An Australian professor says the push to grow crops for biofuels rather than food has worsened the plight of cyclone victims in Myanmar.

Back in 2005, Myanmar's ruling junta required every farmer with an acre of land to plant Jatropha trees on their property. The oil squeezed from the non-edible crop boasts greater yields of oil per acre than other biofuels, with one-fifth the carbon emissions of petroleum-based products. The junta hoped biofuel exports would replace Myanmar's 40,000 barrels per day of petroleum imports and help an economy on the verge of collapse.

Production of biofuels in developing countries has been vigorously supported by industrialized countries. In fact, the International Herald Tribune reports that venture capital investment in biofuels has increased by 800 percent over the past four years.

But in Myanmar, otherwise known as Burma, the junta failed to build a refining plant, leaving its citizens with a useless Jatropha crop, setting off a chain reaction that increased food insecurity and fuel prices. Then the cyclone wiped out much of Myanmar's mid-year rice harvest.

Given Myanmar's political, social and economic idiosyncracies, it's certainly not the ideal case study for jatropha or biofuel. But plans to invest billions of dollars in biofuel refineries in neighboring countries have been put on hold, leading to questions about how sustainable the current equilibrium between food and fuel production really is.

Controversial U.S. Farm Bill was just passed into law. Photo: Johnny Alive (flickr)

Critics of the newly passed U.S. Farm Bill say the measure will hurt poor farmers in the rest of the world.

The $285-billion Farm Bill, which passed into law in May, increases crop subsidies, boosts conservation spending and expands the food stamp program. It also guarantees annual payments to farmers and pays farmers for any crops they sell for less than the federally regulated minimum price.

But international agencies – and even members of the president’s own administration – railed against the measure.

Deputy U.S. Agriculture Secretary Chuck Conner said the measure “heads in the wrong direction in terms of our international obligations,” and expects trade partners “to protest in every way they can." Australia is already making plans to challenge the Bill through the World Trade Organization.

Oxfam America says that by encouraging large companies to overproduce, U.S. government subsidies lead to dumping – selling surplus goods in international markets at prices under the cost of production. The humanitarian agency says this undermines local production, threatens millions of farmers worldwide and clearly violates WTO rules.

Even before this Farm Bill, U.S. farm programs were criticized internationally for their trade-distorting subsidies. This bill further undermines our moral authority. Horst Koehler, an official with the International Monetary Fund, criticized the U.S. for its "double standards" about open markets.

Our hypocrisy not only damages our reputation, but makes the EU and other large exporters less likely to adopt the kind of policies that will help the world’s farmers.