KILLING THE FORESTS
TO SAVE THE CLIMATE?
It is widely known that the November
Climate Summit (COP-6) in The Hague did not
reach any concrete agreements for reducing
climate change on our planet. Several
reasons can be cited for this failure, but
the main problem was the absence of equity
as a principle in the negotiations. With
northern governments, in particular the
United States, and transnational
corporations framing the discussion, false
"solutions" like the use of distant forests
to absorb emissions were on the table,
rather than honest proposals for fair and
immediate carbon dioxide reductions at
home.
The majority of the greenhouse gases
that cause climate change are emitted in
the North. While average global carbon
dioxide emissions are about one ton per
person per year, the average inhabitant of
the United States emits six times more than
this, and a person in El Salvador less than
half this amount. These unbalanced
emissions imply the inequitable use of the
atmosphere, which is an environmental space
that should be shared equally among all
inhabitants of the planet.
That those who emit more should reduce
more seems like an indisputable argument;
however, US politicians believe otherwise.
Instead of meeting their reduction targets
by reducing emissions domestically, they
propose schemes like planting trees to
absorb excess carbon in southern countries.
The result – "sinks" to absorb the North’s
gaseous wastes in the South – is a further
violation of the fair use of environmental
space.
Beyond the equity issue, the planting of
trees to solve the climate crisis raises
several other problems. Trees are not
permanent, and can be cut down at any time.
Furthermore, there are great uncertainties
about the effectiveness of carbon
sequestration, and forests may emit as much
carbon as they absorb under various
circumstances. And finally, if the proposal
to include tree plantations as sinks is
eventually accepted in a climate agreement,
absurd situations may arise such as the
destruction of a natural forest in order to
make way for a monoculture plantation of
trees genetically engineered to absorb more
carbon.
Proposals like these are extremely
dangerous for biodiversity and culture. But
climate change is just one of the many
factors threatening the trees of the world.
This issue of LINK looks at violations to
forests and forest peoples happening today
in places like Bangladesh, Brazil,
Cameroon, Colombia, Costa Rica, Sarawak and
Sri Lanka. Hopefully, the richness and
diversity of FoE campaigns to protect the
forests around the world will bring some
victories in the coming years.
Ricardo Navarro, FoEI Chair, El
Salvador
