The first point is the decrease of crops cultivated for food. The passage shows that using crops for fuels means fewer crops will be left over for people’s consumption. In another words, there will occur a shortage of food to people. However, the proportion of crops used for producing fuels, according to the professor, is not enough to have a large affect on the food supply. For instance, only less than 5% the US’s total yield of corn was needed in 2008 to meet the world’s demand of biofuels of that year. It is not counting billions of tons of corn produced in other countries.
The professor’s next argument focuses on the increase of food price. It is stated in the reading that the food prices will go up as the supply of food crops decreases each year. On the contrary, the professor says that it is true that food prices have been increased these days, but it is due to many causes. Moreover, the presence of biofuels will lead to the decrease of gasoline price. Therefore, the increase of food prices can be covered by the decrease of fuel prices.
Finally, with regard to human’s health, the lecturer refutes the notion presented in the passage that when farmers tend to cultivate them for fuels, they will degrade the nutritional value of their crops, so people will be deprived of some certain nutrients and it consequently causes them some health problems. Instead, he claims that most kinds of crops employed for fuels are uneatable and they are used as food to feed livestock instead. Nowadays, many people in the US have died of eating too much animal fats. So the deduction of cattle-feed can lessen the number of livestock. As the result, people will try to find healthier alternatives to eat.
To sum up, the points made in the lecture contradict the reading. The lecturer concludes that making fuels from crops does not create problems related to food deprivation, higher food prices and negative effects on consumers’ health.
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét