The View From Here - Palm Oil

It was quite easy to get caught in the hype of environmentalism back in the States. Farmers' markets? Yes, please. Shade grown coffee? Wouldn't have it any other way. I reduced, reused and recycled myself into the hipster clan of hyper-aware college grads, as aware of their carbon footprint as they were about the newest unsigned band on the scene. But yet it was hard to ignore how the other half (or should we say 90%) of America lived - suburbs sprawling away from the city and their corresponding big box stores, farms (supported by protectionist measures, if I might add) stretching from upstate New York to southern California, people driving as far as they could with the biggest cars they could find - and thrived. This is the America I deluded myself into thinking did not exist and it is also the America that emits more (per capita and as a whole) carbon dioxide than any other country in the world.
This is why it galls me to read articles about the growing pollution in China, cattle raising in Brazil or orangutan survival in Malaysia and Indonesia. Why should developing countries be singled out for atrocities that the America itself is willing to commit? It just seems like the US is suffering from the "pot calling the kettle black" syndrome except that in this case, the repercussions affect the livelihood of millions.
Case in point: Malaysia. Palm oil is the main export of Malaysia and has recently come under fire from environmentalist groups because forests (and their inhabitants, orangutans included) were cleared to make way for plantations. I do think it's a shame that we're driving many populations of animals to extinction but that's a by-product of the crisis we're facing -- overpopulation hence the greater need for raw material. However, it must also be said that crude palm oil is also used in biodiesel, a sustainable alternative to fossil fuels and a large part of the Malaysian economy depends on the demand for palm oil. In our quest to live like our counterparts in developed countries, we are foiled by those very counterparts whom in a dangerous display of double standardism keep our countries poor in the name of the environment. Often too, these environmentalists are funded by competing products: the soybean oil industry (which is in direct competition with the palm oil industry) frequently funds research that disparages palm oil; beef producers in the US and UK frequently call for the boycott of Brazilian beef based on environmental concerns; and America's perennial competitor, China, is an easy target for anti-trade Americans.
I suppose what I'm trying to say is that while environmental protection is a noble and just cause, there should be an ethical imperative for anyone living in a developed country to enable their poorer counterparts a chance to live like they do. Anti-competitiveness can be demostrated in many forms and environmentalism is one of them. Also, take everything with a pinch of salt (including what is written here) because no matter how even-handed we try to approach any subject matter, biases prevail. Now off I get from my biodegradable, recycled soapbox.