CLIMATE, FORESTS AND
THE KYOTO PROTOCOL
Climate change and forests are
inextricably linked. Forests contribute to
environmental stability by mitigating
extreme temperatures, increasing regional
precipitation, and preventing soil erosion
and deterioration. They are an important
component in the global carbon cycle, and
act as active carbon sinks in many cases.
The large amount of CO2 stored in forest
ecosystems is an important buffer in the
process of climate change.
There is no doubt that the global loss
of trees -- through clearing and burning,
through the conversion of forests to
plantations, and through related forests
fires -- is having a real impact on our
atmosphere. These forest activities
constitute between 20 and 25 percent of
total carbon emissions. Furthermore, there
is increasing evidence that the world faces
a positive feedback cycle in which climate
change, exacerbated by forest fires,
increases the frequency of the El Nino
phenomenon, which in turn causes more
forest burning.
How Climate Change Effects
Forests
There are many scientific uncertainties
about the precise impacts of climate change
on forests. It has been estimated that a
one degree Celsius temperature rise could
alter the function and composition of
forests: in some cases, forest cover will
disappear completely. It may be that
slow-growing species will be replaced by
faster-growing, highly adaptable species.
There will be more frequent outbreaks and
extended ranges of pests and pathogens.
Decreased precipitation and higher
temperatures will result in more frequent
and more intense fires.
Scientific predictions have shown that
boreal forests are more strongly affected
by climate change than other forest
systems. This is because warming is
expected to be particularly significant at
high latitudes, and boreal forests are more
strongly affected by temperature than are
forests in other latitudinal zones.
The loss or degradation of forests can
create serious environmental problems
including soil erosion, flooding and
drought. Forests contain as much as 90
percent of the world's land-based species,
literally millions of types of flora and
fauna. Many species and varieties of plants
have not yet been categorized by science,
and they are sometimes restricted to very
small areas. As it is, 80 percent of the
original forest worldwide has been cleared,
fragmented or otherwise degraded. Illegal
logging, even in protected areas, continues
unabated.
Not enough attention has been paid to
the implications of climate change for
forests. The Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change (IPCC) estimates that at
least one-third of the remaining forests
may be adversely affected by climate
change. More recently, the Hadley Center
for Climate Change at the UK Meteorological
Office has predicted that forests will
become a significant net global source of
CO2 by 2050.
Kyoto Forests
Under the Kyoto Protocol, forests are
recognized as potential sinks for carbon.
This means that amounts of carbon
sequestered through afforestation and
reforestation can be subtracted from a
country’s assigned CO2 reductions or may be
transferred under Joint Implementation.
Forests and their ecosystems hold almost
46 percent of all carbon stored. Due to
climate change and increasing population
pressures, these carbon sinks are
impermanent, uncertain, and represent a
threat to the environmental integrity of
the Protocol. For these reasons, Friends of
the Earth and other NGOs have been
campaigning for the exclusion of sinks from
the Kyoto Protocol's Clean Development
Mechanism.
Countries would plant large-scale
plantations -- the so-called "Kyoto
forests" --
around the world in
order to offset carbon dioxide emissions
and obtain carbon credits. It has been
estimated that between 345 million and 3.2
billion hectares could be available for
this purpose if forest management
activities became eligible under the Kyoto
Protocol. The Washington DC-based NGO
Forest Trends International projects the
total annual market for carbon at US$30-100
billion.
Plantations are a way to avoid
meaningful reductions in greenhouse gas
emissions. Experience in many countries has
indicated that plantations adversely affect
natural forests and ecosystems, cause great
losses in biodiversity, disrupt the social
structure of local communities, and
displace people from their traditional
lands (see page 17). They favour
transnational corporations and increase
social inequality. Their role in forest
destruction and therefore their
contribution to greenhouse emissions must
be emphasized.
"Sinks" such as these probably
constitute the largest loophole in the
Kyoto treaty. An important factor in the
exploitation of this loophole will be the
extent to which well-meaning NGOs take part
in these seemingly beneficial carbon
forestry projects, such as those aimed at
supporting existing grassroots conservation
efforts. NGOs must understand that all
carbon forestry projects, even those
engineered to have some local benefits,
will also affect other communities over a
very far-flung area. All "offset" projects
are designed to license faraway companies
or vehicles to continue to use a
disproportionate amount of the atmosphere
as a CO2 dump, and to legitimize the
operations of the coalmines or oil wells
needed to fuel them.
Monitoring emissions reduction projects
is another potential opportunity for
profit. Consultants can advise companies
about where it might be profitable to look
for reductions opportunities, and
specialist firms are springing up to offer
their services in certifying that emissions
reductions are real. Some of these
consultants are also established NGOs; for
example, the US-based Environmental Defense
Fund is acting as a consultant to the
Suncor company to track its emissions
reductions.
Forests Forever?
The vital role of forests in maintaining
the health and balance of our planet is
indisputable. Forests provide clean water,
habitats for rare and endangered species,
sustenance for communities, and they serve
as carbon sinks that mitigate global
warming. Once gone, these valuable
resources cannot be replaced, and
scientists are now warning that we are fast
approaching the point of no return.
Leonie van der Maesen, FoE Australia
Based on a full-length report by Leonie
van der Maesen, FoE Australia, October
2000.
Frankentrees
|
|
Researchers at the Michigan Technical
University in the United States have
proudly presented a new,
genetically-engineered breed of aspen
that could revolutionize pulp and
paper production. They introduced a
gene into the aspen tree that cuts
the amount of lignin the species
produces nearly in half. Lignin, a
component of all wood, must be
chemically separated from cellulose
to make pulp in paper production. The
transgenic aspen saplings produce up
to 15 percent more cellulose, and
thus grow very quickly. The industry
promises trees that will grow faster,
resist rot, repel insect attacks by
carrying a gene with a natural
insecticide, and will likely grow in
very dry conditions.
This may be good news for the
forestry industry, but there are
growing concerns among many
environmental scientists about the
potential effects of
genetically-modified trees upon the
environment. It has been recognized
that it is impossible to control or
predict the long-term impact of any
genetically-manipulated organism
(GMO).
An investigation by WWF identified
more than 120 genetically-engineered
tree trials over the past decade in
17 countries using 24 different tree
species. Companies experimenting with
GE trees include Monsanto and the
Australian biotech company ForBio,
which have joined forces with the
Indonesian company Monfori Nusantra
in order to mass produce timber and
wood fibre using GE teak, acacia and
eucalyptus in Borneo. Another example
is Genfor, a US$5 million project to
grow GE radiata pine resistant to
European shoot moth and other pests.
Based in Chile, it will use expertise
from the Canadian biotech company
Silvagen.
Perhaps the biggest single threat
from forest biotechnology is that it
could become an incentive for
inappropriate plantation development.
It should be recognized that forest
sinks can only provide a temporary
solution, and will not provide an
overall reduction in emissions.
|
