as well as a reduction in the quality of the soil in regions where this was practised. Within this wider dialogue between food security and environmental sustainability is the question of whether biofuels are a sustainable substitute for fossil fuels. The government's decision to subsidise the production of biofuels has been commended in some quarters, but we need to ask ourselves at what cost. A problem arises because even though biofuels were intended to reduce carbon emissions from fossil fuel burning, they have now become a pollutant in their own right. The FAO states that nitrous oxides released from fertilizers that might be put in the ground in large monocultures will have up to 300 times more warming effect than the carbon dioxide from burning fossil fuels (FAO 2008). Biofuelwatch.org argues that biofuels have the ability to increase greenhouse gas emissions, cause deforestation, and worsen local air quality when used to produce electricity (Ernsting). In addition, the massive, intensive monoculture fields that have to be cultivated solely for the purpose of making fuel does serious damage to the land, reducing the amount of food available for present consumption as well as diminishing the capacity of the land to produce food in the future. As the FAO report concludes, 'If the objective of biofuel support policies is to mitigate global warming, then fuel efficiency and forest conservation and restoration would be more effective alternatives' (FAO 2008). Welcome the guests All the issues that have been discussed should normally be addressed before