Table of Contents:
related kookyplan pages: environmentally conscious investing , Environment issues , carbon trading , deforestation , global warming
Why Brazil should want to save the rain forest....
Beyond the typical environmental reasons (diversity, oxygen for the planet), there is a more SELFISH reson that Brazil should want to save their forest.... The main reason is that Brazil gets most of its cheap electricity from hydroelectric plants. In order to get the massive amounts of rain (and cheap electricity), Brazil needs the massive forest. Forest = RAIN = water = cheap electricity for Brazil .... if you can convince Brazilians that its in their economic best interest to keep the forest, it will be saved.
Dr Antonio Nobre of INPA has revealed that the Amazon accounts for 16 percent global freshwater supplies and generates 20 billion tons of rainfall per day. He said that while scientists don't yet know what would happen to rainfall if the Amazon is razed, replacing Brazil's hydro capacity — which accounts for 70-80 percent of its electricity — would cost $100 billion. This figure implies a value of $260 per ha for water alone for Brazil's remaining forests. Mitchell added that Brazil's agribusiness — soya, beef and sugarcane — all depend on rain and that 40 percent of Brazil's cars can run on ethanol. In other words, any decline in rainfall would have a tremendous impact on the Brazilian economy.
The Amazon has value beyond its instrumental use as paper or for house construction. Studies have shown that vegetation density increases rainfall. It is counterintuitive to consider that it is the forest that brings the rain, but when you consider that trees and plants produce water vapor it makes sense. In short, the forest makes the clouds, which then make the rain forest. Vegetation also shades the ground, preventing water from evaporating. There is an effect that lower rainfall has on Brazil‘s ability to produce electricity. Higher rainfall and less evaporation mean more water in the rivers
Innovative initatives to save the Amazon
Paying Brazilians to NOT chop down the forest:
Bolsa Floresta program which pays forest families living near Uatuma Reserve about $25 per month to not clear primary forest lands in return for making 'no smoke'. Residents are also provided with health care, clean water, and greater access to education.
read more here: http://news.mongabay.com/2008/0818-mitchell_interview_gcp.html
Hotel group "Marriott" signs "carbon offset" deal:
Marriott International has signed a landmark deal with the Brazilian state of Amazonas that will see the hotel group launch a carbon offset program for its guests and invest in a fund aimed at securing 1.4m acres of rainforest. Marriott guests will be invited to invest in the fund, which the company said would offset the carbon emissions associated with their stays. Marriott is one of the world's largest hotel groups, with more than 525,000 rooms. The company estimates it generates 2.9m metric tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions per year, equivalent to 30kg per room.
...read more from FT.com
saving the Amazon rain forest
see also: deforestation
Major environmental villains of the planet are still the oil burned in the United States and coal burnt in China, but the devastation of forests is not far behind: accounts for almost a fifth of all carbon dioxide emissions in the world. By terms of the Kyoto Protocol, in force until 2012, only 37 countries, all developed, are obliged to reduce their emissions of greenhouse gases. The conversations that will extend the next two years will define precisely what will happen after 2012 - and it is clear to everyone that developing countries, particularly Brazil, India and China, must join the effort.
The Brazilian participation in global pollution is lower, but still significant: about 6% of global emissions. To do its part, the country has to bear the cost of containing the devastation of the Amazon. In Bali, the government presented a controversial proposal to create a international fund to help pay the account of the protection of the forest. The country wants to raise 1 billion reais in voluntary contributions, but only Norway gave signs that is willing to participate.
For the rest of the world, the most reasonable solution is to create a system of credits for which people help prevent the deforestation in Brazil can be paid - and not charged.
Even without a clear indication of who will pay the bill, there have been notable advances in the country in the last three years. The area of forest devastated fell more than 50%, and the Brazilian government has accepted the first time, a limit order for the annual devastation: approximately 19000 square kilometers, an area slightly smaller than the state of Sergipe.
One of the points made so stubbornly by the Brazilian government is that the emerging countries like brazil need economic progress. "The equation is how to establish a process capable of making the country reduce its emissions without if it means preventing you from having access to care, infrastructure and energy for their economic and social development," said the EXAMINATION the Minister Marina Silva, Environment.
From a financial perspective, the opportunities of the market for carbon credits, which in Brazil is one of the countries most active, should be much more interesting from 2008. In the first quarter, enter into a transaction Green Exchange, a new scholarship to the world that currency trading green. Located on the New York Mercantile Exchange, there is the potential for immediate handling of more than 60 billion dollars of the market for carbon credits.
Finance Initatives
Ex-minister embraces sustainable development and assumes foundation created by Amazon and by Bradesco
Initially, the project under the command of Furlan will double the capacity of the program Bolsa forest, in which the state pays for environmental services provided by residents of the units of conservation of the forest. The net income of $ 40 million will be sufficient to pay for a "bolsa-forest" of R $ 600 per year for four thousand families. Beneficiaries help preserve the Amazon forest and prevent deforestation. "The final goal is to change the relationship that people have with the forest," says the governor of Amazonas, Eduardo Braga.
The goal is to reach the end of 2008 with 8,500 families benefited. Bradesco will provide the magnetic card for the drawing of scholarships and make the management of the heritage of the foundation.
Furlan will lead the Foundation Sustainable Amazon, a project of the government of Amazonas is born with the support of the country's largest private bank, Bradesco The body, launched on 16, is the main novelty in action Banco do Planeta (Bank of the Planet), under which Bradesco met all its activities in social and environmental responsibility. It starts with a capital of $ 40 million, half of which was contributed by the government and half by Bradesco Amazon. The resources will be invested and only the income will be used in social actions. "This ensures sustainability in the long term," says Luca Cavalcanti, director of marketing for Bradesco.
Sustainable foresting
Everyone knows that the Amazon rainforest is disappearing at an alarming rate. In just one year, the amount of forest lost may be roughly equal to the size of Belgium, a small European country. A vast majority of this destruction is occurring because of slash and burn (clear cutting) of the trees. Farmers are cutting down the trees to make room for soy plantations and cattle ranches, and in the process they cut down everything in sight, sell the woods that are valuable, and then burn the rest to make way for farms. The problem is that trees have a lower economic value than the land for agriculture (in a short sighted sense, who wants to wait 100 years for the new trees to grow?).
Sustainable forest management is the process of removing only some of the trees from a forest, and leaving the rest intact. It also involves replanting and managing the forest for a sustainable future. From a lumber business standpoint, it ensures a steady supply of lumber without undermining the natural ability of forest to remain healthy and bountiful over time.
According to many environment and development groups, the best way to save the Amazon is to make it profitable to keep the forests intact, and to remove only some of the trees for economic development. They suggest that we need to find a way to make the trees above the land worth more than the land underneath.
From a marketing standpoint, I am proposing that we help to save the Amazon, by supporting the efforts of these companies that are buying the land with the intention of sustainably managing the forests (so they will be here for 100’s of more years to come). My thinking is that many Americans would feel good to know that their furniture came from the sustainable forests (and not the clear-cutted ones). For this good feeling, I think that Americans would pay a little bit more for their furniture, and that would help us to compete against the cheaper Chinese imports (see discussion below).
To certify forests as being managed in a sustainable way, there are a number of organizations involved. The most famous and most respected is the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC), which is a non-profit international organization whose standards are the most rigorous in the world today.
The issue is that FSC certified woods are more expensive that the price of non-FSC certified woods.
Agriculture
Brazil Can Protect Amazon Rainforest as Crop Output Increases, Unger Says Brazil can protect its Amazon rainforest and boost agricultural output by planting crops in areas now used for low-intensity ranching, Minister of Strategic Affairs Roberto Mangabeira Unger said.
Slash and burn (clearing for agriculture)
(clearing technique for creating farm land)
The farmland that is opened up through slash and burn has a very short productive life. Anyone that questions the negatives to this practice should take an aerial tour of Haiti. It is all brown and smoke. The Dominican Republic is on the very same island, but through state action it is green and vibrant.
Negative Externality
There is a phrase in economics that describes the process of deforestation. Negative Externalities. A negative externality is the by product of economic growth that negatively impacts future growth. For example, in the USA we use a lot of fertilizer to increase the productivity of our agriculture. This causes runoff into freshwater drinking supplies and rivers. The rivers concentrate the fertilizers and other pollutants and carry them to the sea. The largest river in the USA is the Mississippi. Recently a dead spot in the Gulf of Mexico where the Mississippi drains into the ocean has been found. It is getting larger with each passing year. The shrimp and seafood catch has diminished in these areas, causing damage to the fishing industry (already in trouble due to over-fishing). This demonstrates that one action to increase economic growth can reduce the productivity of another industry.
In this sense, Brazil is harming its future economic capacity (due to decreased water reserves for irrigation or to generate power, for example).
source: By Charles Heck, February 14, 2008 http://www.gringoes.com/articles.asp?ID_Noticia=2068
Land Ownership, redistribution, and its effects on the Amazon:
“Much of the arable land is controlled by a handful of wealthy families, a situation which the Movement of Landless Rural Workers (MST) seeks to redress by demanding land redistribution. It uses direct protest action and land occupation in its quest.”
Controversy:
On one hand, critics can argue that Brazil has not developed like the US because Brazil had a very concentrated ownership of land (99% of land with 1% of people, or something like this). Whereas the US had many private owners each with smaller plots of land...which encouraged development. But, fast forward to today...and the reality is that Brazil benefits from having massive economies of scale in the agricultural sector (world leaders in coffee, beef, oranges, soy, etc). Would that be the case if land were redistributed in smaller plots to individual families?
Destruction of the rain forest: some critics clim that land redistribution in Brazil is patiall to blame for the destruction of the rain forest. This is NOT because smaller land owners are worse for the amazon (in fact the opposite may be true), but instead is because of a law which scares large land owners into finding productive uses for their land...or else risk redistribution. It works like this in Brazil: there is a law that states that if the land is not being put to productive use, then the government can seize it...and redistribute it to the poor. Good idea, but bad consequences for the Amazon rain forest. THis is becaue the majority of the land is owned by rich families...and for generations it has sat, protected. Untill now...and with this new law...these rich families must now find some way to make the land "productive", or else risk loosing the land to the government (and given to the poor). But, how do you make the land productive? By cutting down the trees and putting up agriculture (soy bean plantations, etc). This is one very big reason that you see soy plantations invading the amazon and much of the wild interior of Brazil.
Lack of resources
Greenpeace in Brazil has just 15,300 members (tiny, when you consider the population of Brazil is almost 200 million). Holland, for example, has 16 million members of WWF (world wildlife fund), almost 6% of their population.
Why dont Brazilians donate more?
In Brazil, there is not a culture of donation, so most of the funds must come from abroad. Why? Because Brazilians dont trust, or believe that the money will be spent where they say it will be. There is a culture of distrust, that most Brazilians dont believe the sales pitch that their money will be used for good. People dont give more because they think the money will be diverted, and due to a culture of corruption, they have lots of examples to site.
Also, there is not a fiscal incentive to donate any more (as there is with the Brazilian law Rouanet for culture investments).
Effect
Greenpeace in Brazil, for example has a Brazilian budget of nearly R$8.2 million, but only R$2 million of that comes from Brazilians, the rest comes from abroad. Greenpeace collects this money from abroad, to spend in Brazil protecting the environment.
Pool of capital to be spent:
The money coming from abroad is kind of like a venture capital money that invests in social / environmental causes. the directors of WWF are like fund managers: looking for bood projects to give their resources.
Like Greenpeace, the WWF does not receive money from governments. The donators are people or businesses. WWF, in 2005, received approximately US$982 million in funding from private parties. In Brazil, 65-70% of the money they have comes from WWF abroad.
Local NGO's
Local group in Brazil: "Care Brasil". Their challenge is to increase the amount of capitalization from Brazilians (citizens, companies, and foundations). They also try to develop partnerships with local subsidiaries of Multi-national corporations in Brazil (for money to come from abroad).
In this way, a local charity organization is set up to target foreign corporations, and to ask them to donate to local charitible causes (environment and social). Then, in order to create a better marketing image for their company in the local community, the company donates time, money and resources. Note: having a local charity to take "rents" from a MNC is a good idea, but if taken too far, it becomes a form of extortion. How far should a company go/ how much should a MNC give? (in order to get in good with the local community?)
World Bank
Another key source for funding of projects in Brazil comes from the world bank (Banco Mundial). In 2007, there was approximately US$1.7 billion in funding from the World Bank that went to Brazil to fund projects such as the "Bolsa Bamilia" (in partnership with the federal government), and the "Arpa" (Areas Protegidas da Amazonia)
Corporate donors
Companies such as HSBC gave the WWF in Brazil over US$5 million in order to fund a project called the "Agua para Vida" (water for life).
Organizations trying to help
(please add more here..)
Forest Stewardship Council (FSC)/Rainforest Alliance Forest Management Certification
For forestry operations worldwide, including large and mid-sized forest managers and groups of small landowners. Our SmartWood program evaluates forestry operations, awarding those that meet the principles and criteria of the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) with certification. Forest Management certification is available to all types of landowners, including individuals, corporations, governments, communities and groups of small landowners. Individual companies or groups of companies can apply for certification.
FSC/Rainforest Alliance Chain-of-Custody (CoC) Certification
Manufacturers: http://www.rainforest-alliance.org/forestry/documents/manufacturers.pdf
Distributors: http://www.rainforest-alliance.org/forestry/documents/standards.pdf
Group certification: http://www.rainforest-alliance.org/forestry/documents/group.pdf
For forest-product operations including manufacturers, distributors and retailers that purchase and sell FSC-certified products. CoC certification ensures that the claim of FSC is valid, and is based on credible inventory management systems. Chain-of-Custody (CoC) certification assures consumers and forest product companies that the wood they buy comes from certified forests. CoC certification by our SmartWood program tracks wood from forests and tree plantations certified to the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) standards, from the forest to the point of sale. CoC certification is available for any operation that processes cut wood, such as sawmills, secondary manufacturers, broker/distributors, wholesalers, retailers, printers, paper merchants and other points in the forest products supply chain. If yours is a business involved in the production or delivery of certified products, you must hold a CoC certificate in order to make claims about the FSC content in your products. Certification is available for a wide variety of operations -- please see the standards below.
FSC/Rainforest Alliance Non-Timber Forest Products Certification
For operations that manage and harvest non-timber forest products.
Rainforest Alliance Rediscovered Wood Certification
http://www.rainforest-alliance.org/forestry/documents/rediscovered-wood-program-description.pdf
http://www.rainforest-alliance.org/forestry/documents/rediscovered-wood-guidelines-standards.pdf
For operations that purchase and sell reclaimed, recycled and/or salvaged wood products.
Rediscovered Wood Certification. The Rainforest Alliance’s SmartWood program evaluates forest product operations that are reclaiming or using reclaimed, recycled and/or salvaged wood materials. Those that meet our standards are awarded certification for Rediscovered Wood. The program is available to mills, secondary manufacturers, brokers/distributors, wholesalers, etc. and addresses certification of products that are not eligible for Forest Stewardship Council certification as recycled or reclaimed.
Links to Environment Organizations:
http://www.wwf.org/
http://www.rainforest-alliance.org/programs/forestry/smartwood/
Smart guide - list of furniture companies with certification:
http://www.rainforest-alliance.org/forestry/documents/smartguide_furniture.pdf
Charity organizations focusing on environment:
http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?keyword_list=amazon&Submit2=GO&bay=search.results
Recent laws and regulations
The only real achievement at Bali was a decision to set up a pilot project to investigate how to stop tropical deforestation (see article).
See also
Comments (0)
You don't have permission to comment on this page.