Combating deforestation is one of the means available to States to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. This mechanism, called REDD, is under discussion at the Copenhagen summit. Once again, it brings rich countries and developing countries face to face.
Image of the Amazon basin obtained by CLASlite: in pink and blue the deforested areas, in green the intact forest.
Image of the Amazon basin obtained by CLASlite: in pink and blue the deforested areas, in green the intact forest. (Courtesy Greg Asner / CLASlite)
The states gathered for the Copenhagen summit are talking big money, it is inevitable. The fight against global warming must be financed, in particular aid given to poor or developing countries which are very vulnerable to climate change. Preserving forests is one of the major challenges of this global cooperation.
It has been discussed for several years within the framework of the REDD system, a very practical acronym which sums up a long title: "Reducing emissions linked to deforestation and forest degradation in developing countries".
CO2 emissions from the destruction of tropical forests represent 12 to 20% of annual global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Cutting down trees and modifying soils release large amounts of CO2 stored by these forests. Not to mention that deforestation is reducing the extent of one of the main natural carbon sinks on the planet. Brazil, Indonesia (which has the most alarming rate of deforestation today) and the Congo are the first to be affected by REDD.
This scheme can be financed in two ways: either by market mechanisms, countries that protect their forests selling emission credits on an international carbon market. Either by government funds - there are already some that finance projects in the Amazon or Indonesia.
The market system can have perverse effects: first, that of allowing polluters to continue emitting GHGs while it is important to quickly reduce emissions (read 2020 pivotal year, etc.). It also risks transforming forests into new 'green gold', coveted by investors, to the detriment of the populations who live in these forests without destroying it. British researcher Simon Lewis (University of Leeds) recently wrote in the journal Nature that tropical forest dwellers should be beneficiaries of at least 50% of REDD funding, in order to maintain their livelihoods and avoid a new humanitarian crisis.
In addition to the question of financing this scheme for protecting the tropical forest, there is the problem of its objectives. For the time being, developing countries are reluctant to face the quantified constraints.
The effectiveness of REDD will also depend on the technologies put in place to monitor and quantify deforestation. This forest monitoring has already started in the Amazon basin in Brazil. By combining the freely available satellite images with analysis methods developed by researchers from the Carnegie Institution (California, USA), the CLASlite system reveals the regions of the Amazon basin intact and those that are degraded. According to its promoters, five countries in the Andes-Amazon region have adopted this system and its use should expand.
Cécile Dumas
Sciences-et-avenir.com
11/12/09
http://tempsreel.nouvelobs.com/actualit ... cales.html