8. Biomass is good for the global economy, aidingeconomic development in the South and creating“green jobs” in the North.The Claim: As “clean energy” industries take rootworldwide, they will deliver hi-tech, skilled jobs that are alsoenvironmentally sound. New manufacturing jobs using biobasedprocesses qualify as ‘green jobs,’ providingemployment opportunities while reforming pollutingindustries. Biomass manufacturing also offers a potentialeconomic boost for rural and Southern economies, whichcan earmark land for growing profitable biomass crops andplantations and can build biomanufacturing facilities closeto large sources of cellulose and other biomass. Bioenergymay also earn extra money for development under the KyotoProtocol’s Clean Development Mechanism (CDM).The Reality: Biomass technologies are largely subject topatents and other proprietary claims, and attempts by countriesto develop bio-based manufacturing industries will be subjectto royalties and/or licensing fees. Industrial agriculture andplantations are already controlled by a handful of transnationalcompanies. Moreover, there is no reason to presume thatbiorefineries and monoculture plantations of energy crops arein any way ‘green’ or safe for workers. In addition to theharmful effects to humans and the environment of chemicalinputs and monoculture production techniques, syntheticorganisms may also prove both environmentally damaging andrisky for workers’ health. Brazil provides a real-worldcautionary tale: the conditions of those who cut sugarcane forbioenergy (currently ethanol) involve exposure to high levels ofagrochemicals and dangerous air pollution. Far from helpingmarginal communities, new bioenergy plantations, accreditedunder the CDM or other mechanisms, may directly encroachupon the lands of peasants and small producers, robbing themof control over food production, water and the health of theecosystems in which they live.9. A Biomass economy reduces the politicalinstability/wars/terrorism associated withpetrodollars.The Claim: Wars over oil, natural gas and other fossilresources have been a dominant feature of the late twentiethand early twenty-first century. Inflated profits frompetroleum extraction in the Middle East and elsewhere haveindirectly bolstered extremist groups and fuelled geopoliticaltensions. Oil companies have been dismissive ofhuman rights and territorial claims of indigenous andtraditional communities in their race to control theremaining pockets of oil and gas. Unlike fossil resources,biomass is more evenly distributed across the planet andwould allow industrial economies to achieve energyindependence, cutting off the flow of cash to unstableregions of the globe.The Reality: Removing fossil hydrocarbons from the globalenergy mix (even if it were possible or likely) would notmagically dissolve geopolitical tensions. Like fossil resources,biomass is also unevenly distributed around the globe, andthere is already a scramble to secure and control the land,water and strategic minerals, as well as the intellectualproperty, that will enable the new biomass economy. Fightsover scarce freshwater resources and over oceans and desertsmay become more common, particularly as algal biomasstechnologies mature. Agribusiness, forestry companies and thesugar industry are no more respectful of human rights andsovereignty claims than Big Oil has been: for communitiesfighting cellulose plantations, land grabbing, water theft, orillegal logging, the wars over biomass have already begun.The New Biomassters 33
10. Biomass technologies need support as atransitional step to a new mix of energy sources,including nuclear power, wind, “clean coal,” etc.The Claim: Faced with enormous energy challenges, globalsociety must change how we produce energy. However, it istoo early to know what the new energy mix will be, as therelevant technologies are not yet in place. While biomassmay in the end play only a small role in the new energyeconomy, its advantage is that it can be quickly deployednow as a stop-gap energy source while society transitions tomore long term solutions that are not yet fully developed orneed more time for scale-up, such as hydrogen power,nuclear fusion and ‘clean coal.’ The enormity of the energytransition challenge means that biomass technologies mustbe explored and developed in order to increase the range ofoptions available.The Reality: At its root, global society is faced with notsimply an energy crisis but a crisis of overproduction andconsumption. Gauging the value of a biomass-fuelled economyagainst other inequitable production models, such as nuclearpower or carbon capture and storage, is missing the point.Reduction in overall energy demand is more politicallyunpalatable but ecologically critical. Boosting support fordecentralized peasant agriculture, which does not fuel climatechange and assures food sovereignty, is another means toaddress our global crises.ETC Group 34 www.etcgroup.org