19/10/2010 (Journal Europa.info) - Oil palm is everywhere. We consume and adapt it to any purpose and this overconsumption raises controversy. At the heart of the debate: the RSPO. Is it a drop of oil in an ocean of controversy or even more fuel added to the flames? Let's take a closer look at this.

You wake up in the morning, a day like every other day. In the shower, you work your Dove Go Fresh into a lather. You gulp your bowl of Cheerios down. A touch of St Hubert, three layers of Nutella on your Tesco bread. A Krisprolls toast for the road. And here we go: deforestation, global warming, extinction of orangutans, etc. All because of you! Yes, you, European citizen, democrat, tree-hugger, involved. And on top of that, you continue! A Knorr soup for lunch, Cadbury fingers for dessert, a Mars for the afternoon snack, Heinz ravioli for dinner and a few Kit Kats for a perfect break. You think that you're doing the right thing buying organic food? You are making a mistake! The Eat Natural toasted muesli, Goodearth margarine and Allegro sponge finger biscuits are just as lethal... Their weapon of massive deforestation? Oil palm.

That blood colored liquid, extracted from the Palm tree fruit, is the most consumed plant-oil in the world. But how has this harmless fat used in the traditional cuisines from Africa, Asia and South America become such an industrial serial killer? Its virtues stuck its neck out: smoothness, thickening effect, moisturizing fatty acids, high yield and above all low production cost. Oil palm is mostly used in the food processing industry up to 80%, cosmetics up to 19% and up to 1% with organic fuel cells [i]. And this is on a huge scale because its production is estimated at 22MT only for 2010. The demand grows exponentially: it increases every year by 8.7% since 1995 and could reach 40MT in 2020 [ii]. And, of course, you know the polluted atmosphere of the situation: the main consumer countries are the United States, the EU, India and China, while the producers are located in tropical zones, Indonesia and Malaysia leading the way. The irony of fate: this makes Indonesia the third biggest polluter nation after China and India [iii].

The oil palm consumption boom has harmful effects by the dozen. Single crop cultivation brings on one hand deforestation, soil erosion, watercourse pollution, etc. ; on the other hand, the loss of biodiversity, notably the threat of orangutans extinction, denounced by Greenpeace in a commercial parodying Nestle [iv]. And ther's also the cat among the pigeons: global warming. What an irony, you might say! Planting palm trees contributes to warming our beautiful Earth? Well. Yes. Each acre taken from the primeval forests or peat bogs is a contribution. Given that between 1995 and 2003, the acreages devoted to single crop farming increased by 118% in Indonesia and that the oil palm demand, notably from the EU, would require more than 40,5 million acres of oil palm trees by 2020 [v]. And yet, with each percentage point increase, we dispossess even more small farmers and we limit food crops, which increases the precariousness of farmers and reflects on the price of food products.

A rickety round table

But why are we clinging to that palmate poison? Of course, there is its attractive price for the food giants, new geopolitical challenges and spillovers with the control of new industrial fields and the willingness to limit growing energy requirements. Of course. But how can the world agree to play that deadly game? The stakes are too high to abandon it. Then we reverse the rules so the cheaters can win. The pseudo-solution is called RSPO (from Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil) [vi].

Created in 2003 by WWF, this label aims at limiting the environmental and social impact of oil palm, suggesting a sustainable alternative. It strangely gathers oil palm producers and multinational companies using it ( like Migros, Sainsbury, Unilever Malaysian Palm Oil Association). Would the accused become the lawyers for the good cause? Among the 328 members, there are only 6% of NGOs. Every member has a voice... From that perspective, there's nothing really exciting: food processing industries and big producers outdo the environmentalist NGOs. And all that without worrying about the social conditions of the small farmers.

This roundtable has quickly been denounced by 185 associations and NGOs (International «Declaration against the Greenwashing of Palm Oil by the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil») as being  «greenwashing, meaning the deceptive use of green marketing in order to promote a misleading perception that a company's policies or products are environmentally friendly». According to the WWF [ix], back in mid-2009, less than 4% of the oil palm produced in the world was sustainable and only 0,007% were bought. With these statistics, even if a sustainable alternative were perfect, it isn't feasible considering its weak impact. In brief, the sustainable certificate is not Superman and, under its upholder of the law costume, it only legitimizes questioned practices and widens the vicious circle of oil palm consumption. My dear European, the way out seems out of sight, doesn't it?

Alternatives? Soy is controversial because of its transgenic form and the intensive deforestation it causes. Forget about it. Rapeseed? Even if it has many health benefits (few unsaturated fatty acids), it is criticized for its transgenic origins, its fertilizer requirement and impoverishing soils. As for sunflower, it is rich in unsaturated fatty acids which have a correlation with cancers and cardiovascular diseases. To conclude: the problem seems to be unsolvable. But we mustn't give up hope. Contrary to rumors, the EU did not recognize palm trees cultivation as forests, which would crown the implantation of the plant. Until then, we still can try a Nutella detoxification.