Community | October 11, 2009 | 2 comments

Monsanto penetrating carbon credits

source: http://www.gmwatch.org/latest-listing/1-news-items/11563-monsanto-penetrating-carbon-credit-...

Image
JanforGore
As the UN Climate Change Conference 2009 (COP15) gets closer, a new agreement has to be signed for the period after 2012. It is becoming clear how agribusiness attempts to gain profits from the massive carbon credits market. Under the term "Conservation Agriculture", Monsanto and other biotech allies have penetrated the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) aiming to get carbon credits for agribusiness. A voluntary 'responsible' label for Roundup Ready soy sponsored by World Wild Life Fund (WWF), and a newly approved Clean Development Mechanisms (CDM) methodology are important steps for Agribusiness to get access to this three billion dollar business.

Proposals to include agriculture in carbon offsetting focus on changes in tillage practices and reductions in methane and nitrous oxide emissions. All these practices are included in the concept of "Conservation Agriculture", which is based on three principles: minimal soil disturbance, permanent soil cover and crop rotations . However, in the name of Conservation Agriculture and with the explicit consent of FAO and UNFCCC, very different agricultural methods are included. Under this label a range of systems from biological agriculture to No-till GM industrial agriculture can be labelled as sustainable and so receive carbon credits.

No-till is an agricultural technique that requires no ploughing or digging of the soil. When sowing, seeds are drilled into the soil. In general, No-till is considered a conservation practice that increases levels of soil organic matter and reduces soil erosion, but in RR soy industrial monocultures it part of this technique is used in conjunction with very harmful environmental practices.

In practice, Carbon credits for No-till could mean a massive economic support for Genetically Modified (GM) soy monocultures in South and North America and a promotion of this agribusiness model in other Southern Hemisphere regions.

GM soy monocultures are a production model which is not sustainable in any way. In South America, soy production of this kind is one of the main drivers of deforestation, land use change, biodiversity destruction and human rights violations . Moreover, these monocultures sustain the industrial feed industry which is a main cause of climate change as well. To label these agricultural production models as “sustainable” only because they involve less ploughing (no tillage or No-till) means falling into a trap of absurdly reductionism and blindness.

The report "Agriculture and Climate Change: Real Problems, False Solutions" presented in June 2009 reveals the main agriculture-related proposals in the negotiations for a post -2012 climate agreement. It provides an informative panorama on how current and proposed agricultural practices for the post Kyoto agreements really impact on climate change. However, in this article we will focus specifically on some cases related to soy monocultures.
_______

And the current climate bill in Congress aids their scheme which discredits it right from the start.
  1. groups:
    Community,   Green,   Current Tonight,   Earth and Science,   5 more
  2. tags:
    Politics,  Poverty,  Monsanto,  Deforestation,  13 more
  3.     
    |

2 comments // Monsanto penetrating carbon credits

  • JanforGore
  • JanforGore
    • 0
      JanforGore  

    • Excerpt:

      'Finally, the biotech lobby is getting ready for Copenhagen and they seem to have a close agenda with the big Conservation NGOs. In a recent document of the US biotech lobby association BIO, a surprising plan is to seek collaboration with WWF. Other points are that in the new climate treaty, the threats are intellectual property issues. Meanwhile advantages can be the potential for grants and funding to biotechnology providers and government incentives for international biotechnology deployment. Unsurprisingly, recommendations include close coordination with the United States and friendly international governments.

      Before COP15, there is much more to research and reveal about the agribusiness race to access the carbon credit market. However, it is urgent that a critical debate begins amongst organisations and movements so that a clear, strict and powerful message and action strategy comes out against this agribusiness “climate change offensive“. At the moment, social movements slogans “small scale sustainable farming cool down the earth” might not be enough to counteract the massive advance of the agroindustrial machinery into the climate change arena. It is necessary to identify and denounce the corporate lobby actors such as Monsanto and other biotech lobby. But it is also important to highlight and strengthen the rejection of the role that big Conservationist NGOs such as WWF, World Wildlife Fund and TNC, The Nature Conservancy and IUCN, International Union for Conservation of Nature are playing in these multi stake holders process for Corporate Social Responsibility."
      _____________

      Looks like Copenhagen has already been bought. We need hundreds of thousands of campesinos and farmers to converge on this meeting and demand justice and food sovereignty. NO TILL FARMING IS NOT SUSTAINABLE IF YOU ARE SPRAYING THE SEEDS WITH POISONS AND CANNOT SAVE THEM WHILE DEFORESTING THE LAND.

      I still can't fathom why this doesn't qualify as an environmental crisis of huge proportions to be covered by the media. And I think I'm just about done beating my head against the wall about it here.

    • 2 years ago
more from Community:
from the community

top videos