New Scientific Panel on Sustainable Resource Management.

New Panel must boost resource-efficient growth and innovation, UN Environment Programme says.

BUDAPEST/Nairobi/Paris November 9, 2007 – Assessing the environmental risks of biofuel production and metal recycling are two of the issues likely to top the agenda of a newly formed global think tank on resource efficiency.

Launched in Budapest today at the World Science Forum, the new “International Panel for Sustainable Resource Management” - IPSRM seemingly build along lines that created in the past the IPCC – will provide scientific assessments and expert advice on the use intensity, the security of supplies and the environmental impacts of selected products and services on a global level.

“Climate change rightly tops the environmental agenda at the moment, but the world faces more inconvenient truths that must be addressed”, said Achim Steiner, UN Under-Secretary- General and Executive Director of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), which has established the Panel.

“Economic growth in our modern times cannot be achieved with old consumption and production patterns—a point brought into sharp relief by our new Global Environment Outlook-4 which shows that collectively humans are over-utilizing the Earth’s nature-based resources at a rate that is outstripping nature’s ability to renew and replenish them”, he said.

“We need to provide a boost to resource-efficient growth and innovation. We need to break the links between economic growth and environmental degradation, and finding ways to achieve this ‘decoupling’ is what the new resource panel is all about.”

Established by UNEP, with the support of a wide range of Governments, the European Commission and representatives from civil society, the new scientific panel is part of an international partnership on resource management. It will look at the impacts on resources and materials used in all phases of their life cycle.
“Quadrupling resource-productivity worldwide (doubling wealth while halving resource use) is the smoothest avenue to sustainable development”, according to Ernst Ulrich von Weizsaecker, Dean of the Donald Bren School of Environmental Science and Management at the University of California, and Co-chair of the Panel.

“We all agree that a lot more economic wealth is needed for six and a half billion people let alone nine billion people that we expect to live on earth by the middle of this century. On the other hand, we are already now overexploiting the earth. It is fair to say that we should reduce the consumption of carbon energy and other natural resources by roughly a factor of two. It is high time for the UN system to address the global resource challenges, and I feel honoured being invited to help on this exciting agenda”, he said.

“Humanity is facing its most serious challenge in how to interact with the ecosystems that support us and all forms of life”, said Ismail Serageldin, the other Panel Co-chair and Director of the Library of Alexandria. “We must find new and innovative ways to meet the needs of an expanding population, richer diets, and the appetite for energy. We must redesign the international and national policy environment so that it nurtures the development and promotes the introduction of these new ways world-wide.”

The new IPSRM, like the IPCC, is expected to provide hard scientific and empirical assessments, written in a clear language about complex issues and reports which can be read by those who can take action.

It is hoped that the Panel will assess the situation at the global level and will advise which priority issues to address, for instance metal recycling (should we ‘mine or recycle’, and what are the environmental risks), or the complex issue of bio-based products (are we tackling climate change, or are we ‘burning our food’ as some say).

The Panel is supported by a Secretariat, hosted by the Sustainable Consumption and Production Branch of UNEP’s Division of Technology, Industry and Economics, based in Paris . See www.unep.fr

—————–

 www.SustainabiliTank.info called the panel timely, because of another information that was made available today and that also involves a UN istitution. This material is promoted by : Joseph LaStella, President, Green Star Products, Inc. GSPI which has obvious interest in promoting the information. But he starts with a reply to Jean Ziegler, the UN Special Raporteur of the Right to Food, who as an active NGO has been for years involved in promoting issues that were in a way a favor to Arab interests. There were several clashes in his past with other Middle East figures. So, him promoting now the idea that trying to supply liquid fuels that are not of a petroleum origin, does not smell right. The following self serving business approach seems to us much more honest then a fight to keep the “is.”

The UNEP approach of bringing about an attempt at a scientific look at the issues, and starting from conservation and changes of lifestyles, before even trying to promote alternate supply, is the best of the three positions that will stand out in this posting. We prefer thus the IPSRM/UNEP approach and advocate a look at biofuel supplies as per the business approach of the GSPI, then we advise a critical look at the Jean Ziegler article in order to have the complete picture so we understand why no more serious progress was made in our clearly anticipated shortages of fuel.

GSPI States: Some Biofuels Add Significant Food to Your Table

SAN DIEGO–(BUSINESS WIRE)–Nov. 9, 2007–Green Star Products,
Inc. (OTC:GSPI) responds to the recent comments by Jean Ziegler, the
United Nations Special Reporter of the Right to Food, wherein he said
that using food crops for biofuels amounts to a “crime against
humanity.”

Mr. Ziegler’s remarks carefully describe conventional ethanol’s
impact in using “food for fuel.” Whereas Biodiesel, which is also a
biofuel, is produced in the U.S. from soybeans and provides an
enormous amount of high protein human food along with each gallon of
biodiesel it produces.

Some of the actual unpublished facts are as follows:

For each bushel (60 pounds) of soybeans produced only 10 pounds of
extracted oil is used in making biodiesel. The other 50 pounds (the
soy meal) is used to feed the hungry of the world as one of the best
high protein foods available.

Therefore, any increase in demand for soy oil to produce U.S. fuel
actually creates an additional significant amount of food for our
tables.

Some uninformed world leaders are now even considering a 5-year
moratorium on the production of biofuels worldwide because of
inadequate information concerning biofuels.

Mr. Joseph LaStella, President of Green Star Products, has been
publishing editorials concerning Global Warming and Peak Oil for many
years. Unfortunately many of Mr. LaStella’s predictions have now come
true (see GreenStarUSA.com).

Let’s review the real situation and solution concerning biofuels.

The U.S. Congress passed a provision in the 2005 energy bill
called the renewable fuels standard which required oil companies to
blend 7.5 billion gallons of renewable fuels into the nation’s fuel
supply by 2012. To the surprise of many people including our congress
this goal will be achieved in 2008, four years ahead of schedule.

Ethanol, also a biofuel, uses corn as its feedstock and uses the
entire bushel of corn for its production. Ethanol production (unlike
biodiesel) removes vast amounts of food from the global markets.

The recent massive private investment to build ethanol plants was
fueled by the mandated ethanol requirements and the high-anticipated
profits projected by these mandated ethanol requirements. In 2006,
spot prices for ethanol exceeded $5 per gallon on the west coast. The
American industrial might and greed rose to the occasion and built
ethanol plants to reach a federal production goal four years early.

This is good and bad at the same time; the U.S. certainly proved
that we could rise to the occasion given the right incentive
(profits).

However, the ethanol feedstock supply, mainly corn, was not ready
for this abrupt change. Corn prices doubled sending protests around
the world. Price of basic food goods in Mexico, India, and other
countries increased dramatically and sparked formal protests to the
U.S.

This is only part of the story; with corn prices almost doubling
the American farmers also saw a great opportunity to cash in on
profits and a domino effect began to take place. Many farmers strayed
from the time proven crop rotation method and began growing corn on
the same land year after year. A new slang phrase “corn on corn on
corn” summarizes this practice. This also destroys, or at least
depletes, the topsoil with the temptation of short-term big profits
winning out in many cases.

The next domino to fall was that soybean farmers decided to also
switch to corn to cash in on profits thus reducing soybean production.
This switch also reduces the human edible food from our tables, a real
double whammy to the hungry.

Add some bad global agricultural weather to the equation and you
have increased world hunger.

Further complications include some real corn storage problems this
year since corn is harvested once per year, however ethanol plants run
all year long. Ethanol plants usually only have storage for a 10-day
supply. Therefore, adequate storage silos were not available to store
some of the corn crop and it began to rot rendering it unsuitable for
either ethanol production or human consumption. Silo construction has
a 3-year backlog. A real good business to be in this year was the silo
construction business, which is booming.

The domino effect continued and the effect of recent record high
prices for soy bean oil resulted in many biodiesel plants across the
U.S. shutting down with bankruptcy as a possibility. This will mean
less alternative fuel to run our transportation industry and less high
protein food for our tables. Remember the transportation industry runs
mainly on diesel with biodiesel as a blend and not on ethanol!

It is now evident that corn feedstock is not a real long-term
solution to our fuel shortage. However, it will be a partial answer as
the same holds true for soy oil based biodiesel. Neither of these
products alone can possibly wean the U.S. off foreign oil for energy
independence. There is just not enough prime agricultural land
available.

Let’s talk about Brazil ethanol. Brazil has been using ethanol
since the 1970s and utilizes sugarcane as its feedstock. Sugarcane
feedstock to make ethanol is more efficient than the U.S. corn
ethanol.

People didn’t realize that the present U.S. ethanol production
capacity already exceeds the entire Brazil production capacity. If
Brazil expanded its present capacity by its planned 80% increase in
five years, to the 9.5 billion gallons level, that would still only
represent less than 3% of the U.S. daily oil requirements even if
Brazil gave the U.S. all of its ethanol, which of course is not going
to happen.

U.S. ethanol giants, ADM, Cargill and Bunge, are hungry for a
foothold into the Brazil ethanol market except Brazilian families have
so far rejected offers.

ADM’s chief strategist, Steve Mills, said his company needs to
capture know-how for growing and processing sugarcane. “The one thing
we do know here is that we’re going to have to acquire some expertise
in the area,” said Mr. Mills.

Brazil ethanol is certainly not a long-term solution to U.S.
energy independence; it can only be a small patch on an ever growing
hole in the U.S. fuel crisis.

Other supplies of feedstock such as canola oil from Canada and
increased U.S. production of canola oil can certainly fill another
domestic production gap in the fuel chain. Canola seed produces 140
gallons of oil per acre per year versus 50 gallons for soybeans.
Canola oil is an excellent feedstock for biodiesel production.

Contrary to the belief of many biofuel industries experts, palm
oil from Asia is not an acceptable alternative feedstock for
biodiesel.

Palm oil from Asia is not making the U.S. more energy independent.
Furthermore there is a growing world protest against biodiesel
production from palm oil because there is massive destruction of rain
forests to clear the way for palm oil plantations.

People are already talking about banning the use of palm oil for
biofuel to save the rain forests.

Palm oil production adds to Global Warming first by burning the
rain forest and further adds to Global Warming by eliminating the rain
forest to absorb CO2 from the atmosphere, which is the major Global
Warming gas. This is not an acceptable alternative fuel solution.

The palm oil situation is becoming a global issue. Indonesia’s
government is now asking global investors to pay their country not to
cut and burn its pristine rain forest in order to make room for palm
oil plantations.

The big question is: Is there an answer to Global Warming and the
Energy Crisis? Absolutely yes!

However, the U.S. is about 10 years late in exercising such a
program.

What does all this mean? In the mid 1970s the U.S. launched two
programs, which could have helped avert today’s fuel and Global
Warming crises.

Both of these programs (which lasted over 15 years) provided the
essential stepping stones to a successful solution. They were the USDA
Aquatic Species Program, which studied algae as a fuel source, and the
cellulosic ethanol programs, which utilized waste agricultural
products (i.e. rice stalks, corn stalks, wood chips, municipal waste,
etc.) to produce ethanol. Both of these programs were cancelled under
President Clinton’s administration because certain industry experts
did not see foreign oil imports as a matter of national security and
that oil prices would not increase beyond $20 per barrel in the
foreseeable future.

Mr. LaStella has been preaching these facts for years and is
documented in many publications (see Green Star Products website
 GreenStarUSA.com.

Algae is the ultimate answer for biodiesel fuel, just consider the
following:

1. Algae produce 100 times more oil per acre than traditional food
oilseed crops such as soy etc. (Note: Algae produces 4000
gallons of oil per acre per year versus 50 gallons per acre
for soy.)

2. Algae eat CO2, the major Global Warming Gas, and produce
oxygen.

3. Algae require only sunshine and non-drinkable (salt or
brackish) water.

4. Algae do not compete with food crops for either agricultural
land or fresh water.

5. Algae can reproduce themselves and their oil every 6 hours,
while it takes Mother Nature millions of years to produce
crude oil in the ground.

GSPI has organized a Consortium of companies with far reaching
research and experience in all of these advanced technologies
including cellulosic ethanol, algae, biogas, etc.

The future refineries will be biorefineries, which will utilize
only non-food waste products such as agricultural waste, municipal
waste, manure and algae as feedstock and will produce ethanol,
biodiesel, animal food, fertilizer, electricity, heat and a variety of
specialized chemical products essential for the U.S. industry.

While efforts in the U.S. are just beginning to research
cellulosic ethanol, two of GSPI consortium partners are engaged with
an India chemical company to start construction of the first
commercial cellulosic ethanol plant in India based on years of
privately funded research here in the U.S.

The India plant will utilize a patented (non-enzyme) production
process.

GSPI Consortium partners have a common goal to combine their
technologies to build the first complete Biorefinery using only waste
products as feedstock.

Each of the Consortium technologies can be used independently to
produce specific energy, fuel, fertilizer, agricultural food and
assorted chemicals. However, when combined into one facility the
advantages become impressive.

Each of the Consortium members has agreed to license each other
for specific projects. However, the Ultimate Biorefinery is still the
goal!

Green Star Products will participate in the biodiesel production
and algae processing facility portion of these biorefineries.

Each of the Consortium companies is now actively engaged in
building individual facilities. However, there is significant global
interest in building the first Biorefinery.

Potential financial partners are now negotiating the financing for
the Biorefinery concept.

All members of the Consortium agree that the first Biorefinery
should be built in the U.S.

Green Star Products, Inc. (OTC:GSPI) (OTC:GSPI.PK) is an
environmentally friendly company dedicated to creating innovative
cost-effective products to improve the quality of life and clean up
the environment. Green Star Products and its Consortium are involved
in the production of renewable clean-burning biodiesel and other
products, including lubricants, additives and devices that reduce
emissions and improve fuel economy in vehicles, machinery and power
plants. For more information, see Green Star Products’ Web site at
 http://www.GreenStarUSA.com, or call Investor Relations at
619-864-4010, or fax 619-789-4743, or email  info at GreenStarUSA.com.
Information about trading prices and volume can be obtained at several
Internet sites, including http://www.pinksheets.com,
 http://www.bloomberg.com and http://www.bigcharts.com under the ticker
symbol “GSPI”.

Forward-looking statements in the release are made pursuant to the
“safe harbor” provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform
Act of 1995. Investors are cautioned that such forward-looking
statements involve risks and uncertainties, including without
limitation, continued acceptance of the company’s products, increased
levels of competition for the company, new products and technological
changes, the company’s dependence on third-party suppliers, and other
risks detailed from time to time in the company’s periodic filings
with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

MULTIMEDIA AVAILABLE:
 ” title=”mailto:info@GreenStarUSA.com“>info at GreenStarUSA.com