Article written by Marco Aurélio Garcia, special adviser to President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva.

President Bush's recent visit to São Paulo and his subsequent meeting with President Lula at Camp David have generated an unprecedented discussion about the role of biofuels in the world's energy matrix.

Fidel Castro has criticized the use of ethanol and biodiesel, a position that is shared by other presidents who are friends of Brazil and also by conservative interests. For the Cuban leader the production of ethanol, especially from corn, will favor consumption by the rich at the cost of "burning food" that is intended for the poor.

The Brazilian option for biofuels has a long history. It gained momentum after 2003 and has been included in the dialogue between President Lula and his Latin American colleagues over the last few years, contacts that have led to concrete initiatives with Bolivia, Uruguay, Ecuador, Haiti, and Venezuela, to name but a few.

The United States' interest in this energy alternative has given greater visibility to the topic. It is therefore understandable that government leaders who are critics of the Bush administration will take this opportunity to highlight their differences with Washington.

However, Brazilian energy options should not be transformed into an arena for political and ideological discussion, as if there were two opposing camps in the Americas. Cooperation with the United States on biofuels is valid and does not change Brazil's foreign policy in the region.

Both in São Paulo and at Camp David, President Lula reiterated that our diplomacy is centered on South-American integration. I would note that the region is going through a positive period, with democratic governments that enjoy strong legitimacy from the electoral ballot, and are motivated by a concern with reform, which has contributed to political and social inclusion for thousands of men and women who had been deeply affected by "neoliberal" policies that devastated the region.

In the United States, President Lula explained why this energy option plays a central role in Brazil, a country that has achieved self-sufficiency in oil, with 60 percent of its electrical power coming from hydroelectric sources, that will soon become self-sufficient in natural gas, and that in addition has advanced programs in the areas of solar, wind and nuclear energy.

The Brazilian government is convinced that renewable fuels will allow us to face the four greatest challenges of the century.

The first is the energy crisis that has affected all humanity, including developed countries, and which constitutes a threat to development in our region. In Africa, Asia, Central America and almost the entire Caribbean, biofuels offer an alternative for solving the energy deficit of many countries that have become victims of stagnation and foreign dependency.

The second challenge is that of responding to the crucial problem we have inherited from the 20th century – unemployment and acute inequality. Biofuel production is capable of creating thousands of jobs and sustaining rural livelihoods, thereby reducing disruptive migratory flows. By creating jobs, biofuels provide for increased and better distribution of income primarily if family agriculture is stimulated, as set forth in the Brazilian legislation.
The third challenge is to contribute to reducing global warming, a topic that has acquired apocalyptic overtones. As a fuel or an additive to fossil fuels, ethanol and biodiesel reduce pollutant emissions.

The last challenge is to establish the basis for a state of the art industry - to replace the petrochemical industry - capable of producing new materials, drugs, fertilizers, and animal feed from biofuels.

The Brazilian model indicates that the risk that biofuel programs will contribute to increased hunger is not correct. Hunger is not the result of lack of food. It is the result of unemployment and lack of income that affect millions of men and women. As the Brazilian sociologist Emir Sader has pointed out, the food produced today would suffice to feed 12 billion people.

The Brazilian experience similarly demonstrates that land allocated to raw material production for ethanol and biodiesel is not appropriate for cultivating food crops. Less that one fifth of Brazil's 320 million hectares of arable land is under cultivation. Of this total, only 1 percent is used for sugarcane ethanol, which is one sixty-fifth of the millions of hectares of depleted pasture, where cultivation is expanding.

To say that Brazil may one day become an enormous sugarcane plantation reflects a misunderstanding of the situation.

Likewise, there is no risk to the Amazon, a region that is not appropriate for agriculture intended for energy needs, and in which significant decreases in deforestation are being achieved.

The global production of biofuels obviously deserves careful consideration. It is necessary to select grains the cultivation of which for energy purposes will not cause price increases for food items, as has occurred with corn. Unlike sugarcane – primarily after the advances in terms of productivity as a result of years of research – corn is not suitable in economic or social terms for producing ethanol.

The Brazilian experience demonstrates that biofuels do not increase the dependency of poor countries on rich countries. On the contrary, they have a positive impact on the balance of trade of the former by reducing imports and increasing exports.

Finally, rigorous government certification of new fuels on the part of producing countries – which can be the subject of multilateral agreements –will prevent damage to the environment and ensure decent working conditions.

As in the case of Brazil, national legislations will strike a balance between small family producing units and large plantations.

An energy revolution is currently underway. It does not put biofuels at odds with fossil fuels. On the contrary, they complement one another. It will allow consolidation of South America as the region with the greatest and most diversified energy potential in the world.

Dialogue must replace confrontation. The only passion that is acceptable at this time is that which favours South American unity and the well-being of our peoples.