An hour outside Manaus, the Amazon's biggest city, the blackened remains of a virgin forest smolder. Chain saws whine. And Jonas Mendes tosses logs, one after another, into his kiln. "I know it's wrong to cut down the trees," said Mendes, 48, sweat streaming down his neck and torso. "But I have no other way to make a living." If the Obama administration succeeds in its pledge to curb climate change, billions could flow from the U.S. to help forest dwellers such as Mendes change their ways. Governors of the Brazilian Amazon's nine states are pushing the U.S. and other industrial nations to invest in projects under rules known as REDD -- or Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation -- that are being designed through the auspices of the United Nations. Under pending legislation to cap greenhouse gases, the U.S. government would auction emission allowances, funneling as much as $3 billion from the annual proceeds into rain forest protection. U.S. companies facing carbon controls could meet part of their obligations by investing as much as $13 billion a year by 2020 to preserve forests. The reason? Slash-and-burn deforestation accounts for about 15% of humanity's carbon dioxide emissions. Despite activists' efforts, forests have been disappearing at the rate of about 34 million acres a year for the last two decades. Globally, Indonesia and Brazil are the third- and fourth-largest emitters respectively of greenhouse gases, after China and the U.S., because of their breakneck pace of forest destruction.
Saving the Amazon, Earth's largest tropical jungle, can be a cheaper and faster way to avoid greenhouse gas emissions than replacing coal-fired power plants with renewable energy or switching to electric cars -- although all such measures are considered necessary by climate experts.
Green Man: I first heard about this idea when the government of Guyana announced that some European countries are buying emission allowances to protect the forests there, which are some of the last virgin stands in the world. Some people in the United States though don't see the upside to this idea--they think we're just redistributing wealthy to poorer countries with nothing in exchange. That is a myopic way of looking at the situation though because if we just continue to allow the free market to go unfettered without pollution controls then there will be no world for these companies to live in, work, in and enjoy their money upon. In the rich countries we don't see the consequences of our everyday actions so much as the places who are getting hit first with environmental degradation. We don't see on a daily basis the island nations whose rural livelihood is being directly threatened but yet they did nothing to bring such trouble upon themselves. Yet in the cruel twisting of fate they have to pay for our mess first.
What's in it for the wealthier countries? A clean environment where our children and grandchildren can thrive. I never understood how the American Conservatives are so against protecting the environment when it has direct repercussions for their families. I say this because, ironically, they are very much in support of strong families and protecting their posterity!!
The Amazon along with all the other big forests around the world are our lungs as well as our liver and kidneys, filtering out the toxic gases and it should be starkly clear that any organism can't survive without its physiological systems intact. Well, the Earth is just as alive as any other being on Earth. It's constantly moving, growing, changing and just like all organisms it can get sick. The Earth has "physiological systems" at work in the air, water, earth and fire. It all has to be balanced or the perfect conditions for ALL life to thrive within will die. This should have been plainly made clear in school for most people when discussing the basic "food chain" concept. If one of the animals in the food chain goes extinct (say a predator) then it throws the balance of nature completely off and you get over-population of species, which in turn depletes the grasses and on and one the domino effect goes. How would it be any different for the plant life growing on Earth?
We need to stop looking at the environment as optional and realize that NOTHING, literally NOTHING else is possible in this life without it. I don't care how big your house is, how much money you have or how healthy you are right now because if we don't clean up our environment and get the cycles back in order then we'll all be dead. I'm not being hyperbolic on this--It's a really crisis. There won't be another chance to make up for missing the boat on this one. It's not like we can always revisit the issue like other issues before governments such as health care programs and such. We have one shot, one opportunity and it would be a shame if we humans were the ones to fuck it all up. It would be shame because it would be our own damn fault. We'd be nothing better than a stupid parasite who killed off its host and thus it as well.
And isn't it better to be safe than sorry? If for some reason ALL the scientists in the world are wrong and Earth will be just fine then at least we protected the last natural places on the planet. Open air museums for our children and grandchildren to visit. And if nothing else we will have created a whole new economy for the world in green energy, which will also free us from foreign oil imported from countries who don't like us anyway!! It's win-win situation either way if you ask me!! I really encourage you to read the rest of the article because it goes into so many great points that I don't have space or time to extrapolate upon them here. Click here for the full article.
---The Green Man has Spoken---
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar