After it was leaked that developed nations would be required to take on less of a burden than anticipated and that more would be demanded of poorer countries instead, some are saying that the deforestation deal and emission reduction targets are little more than fantasies.
Intact forests in most of the world’s developing nations store much of the planet’s carbon emissions; however to countries that are desperately seeking industry and development to stabilize their economies, they are simply in the way.
Because trees absorb carbon, deforestation causes a large amount of the greenhouse gas to be released to the atmosphere and also prevents trees from continuing to absorb it (SolveClimate.com).
In the months leading up to Copenhagen, UN leaders proposed a program for Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD) that would, ideally, offer developing countries multi-billion dollar payouts in exchange for preservation of their forests.
However, a draft solidifying target dates for halting and reversing forest cover loss in developing countries has been chucked for vague aspirational language and rich countries like the U.S. have yet to commit to any dollar amounts that they would be willing to spend on financing the economies of nations that agreed to the deforestation deal. According to UN estimates, $22.4 billion to $37.3 billion between 2010-2015 would be needed in immediate funding.
“It’s hardly surprising that developing countries won’t commit to global targets for deforestation when rich countries haven’t yet provided the necessary financing for REDD or global targets for deep reductions of industrial emissions,” said Nathaniel Dyer of Rainforest Foundation UK.
It was also leaked that “funds from climate financing, originally allocated to go to the UN and then be doled out piecemeal to third world nations, would instead be paid directly into the coffers of the World Bank and IMF, organizations that have made a habit out of looting poorer countries with crippling debts that cannot be paid back, forcing such countries to hand over their entire infrastructure to globalist loan sharks” (PrisonPlanet.com).
Despite these major setbacks, many of the leaders gathered in Copenhagen are holding out hope, both for the trees and for the possibility that a realistic agreement between developed and developing countries can be reached.
However, many Copenhagen supporters are slowly realizing that if rich nations continue to search for ways in which they can shirk their responsibility and the need to drastically reduce their own emission, developing nations are unlikely to play ball.
Image Credit: www.worldproutassembly.org