HAVANA — Fidel Castro signaled Thursday he is itching for a return to public life after eight months of illness that has kept him out of sight, lambasting U.S. biofuel policies in a front-page newspaper editorial. . . .
I admit I'm not a great fan of the current president of the United States, but this headline startled me for a couple of reasons. First, I was surprised to read that Bush supports anything that might undermine the oil industry on which his home state's economy seems to rely so heavily. Is this not the same politician who has been advocating the rape of Alaska and other federally protected areas in order to satisfy this nation's lust for fossil fuel? Okay, strong language, but you see where my head has been on the subject.
Then there is the assertion of Fidel Castro, leader of Cuba for the past several generations, that the use of crop-based alternative fuel might jeopardize food supplies on a global level. My initial response to such an accusation was naturally skeptical. I've been told for so long that American farmers are paid to let arable land lie fallow and that we have rotting stockpiles of grain because our production capabilities so far outstrip the ability of consumers to absorb such supplies. Of course, my information is roughly three decades old, and I haven't felt the need to update my information, so I should probably check my facts before spouting, but it seems to me that if we have had such capabilities in the past, we can surely set in motion whatever machinery is necessary to reestablish those levels of production if they prove sufficiently profitable. If people of the world are currently unable to obtain sufficient grain, surely it is not because the U.S. is not producing it. We might be withholding supplies because sellers don't see sufficient profit, which is a different problem altogether, but I don't see the problem being the actual ability of the American farmer to meet world demands.
Here's a thought: if people don't want to eat genetically engineered crops, surely there is use for them as an alternative fuel source. The truth of the matter, however, is that there are ample people in this country alone who find genetically engineered food more affordable than that wrested from the land by more traditional methods. If we are to make use of crops as both food and fuel, it won't be the first time we are sharing. After all, corn has long been used for both cattle and humans, though I'm reliably informed that they are not the same kinds of corn. The same will be true for fuel supplies, I'm sure. The bulk of the land will be used for what is profitable, whether that be food or fuel. Maybe we'll see a shift in the health community's decrees as to the viability of meat consumption in the face of decreasing supplies of consumable produce. Now that would be interesting indeed.
