UK Says Rich Nations Should Pay Billions Every Year for Rainforest

A UK commissioned report stated Tuesday that wealthy countries should pay tropical nations billions of dollars annually to save their forests.

The report, titled “Climate Change: Financing Global Forests,” offered that this money should come from private donors and global carbon markets.  The report states that by 2030, developing nations should also be asked to pay to help create “carbon neutral” forests, through setting targets to help slow deforestation, and hasten reforestation.

“Deforestation will continue as long as cutting down and burning trees is more economic than preserving them,” said Johan Eliasch, Prime Minister Gordon Brown’s special representative on deforestation, and author of the report.

The report estimates that funds from carbon markets alone would be able to cut deforestation rates down 75 percent by 2030.

Carbon markets allow developing countries to earn carbon offsets for chopping down less trees than they have in the past.  These carbon offsets can then be sold to wealthy nations as a cheaper option to domestic greenhouse gas emissions curbs.

The report was criticized by some carbon traders and environmental groups, saying it down-played costs and ignored real issues such as corruption and land disputes.

However the report does recommend that donors from wealthy country should put $4 billion over five years towards research, and to resolve issues such as land disputes.

Source: Reuters
Photo: Wikimedia Commons

Tweet This Post

You might also like:

Add a comment or question

Other Views from Red, Green, and Blue

Senator Inhofe Vows a “Full Investigation” into “Suppressed” EPA Report on Climate Change

Senator Inhofe calls for a “full investigation” into what he terms as a cover-up of scientific data that “vindicates” his position that global warming is hoax. It’s either that or an increasingly desperate attempt to support an untenable position.

Sarah Palin on Energy: What a Switch!

Am I the only one who noticed that Sarah Palin has pulled a huge switchover when it comes to her take on energy policy?

Because it’s dramatic, and may presage the switch that I have been hoping for for a while: the divorce of the idea that a Conservative Environmentalist in politics is an oxymoron.

Tell us what you think: