Greenpeace protestors are still aiming at Fonterra.
This time they’re accusing the co-operative of climate crimes.
Climate campaigner Simon Boxer says Fonterra knows its imported palm kernel comes at the expense of rainforests, orangutans, indigenous peoples and the climate.
I have doubts about the wisdom of importing palm kernel because of biosecurity risks. But I don’t understand why Greenpeace is targeting Fonterra when palm oil used in soap and food must be much more of a problem than the relatively small amount of pke used for animal food.
“Greenpeace is only green in the first five letters of its name and is really an anti-business, anti-trade and anti-farming front,” says David Rose, Federated Farmers Southland-based spokesperson for law and order.
He said public relations stunts cause inconvenience and loss of revenue to people going about their lawful business and points out that the exports generated by farmers and Fonterra help pay for medicine, education and other services.
“At least farmers are aware of their impact on the environment and are working hard to develop management and mitigation measures. That’s why water quality today is far better than when I was a lad, except that is, in our towns and cities.
“Picking on farming is also darn odd. Among the major productive sectors in the economy, we’re actually doing the second best job at reducing emissions.
“Between 1990 and 2007 agriculture emissions grew by 12 percent yet electricity emissions grew by 120 percent despite wind farms, transport by 74 percent despite hybrid cars and industrial processes by 35 percent.
“Farmers are actively cutting emissions growth per unit of output because we farmers are doers while Greenpeace are just talkers. I’d like to see its ideas for real economic growth that doesn’t mean regressing to the dark ages. . .”
Greenpeace does seem to be more intent on protesting for publicity than solving problems.
Farmers, processors and the government are putting a lot of money into research to find ways of reducing animal emissions. Until that research bears fruit the only way to make substantial reductions in emissions is to reduce the national herd.
That would lead to food shortages, damage our economy and almost certainly increase global emissions as countries which produce milk less efficiently than we do, increased their production to fill the gap in the market.