Developing Countries Must Be Made Accountable For Reforestation Funds

Deforestation in Amazon rainforest

Delegates at the United Nations Climate Conference are unable to build a consensus over an effective mechanism to control deforestation and thus reduce carbon emissions. Deforestation contributed 20% to the total carbon emissions worldwide and most of it happens in the poor and developing countries where vast stretches of forest cover are cleared for farming and other activities. While the poor and developing countries see this as an opportunity to cut an easy deal in the global fight against rising carbon emissions, the developed countries are concerned if the funds they would provide for reforestation would be used effectively.

To address the developed nations’ concerns regarding funds management, the developing countries also propose to place the entire reforestation program under the Clean Development Mechanism thus enabling them to earn carbon credits. But it is widely known the Clean Development Mechanism has its own drawbacks and inefficiencies. The developing countries are throwing weight behind such funding schemes as almost all developed countries want them to reduce their carbon emissions and reforestation seems the easiest way as it won’t have any significant affect on the fast growing economies of the developing countries.

Accountibilty, Quality Issues Raise Questions About Effectiveness Of Biofuels In Britain

View of palm oil plantation in Bogor, Indonesia

Amidst the worsening food crisis and widespread poverty nations around the world continue to back biofuels as the replacement of fossil fuels. Even after a World Bank report blamed excessive biofuel production for the skyrocketing food prices the producer and importer countries seem unwilling to reform their production and usage methods. The European Union continues to overlook the concerns made by several of its member countries which have voiced concerns about the environmental effects of biofuel production and has so far refused to suspend or rethink its renewable energy goal which aims to include 10% biofuel in transport fuel by 2020. The producers too are dodging global criticism and forging biofuel deals across the world as they seek to take advantage of the rising demand.

But while setting goals for use of clean fuels is a good thing failing to take steps to prevent deforestation and other environmental catastrophes is bad. And that ’s what the many importers of biofuels are doing, Britain being one of them. A recent study by the Renewable Fuels Agency of Britain points out that merely 19% of the biofuel used in Britain meets the environmental standards and whose origins can be traced back to confirm that they were produced in a sustainable way while the rest 81% don’t fulfill the quality requirements or address the sustainability issues satisfactorily.

Biofuel Agreement Between Netherlands & Brazil Defies Logic

The Netherlands, a member of EU and hence a partner to the emissions target legislation, has approached the world’s second largest producer of ethanol biofuel, Brazil, to help it meet the standards stated the legislation. According to this legislation biofuels would comprise of 10% of all the transport fuels by 2020.

Emission Targets

By March 2009 the European Union plans to pass a legislation that would raise the target for cutting carbon emissions to 30% percent by 2020. EU adopted a biofuel policy in order to achieve this target but lately the environmental consequences and the sustainability of this cleaner fuel have become targets of intense scrutiny from the members of various governments and scientists around the world. USA’s Environment Protection Agency too has similar plans.

Problems

Many scientists have linked the rising food prices to biofuel production and have warned that if the the current situation persists the world could see a ‘global food war‘. Already riots have be reported in many countries where people are protesting against the sky rocketing food prices. According to the UN 36 countries are facing food crisis, which is no mean figure.

Relentless cutting of rain forests in Brazil and Malaysia in order to make land available for production of biofuel crops has led to loss of ecological balance and has adversely affected the biodiversity of those regions. Greedy contractors seeing the tremendous biofuel demand are buying or forcefully taking away lands from farmers to grow sugarcane and palm.

The EPA has ordered that about 9 billion gallons of ethanol be blended to gasoline during 2008. But the scientists fear that an increased production of biofuel crops (sugarcane, maize etc.) would lead to expansion of an already large dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico.

Objections & Review

The arguments against the role of biofuels in the effort to achieve emissions targets is still restricted to the parliaments and review committees of many nations with environmental experts trying to persuade governments to rethink biofuel policies. The agreement on biofuels between the Netherlands and Brazil comes at a time when scientists across the world are sounding alarm bells about the adverse effects of biofuel production.

UN General Secretary Ban Ki-Moon and British Chancellor Alistair Darling are among those who have called for a review of the current biofuel policies. Recently even the Indian finance minister blamed biofuel production for the increasing food prices in his country.

The agreement which calls for sharing knowledge about the production and transport of biofuels and it does not send the right signals given the large build up public opinion against the use of biofuels. But surprisingly Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva not only thinks that the scientists are wrong in linking biofuels to food crisis but also wants to extend the biofuel production to some of the poorest nations in the world.