ÂŁ10 million now pledged by government for this purpose is absolutely laughable if it were not so tragic. The Holsworthy Biogas Plant cost ÂŁ8 million and it services [or serviced] around 30 farms around the township in Devon. Biogas energy is good energy and the process also yields good free fertiliser.

Dump incinerators, nuclear power stations, wars in Iraq and Afghanistan [both energy related IMHO] and a whole host of other useless expenditure and invest heavily in decentralised Anaerobic Digestion plants throughout the UK.

I've been banging on about this technology for many years now and it feels strange to see the issue become live and in the mainstream.

This technology alone will not save our position on the planet but it is a vital part of the overall survival/sustainability strategy.

Well done Newsnight, you have understood the essence of the technology and told the people. Let's hope there is still time.

Some conributions are shown two or three times here. I wrote and not even an acknowledgement

Jim Fleming, Caddington, Beds

I warned you all 200 years ago - the population would soon outstrip the ability of the earth to sustain it. I might have got the absolute timing wrong, as the use of fossil fuels and unsustainable farming methods delayed the inevitable, but the planet is now feeling the consequences.

The only solution is to reduce world population to a sustainable level, commensurate with a comfortable standard of living for all.