Green Fuel launches ethanol-blended petrol
Return of the blend ... Some of Green Fuels tankers
09/11/2011 00:00:00
by Gilbert Nyambabvu
GREEN Fuel -- a US$600 million bio-energy development in the eastern Chisumbanje district -- has launched ethanol-blended with petrol on the local market in a development expected to cut fuel costs for motorists and help reduce the country’s fuel import bill.
The fuel was available at selected pump stations in Harare beginning Monday, selling at US$1.36 per litre, marginally cheaper than unblended petrol, which is currently retailing at around US$1.44 per litre. The government has since approved a blend ratio of 10 percent locally-produced ethanol and 90 percent petroleum, a low-level blend called E-10 in the industry.
“The response has been overwhelming. We are inundated with calls to widen distribution from just Harare to other provinces and we ironing out logistics in this direction to register a national presence,” company spokesperson Lilian Muungani told New Zimbabwe.com on Tuesday.
Green Fuel – a joint venture between private local investors and the state-owned ARDA – plans to build six processing plants at Chisumbanje, each with a capacity of up to 300 000 litres per day, enough to meet the country’s present daily demand of about 2 million litres of petrol.
The project is modelled on the experiences of Brazil – the world’s leading producer of sugarcane-based ethanol -- where more than half the cars on the country's roads already have flex-fuel engines, meaning they can run on pure ethanol or ethanol mixed with petrol, and around 80 percent of new cars sold are of this type.
But blend is not new to the country. Zimbabwe first developed its ethanol industry in the low-veld when Ian Smith’s settler-colonial regime tried to mitigate the impact of international sanctions but the project was hit by the lack of investment as petroleum prices plummeted in the 1980s.
However the country, along with most of the world, has been looking to invest in renewable energy sources, alarmed at the current oil price hikes and security concerns in the main source markets.
Still, blended petrol is not without its critics and Brazil was this year forced to consider reducing its mandatory blending ratio as ethanol prices spiked 27 percent owing to cane shortages blamed on poor harvests and the lack investment in capacity expansion.
Again motorists are concerned about potential damage to their vehicles. Muungani though insists that Green Fuel's product is safe, adding ethanol actually helps clean engines over time.
“Green Fuel is producing new generation anhydrous ethanol (with a water content of less than 0.04%) using the latest technology from Brazil. This type of ethanol is dry; it contains no water and blends easily with petroleum,” she said in a statement.
“New generation anhydrous ethanol (also) ensures cooler engine performance while taking out any residual water from tanks.”
The company says it will also provide support services to help motorists keen to convert their vehicles so they can run on up to 100 percent ethanol.
Muungani said Green Fuel will produce enough ethanol to meet local demand as well as exports into the region and other international markets.
Already the company has invested up to US$300 million in putting up the processing plant at Chisumbanje and about 7,000 hectares under sugarcane, in the process creating some 4,500 new jobs and helping transform a once impoverished rural settlement into a vast and growing agro-industrial centre.
Labels: BIOFUELS, HARARE
Read more...
Zim can ‘grow’ its own fuel
By Garikai Chengu
ZIMBABWE’S agrarian revolution is proving to be a resounding success on several fronts, not least the extent to which it is promoting economic independence. In order to achieve energy independence Zimbabwe must embark on yet another agrarian revolution, this time fuelled by ethanol.
Ethanol is a clean-burning motor fuel that is produced from renewable sources such as sugar cane. Ethanol can be blended with petrol or diesel, effectively allowing Zimbabwe to “grow” some of its own fuel.
Currently, Zimbabwe does not blend ethanol in its fuel nor does the nation have legislation that regulates and promotes the investment, production, marketing, and use of ethanol.
However, such legislation would unlock several enormous benefits of ethanol use for the nation, namely: energy independence, rural development and job creation and finally combating climate change.
The importance of Zimbabwe weaning itself off dependence on foreign oil is highlighted by, firstly, the fact that Zimbabwe is a non-oil producing country with comparatively high costs of importing oil due to its landlocked nature.
Secondly, the foreseeable persistent increase in prevailing international oil prices means that the nation will have to spend more of its scarce foreign exchange resources to obtain the same amount of fuel, putting pressure on the country’s balance of payments position.
By ensuring that ethanol constitutes up to 25 percent of transport fuel, Zimbabwe can reduce its dependence on foreign oil and lower exposure to the price volatility of the international oil market.
The production and use of ethanol would benefit the economy on all levels — local, provincial and national. From the metropolitan areas where drivers would fill up with a domestically produced fuel, to the local communities where the crops are grown and processed, Zimbabwean-made ethanol shall help propel the economy.
A prime example of how ethanol production can benefit local communities, by promoting rural development and creating employment, is the ongoing construction of the biggest ethanol plant in Africa in Chipinge.
By March 2011, the billion dollar ethanol project will produce 100 million litres of ethanol per annum, which is about 20 percent of the country’s total fuel requirements.
Ethanol holds the promise of contributing to rural development by creating jobs in feedstock production, biofuel manufacture and the transport and distribution of feedstock and products. In fact, the ethanol plant in Chipinge will employ over 7 000 people.
Ten thousand hectares has also been set aside for local farmers to be contracted to grow sugar-cane.
Quite aside from ethanol’s contribution to energy independence and rural development, Government should throw its weight behind ethanol as a means of combating climate change.
By signing the Kyoto Protocol, an international agreement connected to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, Zimbabwe has committed to reduce fossil fuel use, thereby reducing carbon emissions and helping to curb climate change and global warming.
In this respect, biofuels like ethanol have one enormous, overwhelming plus-point, which is that they are carbon-neutral.
When fossil fuels, oil, gas or coal are burned in cars or power stations, they add to the net amount of atmospheric carbon dioxide, the greenhouse gas, which is the main cause of global warming.
The carbon they release is new to the atmosphere, because it has been buried deep within the earth for millions of years. On the other hand, when biofuels like ethanol are burned, they are only releasing the carbon dioxide which was absorbed from the atmosphere by the crops used to produce them as they grew. Biofuels are therefore classed as a renewable energy source.
Despite the fact that ethanol is home-grown, clean and renewable, Government only approved a draft energy policy for the first time in 2008 since achieving independence in 1980. However, Government is still yet to formulate a comprehensive policy on ethanol.
Government must draft comprehensive legislation that regulates and promotes the investment, production, marketing and use of ethanol. The absence of firm mandates or incentives has slowed any meaningful development of the biofuels sector.
The legislation must create incentives around two main areas: the use of ethanol and its production.
Regarding ethanol use, the legislation should provide various levels of exemption from motor fuel excise taxes for blenders and a mandatory fuel blend of, say, 25 percent ethanol and 75 percent petrol for filling stations.
Concerning ethanol production, the legislation should create incentives designed to encourage development of production facilities including: income tax credits for small ethanol producers, direct financing or guaranteed loans for capital construction, and direct subsidies for production.
Government should have no difficulty creating such generous incentives for the ethanol industry because ethanol is just about the only renewable-energy initiative that will have broad political support.
Nationalists would love it because it offers the possibility that Zimbabwe may wean itself off dependence on foreign oil. Farmers would love it because it would provide a new source of subsidy.
The automotive industry would love it, because it reckons that switching to a green fuel will take the global warming heat off cars.
The national oil industry would love it because the use of ethanol as a fuel additive means it is business as usual, at least for the time being.
Politicians will certainly love it because by subsidising ethanol they can please all those constituencies.
Besides, in all likelihood taxpayers won’t seem to notice that they are footing the bill.
But what they will notice is a cheaper, clean-burning, renewable energy source that will see us switch from dwindling foreign oil wells to boundless fields of crops to satisfy our energy needs. — Talkzimbabwe.com
Garikai Chengu is a Researcher at Harvard University's Faculty of Arts and Sciences. He can be contacted at chengu@fas.harvard.edu. The views expressed herein are solely those of Garikai Chengu.
Labels: BIOFUELS, ETHANOL
Read more...
Ethanol key to energy independence
By: Garikai Chengu
Posted: Thursday, October 28, 2010 1:39 am
ZIMBABWE'S Agrarian Revolution is proving to be a resounding success on several fronts, not least the extent to which it is promoting economic independence. In order to achieve energy independence Zimbabwe must embark on yet another agrarian revolution, this time fuelled by ethanol.
Ethanol is a clean-burning motor fuel that is produced from renewable sources such as sugar cane. Ethanol can be blended with petrol or diesel, effectively allowing Zimbabwe to ''grow" some of its own fuel.
Currently Zimbabwe does not blend ethanol in its fuel nor does the nation have legislation that regulates and promotes the investment, production, marketing, and use of ethanol.
However, such legislation would unlock several enormous benefits of ethanol use for the nation, namely: energy independence, rural development and job creation and finally combating climate change.
The importance of Zimbabwe weaning itself off dependence on foreign oil is highlighted by, firstly, the fact that Zimbabwe is a non-oil producing country with comparatively high costs of importing oil due to its land-locked nature.
Secondly, the foreseeable persistent increase in prevailing international oil prices means that the nation will have to spend more of its scarce foreign exchange resources to obtain the same amount of fuel, putting pressure on the country’s balance of payments position.
By ensuring that ethanol constitutes up to 25 percent of transport fuel, Zimbabwe can reduce its dependence on foreign oil and lower exposure to the price volatility of the international oil market.
The production and use of ethanol would benefit the economy on all levels - local, provincial, and national. From the metropolitan areas where drivers would fill up with a domestically produced fuel, to the local communities where the crops are grown and processed, Zimbabwean-made ethanol shall help propel the economy.
A prime example of how ethanol production can benefit local communities, by promoting rural development and creating employment, is the ongoing construction of the biggest ethanol plant in Africa in Chipinge. By March 2011, the billion dollar ethanol project will produce 100 million litres of ethanol per annum, which is about 20 percent of the country’s total fuel requirements.
Ethanol holds the promise of contributing to rural development by creating jobs in feedstock production, biofuel manufacture, and the transport and distribution of feedstock and products. In fact, the Ethanol plant in Chipinge will employ over 7,000 people. Ten thousand hectares has also been set aside for local farmers to be contracted to grow sugar-cane.
Quite aside from ethanol's contribution to energy independence and rural development, Government should put its weight behind ethanol as a means of combating climate change.
By signing the Kyoto Protocol, an international agreement connected to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, Zimbabwe has committed to reduce fossil fuel use, thereby reducing carbon emissions and helping to curb climate change and global warming.
In this respect, biofuels like ethanol have one enormous, overwhelming plus-point, which is that they are carbon-neutral. When fossil fuels, oil, gas or coal are burned in cars or power stations, they add to the net amount of atmospheric carbon dioxide, the greenhouse gas, which is the main cause of global warming. The carbon they release is new to the atmosphere, because it has been buried deep within the earth for millions of years.
On the other hand, when biofuels like ethanol are burned, they are only releasing the carbon dioxide which was absorbed from the atmosphere by the crops used to produce them as they grew. Biofuels are therefore classed as a renewable energy source.
Despite the fact that ethanol is home-grown, clean and renewable, Government only approved a draft energy policy for the first time in 2008 since achieving independence in 1980. However, Government is still yet to formulate a comprehensive policy on ethanol.
Government must draft comprehensive legislation that regulates and promotes the investment, production, marketing, and use of ethanol. The absence of firm mandates or incentives has slowed any meaningful development of the biofuels sector. The legislation must create incentives around two main areas: the use of ethanol and its production.
Regarding ethanol use, the legislation should provide various levels of exemption from motor fuel excise taxes for blenders and a mandatory fuel blend of say 25 percent ethanol and 75 percent gasoline for gas stations.
Concerning ethanol production, the legislation should create incentives designed to encourage development of production facilities including: income tax credits for small ethanol producers, direct financing or guaranteed loans for capital construction, and direct subsidies for production.
Government should have no difficulty creating such generous incentives for the ethanol industry because ethanol is just about the only renewable-energy initiative that will have broad political support.
Nationalists would love it because it offers the possibility that Zimbabwe may wean itself off dependence on foreign oil. Farmers would love it because it would provide a new source of subsidy.
The automotive industry would love it, because it reckons that switching to a green fuel will take the global-warming heat off cars. The national oil industry would love it because the use of ethanol as a fuel additive means it is business as usual, at least for the time being. Politicians will certainly love it because by subsidising ethanol they can please all those constituencies.
Besides, in all likelihood taxpayers won't seem to notice that they are footing the bill.
But what they will notice is a cheaper, clean-burning, renewable energy source that will see us switch from dwindling foreign oil wells to boundless fields of crops to satisfy our energy needs.
____________________________________
Garikai Chengu is a Researcher at Harvard University's Faculty of Arts and Sciences. He can be contacted at chengu@fas.harvard.edu. The views expressed herein are solely those of Garikai Chengu.
Labels: BIOFUELS, ETHANOL, GREEN REVOLUTION
Read more...
Bio-fuel body urges safer energy sources
By Fridah Zinyama
Wed 13 Jan. 2010, 04:00 CAT
THE Bio-fuels Association of Zambia (BAZ) has said there is need to come up with good alternatives for renewable energy sources which are environmentally safe in Zambia.
Different stakeholders in the country are currently using jatropha, soya beans, sorghum and sugar cane to produce ethanol and bio-diesel which the country intends to blend with petrol and diesel. According to BAZ director Tyson Chisambo, another good alternative for producing bio-fuels was wood as a raw material for making methanol, ethanol and diesel fuel.
“Currently Shell and Choren Industries have finished building a manufacturing plant for biomass-to-liquid (BTL),” he said. “Such innovations should be encouraged as they are environmentally friendly and Zambian companies should emulate such developments.”
Chisambo said wood fuel had proven to be beneficial because it was inexpensive, cheaper than domestic gas, oil and electricity.
“Wood fuel would prove to be beneficial if it came from sustainable woodlands,” he said. “It is also carbon neutral (90 per cent less than when burning fossils).”
Chisambo further explained that using alternatives like wood fuel would reduce dependence on fuel imports and price uncertainty.
“The bio-fuels industry in Zambia supports these renewable initiatives because the country will greatly benefit from these efforts and we encourage the planting of Jatropha trees in Zambia,” he said.
Chisambo said wood burning was not harmful to the environment as it releases less carbon dioxide than when it biodegrades.
“If bio-fuel from wood was mass produced, companies would have to be aware that they should cut down trees sustainably,” he said. “If not, a problem might arise because if all trees were felled, it would lead to deforestation and habitat destruction.”
Chisambo said as a result of that possibility, there should be a conservation plan in all companies that allowed cutting down some trees to produce biofuels.
“...But then, there should be re-forestation of the area and taking care of the animal and plant species that live there,” said Chisambo.
Labels: BIOFUELS
Read more...
LCC to embark on biogas project
By Masuzyo Chakwe
Mon 14 Dec. 2009, 04:00 CAT
LUSAKA City Council (LCC) in partnership with technology, economy and environment (TEM) foundation of Lund University in Sweden has embarked on an US$293,400 biogas project, which will be implemented in Kanyama compound over a two-year period.
LCC assistant public relations manager Mulunda Habeenzu said preliminary ground work had been done such as identification of land where the project which would run from July, 2009 to August, 2011 would be set up and an inception report had since been completed in readiness for funding.
Mulunda said the biogas would be produced through bio-digestion of the organic waste fractions to produce a gas, which would be used for energy production that is for cooking, electricity generation or lighting among others.
He said the over all objective of the project was to establish a sustainable and poverty oriented waste minimisation and energy recovery system thereby improving the living conditions of the population as a whole especially the poor.
Mulunda said the specific objective of the project was to build a demonstration biogas plant and to run it, to establish a competence centre and train personnel in setting up and running a biogas plant, to sensitise the community and to come up with a replicable model and information dissemination through the competence or knowledge centre for biogas production.
"The executive agency for the implementation of the project is the LCC through Waste Management Unit (WMU), with technical support coming from technology, economy and environment foundation and it will be funded by Tilvaxtverket of Sweden and UNICEF Zambia office," said Mulunda.
Labels: BIOFUELS, LCC, MULANDA HABEENZU
Read more...
Malawi government endorses use of ethanol-fuelled cars
By Nyasa Times
Published: November 24, 2009
Energy and Natural Resources Minister, Grain Malunga, has disclosed that government has endorsed the use of ethanol-fuelled cars. The Minister said the move is part of the ongoing drive to find alternative and cheap sources of fuel to replace imported fossil fuels.
“The issue is reducing the ratio of patrol to ethanol from 90 to 10 [percent] to; 80 to 20 [percent]. So the research has been done as successful which means that now instead of using 90 percent patrol we will be using 80 percent patrol and then 20 percent will be ethanol,” said Malunga on Capital Radio.
“What it means is that there will be a further 10 percent reduction in importation of fuel in exchange to ethanol which is produced locally,” the minister said, pointing out that the development will wean the country off its fossil fuel dependency and better harness Malawi’s ethanol industry.
The country successfully completed a project to test the practicability of using locally produced sugarcane ethanol instead of petrol or diesel to power vehicles. The experiment was under- taken in two phases by the Malawi government and privately owned Ethanol Company of Malawi (Ethco), with the first phase involving the testing of a modified Mitsubishi Pajero and the second a flexi-fuel vehicle that Ethco imported from Brazil.
“The tests showed that the performance of the ethanol-powered vehicle is good, just like that of a petrol-powered vehicle. The difference is that ethanol consumption for a similar distance is [slightly] more than the fuel consumption of a petrol vehicle. This is understandable, as petrol is more ambient than ethanol, [but] this should be compensated by the pricing structure,” said Daniel Liwimbi former Ethco boss now deputy minister of Energy .
Malawi produces cane ethanol at two plants: the Ethco-owned Dwangwa plant, in the central region, and another one at Nchalo, in the southern region, which is owned by local firm Press Cane. The two are adjacent to sugar cane plantations and sugar factories owned by multinational sugar group Illovo.
Each of the two plants has a design capacity of 16-million liters of ethanol but the two factories are producing below capacity because of the low availability of molasses, a by-product of sugar production.
Press Cane and Ethco produce 18-million liters of ethanol a year, which, Liwimbi says, is not enough to meet local demand, should Malawi start using ethanol to power vehicles.
Malawi launched the ethanol-driven vehicle research project following a Cabinet directive which came about as a result of unstable prices of fossil fuels on the world market.
Malunga said Malawi Energy Regulatory Authority (MERA) should ensure that benefits are going to consumers or social development by improving social economic status of the country. (Additional reporting by Marcel Chimwala, Creamer Media)
Labels: BIOFUELS, ETHANOL
Read more...
President blasts West’s subsidies
From Hebert Zharare in ROME, Italy
RICH countries’ agricultural subsidies and denial of market access to produce from developing countries were partly to blame for low crop production in developing nations, President Mugabe has said.
Addressing fellow Heads of State and Government at the Food and Agriculture Organisation Summit here yesterday, President Mugabe said other factors militating against global food security were climate change, inaccessibility to arable land, rising costs of farming inputs and general lack of money to finance farming operations.
Western subsidies, he said, were suffocating farmers in poor and developing countries.
"Add to this denial of market access to agricultural products from developing countries and that completes the host of factors which undermine crop production in our countries," said President Mugabe.
He told the summit that Zimbabwe’s situation was worsened by punitive policies of certain powerful countries that were against the equitable redistribution of land to correct colonial imbalances.
"We face very hostile interventions by these states which have imposed unilateral sanctions on us.
"This has had a negative impact on our farmers who, according to our neo-colonial enemies, must fail so as to damn the rain-fed agriculture; which FAO reports say will see the production of food going down by about 50 percent by 2050 due to climate change.
"To protect the country from the vagaries of the weather, Zimbabwe has an ongoing programme of dam construction across the country to harness water and develop reliable water sources.
"With adequate support, Zimbabwe has the potential to increase the land under irrigation from the present 153 000 to 453 000 hectares," he said.
President Mugabe said apart from water shortages, Zimbabwe had been affected by insufficient supplies of affordable farming inputs such as fertilizers, seeds and agro-chemicals.
He said the Government would continue supporting the agriculture sector through a cocktail of schemes including concessionary loans for working capital and for the procurement of machinery.
"To buttress these schemes, the Government has also introduced a Farm Mechanisation Programme targeting both the smallholder and commercial farming sectors.
"But we remain keenly aware that the mechanisation programme cannot be complete if it does not yield the capacity to enable us to export value-added products," he said.
The energy sector played an integral role in the agriculture sector, said the President, adding that the combination of the power deficit experienced by the Sadc region last year and rising oil prices had a serious negative impact on farming operations.
He said Zimbabwe had consequently embarked on a biofuel project to produce diesel and petrol from jatropha and sugarcane.
"To avoid the negative effect of using maize as biofuel feedstock, our project uses jatropha seed and sugarcane," he explained.
Turning to the ravaging effects of HIV and Aids, President Mugabe said despite declining prevalence rates in the productive 15-49 age group dropping to 13,7 percent, Zimbabwe was concerned that the figure was still too high.
In response to the impact of the pandemic on the agriculture sector, President Mugabe said the Government adopted the Zimbabwe Agricultural Sector Strategy on HIV and Aids to offset its negative consequences.
The President also paid tribute to Sadc and FAO for assisting Zimbabwe in mobilising farming inputs for the generality of the population.
These interventions, he noted, had resulted in an increase in cereal crop yields by over 75 percent this year.
He said Sadc’s agricultural inputs support initiative and the country’s homegrown agricultural policies were paying dividends.
"We are grateful for the support we have received from the Sadc region, which provided seed and fertilizers through the Sadc agriculture inputs support initiative.
"With this support from Sadc, the country experienced a dramatic 75 percent increase in maize production this year.
"For the 2009/2010 season, we have received support from various international co-operating partners who provided input packs through the smallholder emergency support programme, which is co-ordinated by the Food and Agriculture Organisation and is expected to reach over 600 000 households. Zimbabwe is grateful for this support," he said.
The summit, which ends today, drew leaders from mostly developing countries.
Western countries snubbed the meeting, a decision that has been described as indicative of their lack of appreciation of the global food insecurity problem that led to food riots in 22 countries last year.
Labels: BIOFUELS, DONORS, IRRIGATION, JATROPHA, MECHANISATION
Read more...
Noczim contracts 300 small-scale jatropha growers
Business Reporter
THE National Oil Company of Zimbabwe has contracted about 300 small-scale jatropha growers and provided them with over 30 million seedlings to grow
1000ha of the crop during the past two seasons.
Spokesperson of the company Ms Zvikomborero Sibanda said communal and model A1 farmers had taken over 99 percent of all produced seedlings during the past two seasons, which most of them grew as hedges.
"Although management of such hedges is generally poor, of the 23 million seedlings distributed for planting last season, 99 percent was taken by small-scale communal and resettled farmers.
"Large-scale commercial and A2 farmers have taken just under one percent of all produced jatropha seedlings during the past two seasons," Ms Sibanda said.
She said the company had registered over 2 000 farmers who had taken between 100 and 5 000 jatropha plants for growing.
"We have also registered some 500 communities that have taken between 15 000 and 400 000 plants for local level distribution and planting.
"The above three categories have taken delivery of about 30 million jatropha plants during the past two years (largely unverified) even though a separate sampling based verification has been under way during the last half of the year to establish levels of planting and survival under small-scale production."
Ms Sibanda said Noczim had decentralised offices to all provinces to work with key stakeholders in promoting jatropha as one of the initiatives to promote production of the oil seed.
The company had also set up mobile jatropha seed and cuttings purchase teams in areas with significant amounts of jatropha hedges countrywide. The seed and cuttings are used to set up jatropha nurseries that then provide planting materials during the rain season.
"We have contracted a network of jatropha nurseries in every province to provide ready sources of planting materials to all interested farmers. Any farmer who wants to grow jatropha in Zimbabwe can access bare root jatropha planting materials from such nurseries at no cost," she said.
Planting is done between December and March. Early planted jatropha usually grows best.
Additionally, Noczim has also mobilised key institutions to assist in providing technical support and planting materials to interested farmers.
Mobile teams are available in every province and these deliver materials for planting to interested farmers during the planting season.
To add onto this, Noczim has set up a jatropha tillage support team to provide land preparation support to large-scale jatropha farmers.
"Mobile jatropha tillage teams are busy at the moment preparing land for planting during the forthcoming 2009/10 planting season.
"Any farmer with over five hectares (although preference is often given to larger hectarages) can be assisted."
Ms Sibanda said her company was setting up working relationships with national institutions involved in jatropha research on propagation and agronomy to improve on growth and yield performance.
She explained that there had been a huge response from farmers over the past two seasons even though that keen interest had been dampened by the prohibitive costs of land preparation and labour for jatropha planting.
Ms Sibanda said the delicate and stringent management requirements of the crop had slightly reduced adoption of jatropha by some farmers although Noczim had provided tillage support on most farms where jatropha was adopted.
"Noczim has since improved on this by setting up a dedicated jatropha tillage team of 12 tractors to prepare up to 10 000ha of land per annum when fully operational.
"This will go a long way in the establishment of large scale plantations. About a thousand hectares have already been prepared for planting during the forthcoming planting season," said Ms Sibanda.
She however lamented the fact that jatropha hedges and plantations were generally poorly managed.
This was especially true for the last planting season when farmers had serious labour constraints at a time when the economy was under hyperinflation leading to the dollarisation.
"Given that jatropha growing is generally a long term enterprise, with optimal returns realised after five years, farmers prioritise resource allocation to short term yielding crops.
"The jatropha programme will have better impact if a proper plantation establishment package is made available to farmers focusing on support for quality planting materials, land preparation and labour for planting and management of the jatropha plantations."
Fertilizer, agro-chemical support and other incentives in the form of a good support price for jatropha during these plantation establishment years are also vital for jatropha growers, said Ms Sibanda.
Labels: BIOFUELS, JATROPHA, NOCZIM, PARASTATALS
Read more...
MS Zambia Newsletter August 2009
Land Grabs: A direct infringement on Land Rights
Countries with surplus money are pushing to find land, water and good climate. And recently more global corporations are looking at Africa in a different way, not seeing the hungry, but rather, noticing the extensive land mass.
By Michael Muleba, Executive Director, Farmer Organisation Support Programme
01. September 2009
The international hunger for farmland is causing unrest around the world as farming has become a serious business with an estimated 800 million people going hungry by the end of 2008 (Robyn Joubert, 2009). Countries with surplus money are pushing to find land, water and good climate. The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) estimates that about 3 billion hectares of additional land will be required to meet projected food demand in 2050 – and nearly all of this will be in developing countries.
Africa, with only 14% or 184 million hectares of its arable land under cultivation, is a prime target for such land grabs. Angola, Mozambique, Tanzania, Madagascar, Sudan, Senegal and Zambia are all good examples of where foreigners have invested in these agricultural resources. Land grabbing is happening through various ways including: land purchases, long term leases, and large investments in existing farms as well as barter-type principles. Major drivers of current land grabs are the increasing global food insecurity, petrol dollars, agro-fuels and the current credit crunch. The people suffering from this land grab phenomena are the poor – therefore we need to protect them through communal land titles while pushing for sound land policies.
The hunger for foreign land
To feed the world we have to double global food output in 21 years, says Dr John Purchase, CEO of Agricultural Business Chamber – South Africa. Expanding food production at the same rate as demand will be difficult as global farm land is disappearing rapidly, making this target harder to achieve. About 50 million acres (over 20 million hectares) vanish each year to urbanization, population growth and economic and industrial development. In Iraq, 30% of farm land is expected to be lost through upriver damming in Turkey. Vietnam lost 1.2 million acres (485.623 ha) of farm land from 2001 to 2007 through developments including over 100 golf courses. In China and India many of the most fertile areas are being developed for roads and factories. “There is a new wave of investment in land by developed countries like the US and developing countries like China, as a result of the pressure to satiate the world’s energy and food requirements in the long term” says Dr Purchase.
Neocolonial land grabs
In October 2008, the global food security-focused NGO Gran issued a report citing over 100 examples of what are termed neocolonial land grabs. “Africa is the last region with potential for considerable horizontal expansion in terms of commercial agriculture”, says Dr Purchase. And Dr Mohammed Karaan, Dean of Faculty of Agri-sciences at Stellenboch University, points out that many countries have been pushed to invest in good natural resources, which are becoming increasingly scarce.
Dr Karaan says until now, the US has led foreign purchasing, although its forays were mostly into South America. “Japan is also active and to some extent, Taiwan. But China has probably taken the lead in terms of investing in foreign farm land because it has the most available cash. China is a giant in terms of consumption and it needs resources to feed itself.” The country has widespread interests in African continent as well as in Burma, Laos, Russia and Kazakhstan.
Jatropha tree
Petrol Dollars for land
Another investor that should not be ignored is the oil rich, water-poor Middle East, which has surplus cash and is looking to secure food supplies. Gulf Cooperation Council countries are expected to import 60% of their food by 2010, according to the FAO. Arab investors are increasingly attracted to Africa’s agriculture, construction and telecom sectors and are viewed by African states as a useful counterweight to China’s influence.
Sudan is already attracting its share of petrol dollars. United Arab Emirates has farms in several Sudanese provinces, growing wheat and maize. Oil producer Abu Dhabi announced plans in July 2008 to develop 70.000 acres (28.328 ha) of farm land to grow alfalfa for animal feed and possibly maize, beans and potatoes in Sudan.
Bio-fuels
The world is not only short of food, it’s also short of fuel. The World Bank development Report (2008) on agriculture states that over the last decades, the number of the poor in Africa doubled to 300 million, comprising more than 40 percent of the continent’s population. Yet the demand for agro-fuels seems to be insatiable, more global corporations are looking at Africa in a different way, not seeing the hungry, but rather, noticing the extensive land mass. Africa is an obvious target for agro-fuel developers with its large land mass and relatively cheap labor. Fifteen African countries – nicknamed the Green Opec – have a combined arable land base larger than India available for agro-fuel crop production.
This has led to an expansion of agro-fuel and non-food oil plantations in developing countries. “There’s no doubt the need for oil and energy is another key driver of foreign land buying” says Dr Purchase. Europe for example, is establishing jatropha plantations in Mozambique and Zambia. The Mozambique government favors jatropha and the country has seen a rash of bio-fuel investment – seeing European Company Bio-diesel Africa build two refineries in that country.
Japan and the US are also very active, working their agro-fuel interest into various aid, trade and investment agreements with the African continent. Brazil has cut deals for ethanol imports and technology transfer with several African Countries including Senegal, Nigeria, Mozambique and Angola. China has secured a long-term deal for Nigerian cassava for its domestic ethanol distilleries.
China recently requested 2 million hectares for jatropha cultivation in Zambia, the biggest lease of land in a country which faces a food shortage following flooding and droughts. UK-based D1 Oils has planted more than 156.000 ha of jatropha in countries across Africa including Swaziland and Zambia as well as India and Southeast Asia. Germany’s Flora EcoPower is investing 77 million US$ in Ethiopia. Also, Swedish ethanol producer Sekab group plans to produce 100 million liters of ethanol a year in Tanzania by 2012. Also about to jump on board is British-based energy firm Cams Group, which last year bought 45.000 ha in Tanzania to produce 240 million liters of ethanol a year from sorghum. British firm Sun Biofuels also plan to grow jatropha in Tanzania to supplement yields from its other plantations in Ethiopia and Mozambique.
The fine print
The terms of these land deals vary according to requirements. Some involve land purchases, others long term leases, while some require large investments in existing farms. Others are based on barter-type principles. For example, in May 2008, the Libyan government gave Ukraine an oil and gas contract in exchange for 247.000 ha of Ukrainian land to produce its own food. Some East African countries, like Ethiopia, lure investors by leasing their arable land at minimal cost. The hope is that the resultant job creation, access to capital, agricultural know-how and investment in farming infrastructure will be compensation enough. But it does not always work that way. There are numerous examples of investors using the country’s land and water resources and bringing in outsiders to supply fertilizer, seed, specialized labor and tractors.
A few years ago Libya snatched up an offer to acquire control of 100.000 ha in the office du Niger, Mali’s main rice producing area. As part of the deal, Libya agreed to improve local infrastructure including enlarging canal and improving a road. But when it came to awarding these contracts and to finding a supplier of rice seeds, local firms were snubbed in favor of Chinese and Libyan ones.
Land grabs by foreign countries has become a serious issue in Africa. In one of the most controversial deals, South Daewoo recently acquired a 99-year lease on 1.3 million hectares of land in Madagascar to grow palm oil and maize. The agreement represented half the islands arable land and caused widespread anger, fuelling revolts which led to the death of 135 people and the downfall of President Marc Ravalomanana.
See Chart detailing the amount of land coveted by agro-fuel investors in African States (word doc)
Populations protest, but governments are in charge
The Seychelles recently cancelled a large new hotel development by an international investor which was zoned for 20 ha of prime agricultural land. This followed strong objection from local residents worried about food security. In Pakistan, small scale farmers protested in January 2009 against the government’s plans to invite foreign investors to establish large scale farms, cultivated with heavy machinery. Investors would be allowed to repatriate the all crop. Pakistan already suffers from a food shortage and imports wheat every year, and farmers fear foreign investors taking a share of the country’s production would worsen food security.
In the face of credit crunch, activities by many governments will drive many deals – Angola state media recently reported that Beijing has granted the country a US$ 1 billion agricultural loan. In February, the Chinese president went on a four-nation tour to cement ties with African countries. This month (July 2009), President Barrack Obama was in Ghana, proposing ‘Farm Aid’ for Africa – what does this mean especially on land issues; will we see more land deals?
The question for Zambia is, how are we going to manage and protect our land? What should be the role of the civil society in protecting the poor who are/will be loosing land to foreign investors?
The way forward
The land grabbing has become very sophisticated and the poor are bound to suffer. While we continue lobbying government for policy change, we need to sensitize and assist the poor access and legally own land.
The advertising that agro-fuels will assist small scale farmers is only accurate if decisions about the use of land remain decentralized within the country. The farmers can then decide how to plant xx kilometers of Jatropha tree fencing to produce oil for lamps or soap or bio-diesel for their own vehicles. But this scenario is not the one that global corporations are setting, theirs is the usurpation of huge tracts of African land for overseas consumption, and if they ruin the ecosystem, they will move on.
We therefore need to build the capacity of small scale farmers and their organizations to be part of the new agribusiness dispensation through direct investments as well as in partnership with foreign investors. We need to empower the rural communities’ access and communally own land through ‘Community land titles’ to protect them in the future land concessions.
FOSUP’s interventions in partnership with Nyimba District Farmers Association is about to provide titles to over 150 poor farmers in Mitilizi Resettlement Scheme through ‘Communal Land Title Acquisition Approach’. So far, meetings and agreements have been reached between FOSUP, Ministry of Lands, Department of Resettlement and Ministry of Agriculture.
Labels: BIOFUELS, CHINA, NEOCOLONIALISM
Read more...
Zesco proposes increased use of alternative energy sources
Written by Mwila Chansa in Kitwe
Sunday, June 28, 2009 4:35:00 PM
ZESCO has proposed increased use of alternative energy sources to promote competitiveness so as to realise the diversification drive in the economy.
And Energy Regulation Board (ERB) Northern region manager Yohanne Mukabe urged energy consumers not to view messages of reducing consumption as an inconvenience.
Meanwhile, energy deputy minister Allan Mbewe noted that the whole world was now moving towards energy efficient technology to mitigate climate change.
During the official launch of the Energy Conservation Commemoration week at City Square in Kitwe on Friday, Zesco customer services director Teddie Mwale said the power utility recognised the need for other energy sector institutions to play their role.
"Therefore, Zesco encourages the use of alternative sources of energy like renewable energy such as solar, wind and biomass wherever possible. You will agree with me that this spirit of competitiveness will effectively promote the diversification drive in the economy," said Mwale.
He further said concerted efforts were required by all stakeholders to use electricity prudently in order to minimise the undesirable effects of load shedding.
And Mukabe said reducing energy consumption should not be seen as an inconvenience but as one way of reducing bills for customers.
He said the current challenges being faced in the energy sector such as increased demand against low generation capacity of electricity called for behavioural change in energy consumption.
He noted that people in Zambian consumed more electricity than they should.
Meanwhile, Mbewe said those that followed world politics were aware that energy efficiency was one of US President Barack Obama's priorities and that if the US could choose to be prudent in using energy, Zambia had no choice but to follow suit.
And Copperbelt University (CBU) public relations officer Grace Mikunga said the institution was determined to play its role in contributing to energy awareness to industry and commercial enterprises.
Mikunga noted that energy constituted a major component of factors that increased the cost of production whilst reducing profitability.
Labels: ALLAN MBEWE, BIOFUELS, ERB, YOHANNE MUKABE, ZESCO
Read more...
Prof Sinkala urges more information on biofuels
Written by Nchima Nchito Jr
Tuesday, June 16, 2009 7:40:37 AM
BIOFUELS Association of Zambia (BAZ) chairman Prof Thomson Sinkala has said there is a need for Zambians to be informed about the benefits of the biofuels industry.
Responding to a press query, Prof Sinkala stated that it was important that the public was aware of what was involved in the bio-fuel industry.
“Our approach as Biofuels Association of Zambia is that the public at large in Zambia must be informed about the biofuels industry. The need for involvement by Zambians and the opportunities available for them must be spelt out,” he stated.
“The information must also articulate the issues of food security, contribution of biofuels to household economy, environment, and general law and order in relation to biofuels industry. For the targeted biofuels, namely bioethanol (for petrol), biodiesel (for diesel), bio-oils/vegetable oils (for kerosene), charcoal and biogas, appropriate know-how and information on activities from production to marketing for the selected feed stocks will have to be imparted to those involved, in order to minimize failures which may derail the targets.”
Prof Sinkala further cited the lack of knowledge concerning the bio-fuel industry, even among technocrats, as one of their biggest challenges.
“Decision makers often do not have time to peruse through the so many issues that confront them to manage socio-economic activities. Furthermore, they are often the targets by agents of misinformation who knowingly or unknowingly derail development programmes,” stated Prof Sinkala.
“It is important therefore that decision makers are availed with information about biofuels so that all Zambians have equitable opportunity to participate in the development of the biofuels industry.”
Labels: BIOFUELS, BIOFUELS ASSOCIATION OF ZAMBIA, THOMSON SINKALA
Read more...
Investor to produce biodiesel in Luapula
December 25, 2008
An investor has expressed interest to venture into biodiesel production from palm oil in Luapula Province next year.
BIOMAX Company Limited is willing to invest over US $50 million (50 million United States Dollars) for the establishment of a biodiesel processing plant in Nchelenge district.
The company would set up a processing plant in the district for initial processing of crude palm oil after procurement of oil palm from local farmers.
Luapula Province Acting Permanent Secretary, Clement Siame, disclosed this to ZANIS in Mansa.
Mr Siame explanied that once processed at first stage at the plant in Nchelenge, the crude palm oil would be taken to Ndola for refining where it would be processed into biodiesel which would be distributed to a named oil marketing company.
He revealed that BIOMAX had set up a processing plant in Ndola at the total cost of US $30 (30 million United States Dollars) to refine the crude palm oil from Luapula Province into biodiesel.
He said another company, Gurock Ropes, has expressed interest in investing in the plantation of palm oil in Luapula Province.
The acting PS said Gurock Ropes had the capacity to refine edible oils such as cooking oil and other products that came from palm oil.
Mr. Siame said that once the two companies start operating they would create employment and strengthen the local palm oil farmers in the province.
Many farmers are engaged in palm oil farming on an out grower basis.
About three years ago, government initiated the palm oil farming project in Luapula Province after it procured thousands of palm oil seedlings from Costarica to support local farmers’ out grower schemes in Nchelenge, Mwense and Kawambwa districts.
This was from a realization that Luapula Province had suitable conditions for palm oil production and that the industry could become one of the major industries to contribute to the economic well-being of the country.
Labels: BIOFUELS, BIOMAX, CLEMENT SIAME
Read more...
Proceed with biofuel plans, BAZ urges govt business
Written by Nchima Nchito
Thursday, November 27, 2008 12:01:19 PM
BIOFUELS Association of Zambia (BAZ) chairman Professor Thomson Sinkala has urged the government to proceed with the biofuel production plans despite falling prices of oil on international markets.
In an interview, Prof Sinkala said this was the best time for Zambia to attract investments in biofuel production when oil prices had tumbled.
“If anything, development of biofuels should be treated as an urgent matter now because of the current reductions in oil prices,” Prof Sinkala said.
He cited countries like the United States that were now looking towards biofuel production as good examples for Zambia.
“The President-elect of the US recently announced how his government will use biofuels and education to create 2.5 million jobs by 2011. Now the US is one of the biggest consumers of oil and I feel we can learn from their decision to develop biofuels,” he said.
When asked whether the reduction of crude oil prices was not a positive development as it would mean reduced pump prices of fuel on the local market, Prof Sinkala said it was important to look at both sides of an issue.
“It’s good yes, those prices have gone down but we have to understand the issues at hand. Oil is a non-renewable resource, meaning it will run out one day and the only way to keep it in supply is by discovering new oil deposits,” he said.
“Oil explorations are expensive to carry out and according to what I have been made to understand, for an exploration to be financially feasible, oil has to cost in the range of US $100 a barrel.”
Prof Sinkala added that because of the current low prices of oil, there was a possibility that exploration projects would be put on hold till the prices of oil stabilised.
“With this happening, it may in turn lead to shortages, hence pushing the prices of oil back up again. All in all, what I’m saying is that there is no reason for us to relax in our quest to develop biofuels” said Prof Sinkala.
Labels: BIOFUELS, BIOFUELS ASSOCIATION OF ZAMBIA, FUEL, OIL, THOMSON SINKALA
Read more...
World food scarcity and the challenges of climate change and bio energy
Shobha Shukla writes this feature for The Zimbabwe Guardian as the world commemorates World Food Day on 16 October 2008
Wed, 15 Oct 2008 10:15:00 +0000
‘Rarely has the World Food Day assumed greater meaning than in present times, as rapidly rising food prices risk increasing the number of hungry in the world,’ according to the Food And Agriculture Organization (FAO).
FAO was founded in 1945 on the 16th of October - a day which is observed as World Food Day (WFD) in about 150 countries all over the world. The theme for this year’s WFD is ‘World Food Scarcity : The Challenges Of Climate Change And Bio Energy’ as there is a strong need to expand global awareness to reduce the effect of severe climate patterns on agriculture and the impact of bio fuels on food production.
Global warming and the bio fuel boom are threatening to push the number of hungry even higher in times to come. During 2007 alone, around 50 million more have been added to the rank of the world’s hungry due to rising prices, thus pushing the number of unfed to about 900 millions. The world seems to be further distancing itself from reaching the U.N. Millenium Development Goal of halving hunger and poverty by 2015. Poor harvests, high oil costs, bio fuels and a rising demand for basic staple crops, especially in fast growing Asian countries, have been cited as examples for the spiralling food prices which have sparked protests, even riots, prompting the U.N.Secretary General Ban Ki Moon to give a wake up call.
Global wheat prices have more than doubled during the past year due to poor weather conditions in some wheat producing areas (droughts in Australia and Europe); a shift by farmers to growing crops used in making bio fuels; and speculation by traders.
Though India is being touted as one of the world’s hottest economy, nearly 50% of the world’s hungry live in it. It is listed as a low income, food deficit country, with about 25% of its population subsisting on Rs.12 or less, a day and around 77% living on less than $1 a day ( according to the latest report of National Commission for Enterprises In The Unorganized Sector).
It does boast of having a burgeoning 350 million strong middle class with improved diets ( which was lamented by Ms.Rice and Mr.Bush to be one of the causes of the global food price crisis). Yet around 35% of its population is food insecure, consuming less than 80% of the daily minimum requirement and it has the dubious distinction of having the highest rate of malnutrition in children below three years of age in the world (about 46%).
Today, India faces an agricultural crisis and hunger, which are due to not only current high prices of basic staples, but skewed up government policies too. Her rapid economic growth and accompanying shortages have also fuelled prices. State support for agriculture and irrigation has been slashed, price support reduced and the public distribution system drastically curtailed.. While the GDP grew at the rate of 8.5% in 2006-2007, the growth in agricultural sector was a mere 2.6%.Also marginal land holdings have increased and total cultivated land decreased, especially as more and more agricultural land is being seized by domestic and international corporations in the form of ‘Special Economic Zones’ for industrialization (as happened in Nandigram and to some extent in Singur).
The results have been disastrous as many studies show that agricultural growth reduces poverty and hunger much more than urban and industrial development. A spate of farmer suicides ( about 150,000 during the last decade) is a rude reminder of our agrarian crisis and the grip of cash cropping on poor farmers, bolstered by seed and chemical agribusiness. India has belatedly sought to control prices by holding back essential commodities, curbing export of non-premium rice and waiving off loans of farmers. Obviously more needs to be done than mere cosmetic changes.
There is an urgent need to improve productivity of dry land farming (as 60% of India ’s agriculture is rain dependent) as well as a better implementation of the National Rural Employment Programme and the Public Distribution System.
The director general of FAO, Dr. Jacques Dious, has called upon governments to pay urgent attention to needs of agriculture and water management and also increased investment in agriculture. At the recent Rome Summit held in June 2008, he pointed out that in 2006 the world spent 1.2 trillion dollars on arms. He asked, ‘Against that backdrop how can we explain to people of good sense and good faith that it was not possible to find $ 30 billion a year to enable the hungry to enjoy the most fundamental human right to food and thus the right to life.’ Yet it has been estimated that there is enough food for all in the world, at least 2700 kilo calories per person, per day.
But it is the lack of purchasing power (more than food shortage due to population explosion and inclement weather conditions) which makes so many millions go to bed hungry every day. Hunger is linked to the denial of a living wage to the working poor. It is about denial of land to the landless. It is caused by socio economic policies that deny people the right to food. Resources are there to end hunger, but they are exploited by a miniscule few to the detriment of others So the real reason for all this hunger and poverty may well be policy and not scarcity; politics and not inevitability. The real culprits are economies that fail to offer everyone opportunities and societies that place economic efficiency above compassion.
As we Indians gloat over our victory in the recently concluded Nuclear Deal and as Ratan Tata and his Nano are hailed as an engineering marvel, let us do something sincere and concrete to put some food inside empty bellies. That then would be a truly Indian Miracle. Till then, let each one of us at least refrain from over eating and throwing away left over food in the dustbin.
Shobha Shukla
[The author teaches Physics at India's Loreto Convent and has been writing extensively in English and Hindi media. She serves as Editor of Citizen News Service (CNS).]
Labels: BIOFUELS, FAO, FOOD, WORLD FOOD DAY
Read more...
Destroying African Agriculture
by Walden Bello
Monday, August 18, 2008
Published on Wednesday, June 4, 2008 by Foreign Policy in Focus
Biofuel production is certainly one of the culprits in the current global food crisis. But while the diversion of corn from food to biofuel feedstock has been a factor in food prices shooting up, the more primordial problem has been the conversion of economies that are largely food-self-sufficient into chronic food importers. Here the World Bank, International Monetary Fund (IMF), and the World Trade Organization (WTO) figure as much more important villains.
Whether in Latin America, Asia, or Africa, the story has been the same: the destabilization of peasant producers by a one-two punch of IMF-World Bank structural adjustment programs that gutted government investment in the countryside followed by the massive influx of subsidized U.S. and European Union agricultural imports after the WTO’s Agreement on Agriculture pried open markets.
African agriculture is a case study of how doctrinaire economics serving corporate interests can destroy a whole continent’s productive base.
From Exporter to Importer
At the time of decolonization in the 1960s, Africa was not just self-sufficient in food but was actually a net food exporter, its exports averaging 1.3 million tons a year between 1966-70. Today, the continent imports 25% of its food, with almost every country being a net food importer. Hunger and famine have become recurrent phenomena, with the last three years alone seeing food emergencies break out in the Horn of Africa, the Sahel, Southern Africa, and Central Africa.
Agriculture is in deep crisis, and the causes are many, including civil wars and the spread of HIV-AIDS. However, a very important part of the explanation was the phasing out of government controls and support mechanisms under the structural adjustment programs to which most African countries were subjected as the price for getting IMF and World Bank assistance to service their external debt.
Instead of triggering a virtuous spiral of growth and prosperity, structural adjustment saddled Africa with low investment, increased unemployment, reduced social spending, reduced consumption, and low output, all combining to create a vicious cycle of stagnation and decline.
Lifting price controls on fertilizers while simultaneously cutting back on agricultural credit systems simply led to reduced applications, lower yields, and lower investment. One would have expected the non-economist to predict this outcome, which was screened out by the Bank and Fund’s free-market paradigm. Moreover, reality refused to conform to the doctrinal expectation that the withdrawal of the state would pave the way for the market and private sector to dynamize agriculture. Instead, the private sector believed that reducing state expenditures created more risk and failed to step into the breach. In country after country, the predictions of neoliberal doctrine yielded precisely the opposite: the departure of the state “crowded out” rather than “crowded in” private investment. In those instances where private traders did come in to replace the state, an Oxfam report noted, “they have sometimes done so on highly unfavorable terms for poor farmers,” leaving “farmers more food insecure, and governments reliant on unpredictable aid flows.” The usually pro-private sector Economist agreed, admitting that “many of the private firms brought in to replace state researchers turned out to be rent-seeking monopolists.”
What support the government was allowed to muster was channeled by the Bank to export agriculture - to generate the foreign exchange earnings that the state needed to service its debt to the Bank and the Fund. But, as in Ethiopia during the famine of the early 1980s, this led to the dedication of good land to export crops, with food crops forced into more and more unsuitable soil, thus exacerbating food insecurity. Moreover, the Bank’s encouraging several economies undergoing adjustment to focus on export production of the same crops simultaneously often led to overproduction that then triggered a price collapse in international markets. For instance, the very success of Ghana’s program to expand cocoa production triggered a 48% drop in the international price of cocoa between 1986 and 1989, threatening, as one account put it, “to increase the vulnerability of the entire economy to the vagaries of the cocoa market.” 1 In 2002-2003, a collapse in coffee prices contributed to another food emergency in Ethiopia.
As in many other regions, structural adjustment in Africa was not simply underinvestment but state divestment. But there was one major difference. In Latin America and Asia, the Bank and Fund confined themselves for the most part to macromanagement, or supervising the dismantling of the state’s economic role from above. These institutions left the dirty details of implementation to the state bureaucracies. In Africa, where they dealt with much weaker governments, the Bank and Fund micromanaged such decisions as how fast subsidies should be phased out, how many civil servants had to be fired, or even, as in the case of Malawi, how much of the country’s grain reserve should be sold and to whom. In other words, Bank and IMF resident proconsuls reached into the very innards of the state’s involvement in the agricultural economy to rip it up.
The Role of Trade
Compounding the negative impact of adjustment were unfair trade practices on the part of the EU and the United States. Trade liberalization allowed low-priced subsidized EU beef to enter and drive many West African and South African cattle raisers to ruin. With their subsidies legitimized by the WTO’s Agreement on Agriculture, U.S. cotton growers offloaded their cotton on world markets at 20-55% of the cost of production, bankrupting West African and Central African cotton farmers in the process.2
These dismal outcomes were not accidental. As then-U.S. Agriculture Secretary John Block put it at the start of the Uruguay Round of trade negotiations in 1986, “the idea that developing countries should feed themselves is an anachronism from a bygone era. They could better ensure their food security by relying on U.S. agricultural products, which are available, in most cases at lower cost.”3
What Block did not say was that the lower cost of U.S. products stemmed from subsidies that were becoming more massive each year, despite the fact that the WTO was supposed to phase out all forms of subsidy. From $367 billion in 1995, the first year of the WTO, the total amount of agricultural subsidies provided by developed country governments rose to $388 billion in 2004. Subsidies now account for 40% of the value of agricultural production in the European Union (EU) and 25% in the United States.
The social consequences of structural adjustment cum agricultural dumping were predictable. According to Oxfam, the number of Africans living on less than a dollar a day more than doubled to 313 million people between 1981 and 2001 - or 46% of the whole continent. The role of structural adjustment in creating poverty, as well as severely weakening the continent’s agricultural base and consolidating import dependency, was hard to deny. As the World Bank’s chief economist for Africa admitted, “We did not think that the human costs of these programs could be so great, and the economic gains would be so slow in coming.”4
That was, however, a rare moment of candor. What was especially disturbing was that, as Oxford University political economist Ngaire Woods pointed out, the “seeming blindness of the Fund and Bank to the failure of their approach to sub-Saharan Africa persisted even as the studies of the IMF and the World Bank themselves failed to elicit positive investment effects.”5
The Case of Malawi
This stubbornness led to tragedy in Malawi.
It was a tragedy preceded by success. In 1998 and 1999, the government initiated a program to give each smallholder family a “starter pack” of free fertilizers and seeds. This followed several years of successful experimentation in which the packs were provided only to the poorest families. The result was a national surplus of corn. What came after, however, is a story that will be enshrined as a classic case study in a future book on the 10 greatest blunders of neoliberal economics.
The World Bank and other aid donors forced the drastic scaling down and eventual scrapping of the program, arguing that the subsidy distorted trade. Without the free packs, food output plummeted. In the meantime, the IMF insisted that the government sell off a large portion of its strategic grain reserves to enable the food reserve agency to settle its commercial debts. The government complied. When the crisis in food production turned into a famine in 2001-2002, there were hardly any reserves left to rush to the countryside. About 1,500 people perished. The IMF, however, was unrepentant; in fact, it suspended its disbursements on an adjustment program with the government on the grounds that “the parastatal sector will continue to pose risks to the successful implementation of the 2002/03 budget. Government interventions in the food and other agricultural markets…crowd out more productive spending.”
When an even worse food crisis developed in 2005, the government finally had enough of the Bank and IMF’s institutionalized stupidity. A new president reintroduced the fertilizer subsidy program, enabling two million households to buy fertilizer at a third of the retail price and seeds at a discount. The results: bumper harvests for two years in a row, a surplus of one million tons of maize, and the country transformed into a supplier of corn to other countries in Southern Africa.
But the World Bank, like its sister agency, still stubbornly clung to the discredited doctrine. As the Bank’s country director told the Toronto Globe and Mail, “All those farmers who begged, borrowed, and stole to buy extra fertilizer last year are now looking at that decision and rethinking it. The lower the maize price, the better for food security but worse for market development.”
Fleeing Failure
Malawi’s defiance of the World Bank would probably have been an act of heroic but futile resistance a decade ago. The environment is different today. Owing to the absence of any clear case of success, structural adjustment has been widely discredited throughout Africa. Even some donor governments that once subscribed to it have distanced themselves from the Bank, the most prominent case being the official British aid agency that co-funded the latest subsidized fertilizer program in Malawi. Perhaps the motivation of these institutions is to prevent the further erosion of their diminishing influence in the continent through association with a failed approach and unpopular institutions. At the same time, they are certainly aware that Chinese aid is emerging as an alternative to the conditionalities of the World Bank, IMF, and Western government aid programs.
Beyond Africa, even former supporters of adjustment, like the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) in Washington and the rabidly neoliberal Economist acknowledged that the state’s abdication from agriculture was a mistake. In a recent commentary on the rise of food prices, for instance, IFPRI asserted that “rural investments have been sorely neglected in recent decades,” and says that it is time for “developing country governments [to] increase their medium- and long-term investments in agricultural research and extension, rural infrastructure, and market access for small farmers.” At the same time, the Bank and IMF’s espousal of free trade came under attack from the heart of the economics establishment itself, with a panel of luminaries headed by Princeton’s Angus Deaton accusing the Bank’s research department of being biased and “selective” in its research and presentation of data. As the old saying goes, success has a thousand parents and failure is an orphan.
Unable to deny the obvious, the Bank has finally acknowledged that the whole structural adjustment enterprise was a mistake, though it smuggled this concession into the middle of the 2008 World Development Report, perhaps in the hope that it would not attract too much attention. Nevertheless, it was a damning admission:
Structural adjustment in the 1980’s dismantled the elaborate system of public agencies that provided farmers with access to land, credit, insurance inputs, and cooperative organization. The expectation was that removing the state would free the market for private actors to take over these functions-reducing their costs, improving their quality, and eliminating their regressive bias. Too often, that didn’t happen. In some places, the state’s withdrawal was tentative at best, limiting private entry. Elsewhere, the private sector emerged only slowly and partially-mainly serving commercial farmers but leaving smallholders exposed to extensive market failures, high transaction costs and risks, and service gaps. Incomplete markets and institutional gaps impose huge costs in forgone growth and welfare losses for smallholders, threatening their competitiveness and, in many cases, their survival.
In sum, biofuel production did not create but only exacerbated the global food crisis. The crisis had been building up for years, as policies promoted by the World Bank, IMF, and WTO systematically discouraged food self-sufficiency and encouraged food importation by destroying the local productive base of smallholder agriculture. Throughout Africa and the global South, these institutions and the policies they promoted are today thoroughly discredited. But whether the damage they have caused can be undone in time to avert more catastrophic consequences than we are now experiencing remains to be seen.
Walden Bello is a senior analyst at Focus on the Global South, a program of Chulalongkorn University’s Social Research Institute, and a columnist for Foreign Policy In Focus (www.fpif.org).
Sources
1. Charles Abugre, “Behind Crowded Shelves: as Assessment of Ghana’s Structural Adjustment Experiences, 1983-1991,” (San Francisco: food First, 1993), p. 87.
2. “Trade Talks Round Going Nowhere sans Progress in Farm Reform,” Business World (Phil), Sept. 8, 2003, p. 15
3. Quoted in “Cakes and Caviar: the Dunkel Draft and Third World Agriculture,” Ecologist, Vol. 23, No. 6 (Nov-Dec 1993), p. 220
4. Morris Miller, Debt and the Environment: Converging Crisis (New York: UN, 1991), p. 70.
5. Ngaire Woods, The Globalizers: the IMF, the World Bank, and their Borrowers (Thaca: Cornell University Press, 2006), p. 158.
Copyright © 2008, Institute for Policy Studies
These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
Discuss this story Print This Post E-Mail This Article
18 Comments so far
lexington June 4th, 2008 11:47 am
Re read the following
At the time of decolonization in the 1960s, Africa was not just self-sufficient in food but was actually a net food exporter, its exports averaging 1.3 million tons a year between 1966-70.
Today, the continent imports 25% of its food, with almost every country being a net food importer.
In Patel’s book ‘Stuffed and Starved’ he points out that India had more recorded famines during the British Raj than in the preceding 2 centuries.
Clearly control of a nation’s food by forces other than by farmers and the government is not a ‘good thing’
good2go June 4th, 2008 12:27 pm
“African agriculture is a case study of how doctrinaire economics serving corporate interests can destroy a whole continent’s productive base.”
Rather the bottom line here. Check out this piece as well.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7430996.stm
Gonzalo Ovieto here gets to the root of the problem, echoing much of what is said here. Notice many of Bello’s sources are old pieces, meaning things are probably even worse now.
The sinking dollar, the rising cost of energy, and other problems have exacerbated the food crisis much more than biofuels could expect to. 4% of grains worldwide are used for biofuels, the corn used is feed corn, a lousy crop for fuel but farmers have to learn that soon. A diversity of crops throughout the planet can help produce better fuels and better food. Smaller scale permaculture, the way African farmers once planted only even more efficient. And reversal of global warming. For more info,
http://www.alcoholcanbeagas.com?bid=2&aid=CD8&opt=
biggy June 4th, 2008 1:28 pm
I agree. Any government that is told by a foreign entity to destroy its food security and means of survival (even at the point of a barrel to the head) is not worth its salt.
It’s insane for one to accept an argument by a foreigner that ” you don’t need food security because we will supply or sell food when you are in need”. What about if they agree to sell you the food but at an exorbitant price you cannot afford or just outright refuse!
GottaGetOffTheGrid June 4th, 2008 1:51 pm
“the parastatal sector will continue to pose risks to the successful implementation of the 2002/03 budget. Government interventions in the food and other agricultural markets…crowd out more productive spending.”
translation: stop feeding your people, buy our guns.
EmptySet June 4th, 2008 3:57 pm
So it only took these geniuses 20 years to realize their policies didn’t work? Brilliant! Well, to keep getting paid for 20 years when your activities actively undermine your stated goals is brilliant, in a way.
CJM June 4th, 2008 4:56 pm
The problem is mentioned in the first paragraph, and has been around for as long as I have been aware of these things: The World Bank, International Monetary Fund (IMF), and the World Trade Organization (WTO).
They are amoral parasites. Get rid of them and the problem is solved.
FrederickJohnson June 4th, 2008 5:53 pm
None of this would be happening if only we’d replace corn with hemp. Hemp’s petroleum-free, doesn’t cause global warming, does not deplete the soil the way corn does, and can grow in any climate as was pointed out by another poster on another topic. Instead of attacking all biofuels which means letting the “right” win, let’s get down to the good vs. bad ones, ok?
FrederickJohnson June 4th, 2008 5:54 pm
By the way, why isn’t the Left calling for an ABOLITION of the IMF and the World Bank ? Big Government hasn’t been kind to the Left for 28 years, get it?
karlof1 June 4th, 2008 6:01 pm
“The problem is mentioned in the first paragraph, and has been around for as long as I have been aware of these things: The World Bank, International Monetary Fund (IMF), and the World Trade Organization (WTO).
“They are amoral parasites. Get rid of them and the problem is solved.”
Just getting rid of the institutions isn’t sufficient; we need to get rid of the people and mindset that instituted them in the first place.
abuelito June 4th, 2008 6:51 pm
Thanks Walden. Yeah is it ever a tough fight. I don’t know if the banks are stupid or just stubbornly ruthless as they wreck on Global Sputh country after another- it’s been going on for maybe fifty years now, and they still don’t get it.
see also Vandana Shiva
http://www.navdanya.org/earthdcracy/index.htm
MiMiCcS June 4th, 2008 8:04 pm
The banks serve the neo-malthusian elites who drive Globalizationa and free Trade, and whose agenda is population reduction in these eras. From Henry Kissingers NSSM 200 in 1974 until today. Africa and Latin America have been targets to suppress food production and population, and credit is issued to these countries with strings attached that achieve this. Those who do not go along get their economies attacked, such as Zimbabwe. Most of the civil wars are being funded by covert operations to this end as well.
America is the next target.
Chakra Khan June 4th, 2008 9:12 pm
Destroying Africa .period. is more like it
White folks just can’t deal with the fact that they are just really really light-skinned blackfolk themselves
shankari25 June 4th, 2008 9:21 pm
Didn’t South America get together to pay each other’s debt off? Why can’t Africa unite to boot out the bankers and looters? Why can’t they default altogether? They need to consider the needs of their people and kick everyone else out. If they need to copy medicine, then do it. That’s what Thailand did. There is currently an anti-Western group of emerging nations, Brazil, Russia, China, and India. Get with people who are concerned about things you are and boot the liars, cheats, colonialists out. Enough is enough. If Europe and the US won’t buy their stuff, then consider other markets. Europe and the US are on their way down. The emerging markets are the ones who will lead.
GwNorth June 4th, 2008 9:48 pm
All countries should defend zealously their own ability to grow food. If this through subsidies or tariffs then so be it.
If you can not feed your self you are at the mercy of those who will take everything you have in exchange for that food.
It is a Classic starve and Conquer approach and at the heart of Capitalism.
whatfools June 4th, 2008 11:39 pm
Is anyone surprised that the IMF and World Bank loan sharks have destroyed everyone in their path? This is the empire’s way of plunder.
lizard June 4th, 2008 11:59 pm
The problem isn’t capitalism or socialism, the problem is that people cheat and steal. The problem is the mind set that justifies this.The US and european governments are cheaters and thieves. Maybe every government would do the same if given the chance, but right now , the biggest problem is the US, a cheater and thief par excellence .
stilldreaming June 5th, 2008 1:50 pm
Africa’s population grew by A LOT since the 60’s. Child mortality dropped (thanks to western medicine) but many in Africa still have 7 or more kids per woman, with the woman often having no real choice of family size.
Don’t forget birth control (voluntary, provide education, option to purchase method of choice) as a solution to conquer famine.
Religion causes exponential population growth — how come articles like this do not even mention these root causes of famine?!
Even if corporations had not interfered, population growth ensures famine and environmental damage, followed by war over resources.
Andrew Taynton June 7th, 2008 4:36 am
stilldreaming
Despite the growth in the African population, it is the one continent that still has excess land that can be tilled.
Yes, a negative population growth is desirable, and the best way to achieve that is through education/schooling and improved living standards. We need to stop wasting money on wars and spend it where it in needed.
Religion is not necessarily the cause of large families, as a large family can bring security to parents in their old age if they have many children to contribute to their material needs if there is no guarenteed pension.
Join the discussion:
You must be logged in to post a comment. If you haven't registered yet, click here to register. (It's quick, easy and free. And we won't give your email address to anyone.)
FAIR USE NOTICE
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
Common Dreams NewsCenter
A non-profit news service providing breaking news & views for the progressive community.
© Copyrighted 1997-2008
www.commondreams.org
Labels: AGRICULTURE, BIOFUELS, FARM SUBSIDIES, FERTILIZER, IMF, NEOLIBERALISM
Read more...
Saki urges govt to find alternative source of oil
By Chiwoyu Sinyangwe
Wednesday August 13, 2008 [04:00]
GOVERNMENT needs to be responsive to the petroleum crisis in the country and provide enough motivation for OMCs to import finished petroleum products, energy expert Andrew Kamanga observed yesterday. And United Liberal Party (ULP) president Sakwiba Sikota called on the government to look beyond the Middle East region as the country' s alternative source of crude fuel.
Commenting on the recent countrywide diesel crisis, Kamanga said there was need for transparency in the management of the fuel situation in the country to ensure adequate planning by all stakeholders.
"The current fuel crisis in the country is a basic issue. If Indeni Oil Refinery is going to shut, then oil marketing companies (OMCs) need to be informed in good time so that they make adequate preparations to bring in finished products from outside the country," Kamanga said. "But most critically, government needs to come up with definitive policy to deal with shortages like the current one.
"If Indeni shuts, then OMCs should be given enough motivations like waiving duty and other applicable taxes on imported finished petroleum products so that OMCs have enough motivation to import the oil."
He also said there was need for accurate information on the current economic consumption in the country considering the increased economic activities especially in the mining sector.
Analysts estimate that the previous national consumption of 90, 000 metric tonnes per 45 days had since reduced to 30 owing to increased demand.
And Sikota observed that the poor in the country would be hit the hardest by the current escalating costs of fuel.
In a press statement released yesterday, Sikota also urged the government to expedite the installation of the hydrocracker at Indeni to enable the country's sole oil refinery to refine feedstock coming from Angola.
"Instead of asking poor people to accept the high cost of living, government should look for other sources of fuel that will make life cheaper for the common man. We expect a better response from the MMD government concerning the high cost of diesel; and petrol in Zambia," stated Sikota. "Government should invest in equipment that will enable us to start importing crude oil from Angola and other African countries. Angola is much closer to Zambia than the countries from which we import oil in the Middle East. Importing crude from Angola will greatly cut the cost of diesel and petrol in Zambia."
Sikota also urged the government to seriously pursue the biofuel sector as an alternative source for the country's fuel supply.
"Government should also consider the possibilities of producing ethanol as an alternative source of fuel for the Zambian economy. Ethanol is a renewable fuel source that can be produced from a wide range of feedstock including grains such as sorghum, agriculture waste and cellulose. All these grains can be cultivated at a large scale in the country," stated Sikota.
Labels: BIOFUELS, FUEL, SAKWIBA SIKOTA
Read more...
Zambia's vice-president calls for response to fuel, food prices
By Noel Sichalwe, Kabanda Chulu and Chibaula Silwamba
Tuesday July 29, 2008 [14:01]
VICE President Rupiah Banda has said there is need to effectively respond to the challenges posed by rising fuel and food prices because they are interrelated. And Lesotho Prime Minister Pakalitha Mosisili has said the development process calls for extensive interaction with the people and that Africans should put the communities at the heart of development.
Meanwhile Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni has urged developing countries to ensure that partnerships were not narrow and in a parasitic way. Officially opening the 18th Global Southern Africa Smart Partnership International Dialogue on Monday, Vice President Banda said in the face of rising economic growth and increased demand for energy, the region was experiencing power deficits.
He said the challenge was how to find financial resources to exploit available natural resources and how to make it happen quickly.
The world today is faced with major challenges of rising fuel and food prices and experts tell us that these two issues are related because some food items are being diverted towards use for fuel production and the question is how should we respond to these dynamics?" Vice President Banda said. "We recognize that rising food prices are a challenge but we also acknowledge that this development has created opportunities for creative minds and for land rich countries like Zambia it may not be necessary to make a choice between producing crops for either fuel or food because we have enough space to accommodate both."
Vice President Banda urged the Smart Partnership delegates to share ideas on what actions and strategies could be taken to utilize opportunities arising from high fuel and food prices.
He also challenged the delegates to find ways of addressing effects of climate change that has seen an increase in droughts and floods which is resulting in poverty, diseases and food insecurity, among other issues.
And Vice President Banda has said the region was facing challenges of translating economic gains into equitable and improved living standards.
"This challenge is compounded by among other things rising fuel and food prices, energy deficits, environmental degradation, inadequate infrastructure and high poverty levels," said Vice President Banda. "Against this background, it is appropriate that during this dialogue we shall discuss solutions to these issues and Zambia looks forward to learn from other Smart partners how to hasten the attainment of the vision 2030."
And Lesotho Prime Minister Pakalitha Mosisili said the Smart Partnership Movement has held about 17 conferences from the time it started in 1995 and that Zambia was the 10th country to host the dialogue.
He said the dialogue has aimed at building strong partnerships for various countries as a way of forming new bonds. He said the new bonds that have existed among African countries could be attributed to the spirit of partnership on cultural and collective reasoning.
"Collective wisdom manifests in the noble spirit of working together and it is this spirit that gave birth to Southern Africa Development Community (SADC) and Southern Africa International Dialogue," he said. "This recognizes country development as an over all integral development of the country. This demonstrates the practical role-played in long-term framework of economic development. The development process calls for extensive interaction with the people. As such we should put the communities at the heart of development. We in Africa have come to recognize this."
Prime Minister Mosisili said Lesotho has a Vision 2020 that aims at stabilizing its democracy, strengthening the economy, manage its development well and own well established technologies.
He said Lesotho's vision explored the options of social economic development by 2020 and identify the suitable economic development. Prime Minister Mosisili said the 2020 Vision could only be realized through collective efforts.
"As Smart Partnership, we should think about the imperatives of common vision realizing that countries from Southern Africa must come together to develop the economy," he said.
Prime Minister Mosisili said the conference was aimed at a win-win Smart Partnership with the governments, civil society and other stakeholders.
He urged the delegates at the conference to share their experiences and ideas as a way of learning from each country's achievements and failures.
Malaysia Deputy Prime Minister Mohd Najib said the Smart Partnership conference was held against a backdrop of global problems like rising food prices, skyrocketing fuel prices and environmental challenges like global warming.
"We must revisit our priorities and reevaluate our options," he said.
Deputy Prime Minister Najib said the conference should focus on the smart partnership approach to the current global problems.
He said there was need to focus on the eradication of poverty in developing nations, human capital development and technological development. He said there was need to develop human capital that emphasized on knowledgeable and skilled personnel to resolve the current global challenges.
"We should share progress in each country in areas of human capital development, poverty eradication and technological progress," he said. "We can eradicate poverty through human capital development and capacity building."
Deputy Prime Minister Najib said the reduction in domestic petroleum subsidies and food shortages have affected the poor and middle-income group.
He said his government was confident that it would reduce the general poverty to lower levels by 2010.
And Speaking on arrival to attend the conference, President Museveni said the realization national visions goes beyond borders hence the need to network and share experiences.
"It is not only for outsiders but between industries and labour, between government and the private sector. I am sure this is the philosophy of a smart partnership because we don't have to have a win-lose relationship," he said. "We can all win and that is within each country. Now beyond each country, then we try to have the cooperation with others who think the same and we can transfer that philosophy between the North and the South. This win-win approach is the essence of this smart partnership movement. You can have a partnership in a smart way, in a clever way not in a narrow and parasitic way."
Meanwhile, the Ministry of Tourism and Natural Resources has joined the Ministry of Community Development and Social Services to organize the Africa Freedom Dance Festive in Lusaka.
Zambia Tourism Board (ZTB) public relations officer Doris Kofi yesterday announced that the countries that would participate in todays dance festive are Angola, Botswana, Burundi, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Malawi, Mozambique, Namibia, Tanzania, Zimbabwe and host Zambia, among others.
She explained that in the past two years the festival was held in partnership between the Ministry of Community Development and Social Services and the French embassy but this year it would be between the former and the Ministry of Tourism and Natural Resources.
Kofi explained that the dance festival which was usually held in July together with the Africa Freedom Day celebrations had this year been moved to July to concede with the on-going Smart Partnership dialogue.
She said the dancers yesterday held a special performance for the delegates attending the Smart Partnership dialogue.
But today the Africa Freedom dance festival performance will be open to all members of the public and it will be held in the Lusaka Show grounds main arena, said Kofi.
Among the delegates attending the dialogue conference include, former Presidents Joachim Chissano of Mozambique, Sir Ketumile Masire of Botswana, Sam Nujoma of Namibia, Lesotho Prime Minister Pakalitha Mosisili, Malaysian Deputy Prime Minister Mohammed Najib, South African ANC President Jacob Zuma, Swaziland Prime Minister Absalom Dlamini, Gambian Minister of Trade Abdou Kolley,Sudanese head of National Planning Dr Elsir Mahgoab Ali,Mozambican Trade Minister Fernando Sumbana, Namibian Trade Minister Dr Hage Geingolo and Botswana Minister of Finance Baledi Gaolathe.
Labels: BIOFUELS, ENERGY, FOOD, INFLATION, RUPIAH BANDA, SMART PARTNERHIPS
Read more...
This is an excellent solar technology company that is doing a lot of business building photovoltaic solar panels. Still privately held, and based in Silicon Valley - San Jose, CA.
http://www.nanosolar.com/team.htmFrom their website:
Nanosolar is a global leader in solar power innovation. We are setting the standard for affordable green power with solar cell technology of distinctly superior cost efficiency, versatility, and availability.
Our mission is very simple: Delivering cost-efficient solar electricity.
Leveraging recent science in nanostructured materials, we have developed a critical mass of engineering advances that profoundly change the cost efficiency and production scalability of solar electricity cells and panels.
Our first product, the Nanosolar Utility Panel™ enables unprecedented system economics at utility scale.
Founded in 2002, we are building the world's largest solar cell factory in California and the world's largest panel-assembly factory in Germany.
Labels: BIOFUELS, SOLAR ENERGY
Read more...
