***********************************************
WORLDWIDE
FOREST/BIODIVERSITY CAMPAIGN NEWS
ACTION
ITEM: Forest Plantations May Speed up Global Warming
***********************************************
Forest Networking a Project of Forests.org
http://forests.org/ -- Forest Conservation
Portal
http://forests.org/web/ -- Discuss Forest
Conservation
11/09/00
OVERVIEW
& COMMENTARY
Many of
the World's developed countries are shirking their
responsibility
to reduce carbon dioxide emissions under the Kyoto
Agreement
by attempting to claim credit for carbon stored in planted
trees,
thus allowing more emissions. Our
scientific understanding of
carbon
sinks continues to grow, as major new studies indicate that
plantation
forestry, rather than mitigating climate change, may
actually
speed it up. Two studies published in
the science journal
Nature
show that as temperatures rise, forests (particularly
plantations)
are likely to emit more CO2 into the atmosphere, leading
to
further warming of the climate. The
conclusion is that planting
trees
to absorb CO2 in order to offset additional future emissions is
full of
uncertainty. Refraining from emitting
carbon into the
atmosphere
in the first place is the only way to be certain
atmospheric
carbon dioxide does not rise unnecessarily.
These
findings
come in addition to another recent study that showed that
ancient
old-growth forests are much more dependable carbon sinks than
plantations,
and even when fully mature continue to sequester
additional
large amounts of carbon in their soils for long periods of
time.
Together,
these findings of the uncertainty of plantation carbon
sinks
and the surety of ancient old-growth carbon storage, are
dramatically
at odds with the policy initiatives to be negotiated
soon at
the Hague climate conference. The
United States, Canada,
Australia,
Russia and other countries are pressing at the Hague
climate
meeting to achieve as much as half of their greenhouse gas
reductions
not by reducing carbon dioxide emissions, but by using
"sinks"
like planted forests to remove carbon dioxide. The proposal
to
allow carbon credits for tree planting is almost certain to
accelerate
the destruction of native forests - as is currently taking
place
in Tasmania, Australia (below). Thus,
in essence the proposal
is to
eliminate sure and secure carbon storage ecosystems to replace
them
with plantations that may or may not hold carbon well.
This is
a grossly irresponsible position in direct conflict with the
best
scientific knowledge currently available.
Given an
unwillingness
to account for carbon sinks in a responsible and valid
manner;
such as giving credit solely for ancient forest protection
and
ensuring plantations do not replace these more dependable carbon
stores,
we here at Forests.org join Greenpeace and WWF in calling for
carbon
sinks to be excluded from the Kyoto treaty.
It must be
insisted
that industrialized countries achieve their targets by
cutting
emissions.
Below
is more information on the recent scientific findings. There
is also
a short piece that indicates that our worst fears regarding
natural
forests being cleared for plantations that as "carbon sinks"
are to
be considered credits, thus allowing more emissions, is coming
to pass
in Australia (not surprising given their government's well
established
cavalier and dismissive attitude towards the value of
ancient
forests and severity of climate change).
Lastly, there is an
Action
Item requesting that you contact the American delegation soon
to
depart for the Hague to raise these points.
You may also want to
send an
email from our web site to the United Nations Framework
Convention
on Climate (UNFCCC), which is responsible for the
conference. You can let them know that Ancient
Old-Growth Forests
Make
the Best Carbon Sinks at:
http://forests.org/emailaction/oldcarbon_oct_00.htm
or by
emailing them directly at secretariat@unfccc.int .
g.b.
*******************************
RELAYED
TEXT STARTS HERE:
ITEM #1
Title: Forests Could Speed Up Global Warming,
Scientists Say
Source: Reuters, Copyright 2000
Date: November 8, 2000
By: Patricia Reaney
LONDON
(Reuters) - Global warming could happen faster than scientists
expect
because forests, instead of mitigating climate change, could
speed
it up, researchers said Wednesday.
As
environment ministers prepare for a major climate change
conference
in The Hague next week, scientists at Britain's Hadley
Center
for Climate Prediction and Research said planting forests to
absorb
carbon dioxide (CO2) and reduce global warming could be
counterproductive.
Two
studies published in the science journal Nature using computer
models
of global warming show that as temperatures rise, forests, or
so-called
carbon sinks, are likely to emit more CO2 into the
atmosphere,
leading to further warming of the climate.
``Our
initial results suggest that vegetation and soils, which
currently
absorb about a quarter of human-made carbon dioxide
emissions,
could accelerate future climate change by releasing carbon
to the
atmosphere as the planet warms,'' said Dr Peter Cox.
The
findings could have important implications for the Hague meeting
because
the use of carbon sinks is one of the key issues that will be
debated
at the two-week conference.
Ministers
from around the world will try to seal an international
agreement
to cut emissions of CO2 by an average of five percent of
1990
levels by 2008-2012 in line with a treaty agreed in Kyoto, Japan
in
1997.
The
Kyoto treaty allows countries to plant forests to offset some of
their
CO2 emissions.
``All
we can say... is that if you want to plant trees to absorb CO2
in
order to offset additional future emissions there are a huge
amount
of uncertainties,'' Dr Geoff Jenkins, head of the Hadley
climate
change program, said in a telephone interview.
``On
the other hand if you refrain from emitting carbon into the
atmosphere
you know where you are in terms of its effect on CO2. So
there
is a big difference in the uncertainty levels between those two
courses
of action,'' he added.
Charges
Of Cheating
Environmental
groups Greenpeace and WWF are calling for carbon sinks
to be
excluded from the Kyoto treaty. Both groups want industrialized
countries
to achieve their targets by cutting emissions.
``Claiming
credit for carbon stored in trees is a blatant attempt by
some
countries to cheat on their Kyoto commitments,'' Bill Hare,
Greenpeace
International's Climate Policy Director, said in a
statement.
The
second study in Nature by Dr Richard Betts also showed that
planting
new forests in cold parts of the world like Siberia and
Canada
could be doing more harm than good.
This is
because in northern countries, where the ground is covered in
snow,
forests absorb more of the sun's heat than the terrain. The
additional
exposure to the sun has a warming influence that could
offset
part of the cooling effect of the CO2 uptake.
Britain's
Environment Minister Michael Meacher said the research
highlighted
the importance of the Hague conference and the difficult
negotiations
ministers will face.
``These
results add weight to our view that we must achieve real
emission
reductions to meet Kyoto targets, and confirm our concerns
about
sinks. We must be cautious about them,'' he said in a
statement.
Item #2
Title: Environment groups criticise Tasmanian
forestry practices
Source: c 2000 ABC (Australia)
Date: November 8, 2000
Environment
groups in Europe claim forestry practices in the
Australian
state of Tasmania have revealed a giant loophole in the
proposed
Kyoto protocol to reduce global warming.
Matt
Peacock reports:
Greenpeace
and the World Wildlife Fund say rather than helping the
environment,
the proposal under the Kyoto protocol to allow nations
to
claim credits for tree planting, may actually accelerate the
destruction
of native forests. And they are citing Tasmanian examples
of
Japanese power companies sponsoring the destruction of high
conservation
value native forests to be replaced by fast-growing
plantations,
which it's then intended would be claimed as carbon
credits
under the international treaty to be hammered out next week
at the
Hague. The United States, Australia and Japan are strongly in
favour
of the carbon trading system, which would allow countries
to
increase their atmospheric pollution provided they acquire
sufficient
credits.
ITEM #3
Title: PRE-CLIMATE SUMMIT CALL-IN TOMORROW
Source: American Lands Alliance
Date: November 8, 2000
By: Aaron Rappaport, American Lands Alliance
With
the Presidential election still undecided, it's hard to believe
that
the climate summit in The Hague - the most important meeting for
the
world's climate since the Kyoto Protocol was written in 1997 -
starts
next Monday, but it does. Regardless of
the political outcome
on our
shores, forest rules under the Protocol will be decided at The
Hague
and will have long-term and far-reaching consequences for
management
on forests all over the world, including on 500 million
acres
here in America. The U.S. is still
clinging to an
environmentally
dangerous proposal for forest rules under the
Protocol,
which will be finalized at the summit.
The
rules will govern how forests are used and credited for absorbing
carbon
dioxide (CO2). Credited activities will
likely receive
significant
financial incentives. The rules will
also cover vast
areas
of land, 500 million acres of forests in the U.S. alone. Thus
it is
crucial that only activities that are good for climate,
forests,
and other native ecosystems receive credits.
Now,
building on last week's call in day, conservationists need to
take
pressure on U.S. negotiators to the next level. Two steps are
urgently
needed:
A) Urgent calls to the Administration are
needed tommorow(November
9) as a
"send-off" as negotiators prepare to leave for The Hague.
B) Rapid response from forest activists
throughout the summit's
duration. We've done well with this in the Congress
and with the
WTO. Now, let's take it to international climate
negotiations. To
join
the rapid response team contact Darcy Davis at 503-978-0132 or
mailto:darcydavis@americanlands.org.
Tomorrow,
please call Roger Ballentine, the Deputy Assistant to the
President
for Environmental Initiatives, at 202/456-1782. When you
call,
please make the following points:
1) Forest rules under the Kyoto Protocol must
protect and restore
old-growth
forests and other native ecosystems.
2) "Business-as-usual" forestry should
not be credited because it
does
not reduce CO2 emissions.
3) Destructive activities such as tree
plantations should not be
credited. Doing so would create additional financial
incentives for
environmental
harm.
If you
prefer to send a letter by mail or fax Mr. Ballentine's
contact
information is: Mr. Roger Ballentine,
Deputy Assistant to
the
President for Environmental Initiatives, The White House, 1600
Pennsylvania
Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20500; Fax:
(202) 456-1736.
Public
outcry has helped. In response, the
Administration has
conditionally
rejected old-growth unfriendly carbon accounting
promoted
by the timber industry. However, the
U.S. rules proposal
would
grant credits to current, business as usual forest activities,
as well
as to environmentally destructive forest activities such as
the use
of pesticides, herbicides, irrigation, and exotic and even
genetically
engineered trees. And, as allude to
above,
Administration
support for old-growth protective carbon accounting is
still
uncertain. Moreover, the U.S. proposal
currently makes this
contingent
upon "substantial" credit being received for business-as-
usual
forestry!
For
more background on forest rules under the Kyoto Protocol, see
www.americanlands.org/forestweb/factsheet.htm.
For
more information please contact Darcy Davis or Aaron Rappaport of
the
American Lands Alliance. Darcy Davis
503/978-0132,
mailto:darcydavis@americanlands.org. Aaron Rappaport 202/547-9098,
mailto:arappaport@americanlands.org.
Steve
Holmer
Campaign
Coordinator
American
Lands
726 7th
Street SE
Washington,
D.C. 20003
202/547-9105
202/547-9213
fax
mailto:wafcdc@americanlands.org
http://www.americanlands.org
###RELAYED
TEXT ENDS###
In
accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is
distributed
without profit to those who have expressed a prior
interest
in receiving forest conservation informational materials for
educational,
personal and non-commercial use only.
Recipients should
seek
permission from the source to reprint this PHOTOCOPY. All
efforts
are made to provide accurate, timely pieces, though ultimate
responsibility
for verifying all information rests with the reader.
For
additional forest conservation news & information please see the
Forest
Conservation Portal at URL= http://forests.org/
Networked
by Forests.org, Inc., gbarry@forests.org