n ew s a n d v i ew s fro m t he co nser vat io n uni t

The death of common sense

Why planting trees is not going to help climate change one bit
by Mark Botha, Director of Conservation, BotSoc
It is interesting to see how easily we forget to stop and think in this hectic world, bombarded as we are by undigested media, socio-environmentalpolitical crises, and the myriad of worthy causes or responses required to deal with a problem. We are all guilty of it at one time or another. But, we are especially guilty when the proposed recommended mitigation action we are urged to take seems intuitively like such a good idea, salves our conscience but doesnt make a real difference. Take tree planting to address climate change for instance. The thesis is simple to assuage your guilt at emitting several tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere from your luxury 4x4, shopping trips to Dubai and the air-conditioner, heater and geyser in your home, you simply plant a few trees. In your back garden, a local township or public park wherever seems convenient. A myriad of helpful consultants can calculate your carbon guilt and for a small fee and the click of a mouse button, allow you to purchase absolution. Miraculously, you are now 'carbon neutral' and can sleep easy. Except for the obvious errors of logic. The first problem with the thesis is that it simply defies the workings of the worlds carbon cycle. There are two fundamentally different forms of carbon on earth ancient versus currently mobile. Ancient carbon is locked up in oil, coal, methane and other forms deep in the earths crust or in permafrost. It plays no role in the greenhouse effect, and was laid down millions of years ago when the atmospheric concentration was 3000 ppm (roughly ten times what it is today) and ferns and cycads ruled. These concentrations reigned when semi-tropical conditions dominated large parts of the globe, and no ice was present at the poles. New or currently mobile carbon is that which was recently part of a living thing your lunch from yesterday, plankton or the petunias in the garden. It cycles regularly into the atmosphere and back into life all the time. It plays a vital role in the greenhouse effect. BELOW: Community forestry using kiaat, Pterocarpus angolensis, in Tanzania. This is an excellent initiative that is getting communities to establish and re-forest reserve areas. However, although we should support these initiatives, they aren't really going to help soak up the carbon emitted from our flights to visit them.

ABOVE: A hundred-year old cluster fig, Ficus sycomorus, on the Mkuze floodplain in KwaZuluNatal. Planting trees is good for many reasons, but one has to question whether it helps mitigate climate change. When does a re-planted forest really contribute to carbon sequestration? In order to power our modern lifestyles, were taking enormous quantities of ancient carbon out of the crust and burning it in an orgy of fossil-fuelled delight. Just so we can use a 2-ton SUV to collect a bag of groceries and ensure that the huge flat-screen TV hums along 24/7 and that Canadian wheat and Australian mutton is cheaper than if we grew them in the Swartland. Ancient becomes current. No matter how many trees we plant we can never take this newly liberated ancient carbon and get it out of the greenhouse cycle again. Sure we can delay it five, ten or possibly fifty years but it is not sequestered forever, unless we bury it where the air and sun cant get at it. Planting trees to take CO2 out of the atmosphere is like drinking to keep the sea level from rising maybe it will make an infinitesimal impact in the short-term, but ultimately its just not going to work. Usually doing the right thing for the wrong reasons isnt too much of a problem. But the insidious thing about mitigating the causes of climate change is that half measures or misguided actions are particularly damaging. Firstly, they dont actually contribute to addressing the problem in any remotely meaningful way. And secondly, they inadvertently lull us into a false sense of security we think that we can continue with our profligate lifestyles and make amends by planting trees. Nothing but a fundamental change of our energy economies and lifestyles will do and we better start moving down this road fast. Another obvious issue is that no matter how many trees we plant, this cannot make up for the enormous areas of rainforest being cleared every minute (for dubious biofuel plantations, Amazonian soy and beef, or that lovely hardwood coffee table you had your eye on) or the deep peat lands being burnt. It still astounds me that there is an economy that rewards cutting down intact rainforest, shipping the whole logs halfway across the world, and slicing them into veneer to be used only once to shutter concrete in the supports of an Olympic (or perhaps World Cup) stadium. If half as much money and effort went into preserving the forest and grasslands that are wantonly destroyed as into planting a few trees in some urban lot, we wouldnt be in nearly the pickle we are. Many groups and companies are relying on carbon finance from individuals and firms wishing to offset their impact to restore degraded

VELD&FLORA | MARCH 2009

forest areas through tree planting. Fortunately there are some robust standards (like the Climate Community & Biodiversity and Voluntary Carbon standards) that can make these schemes more credible and ensure that at least some verifiable mitigation should result. Much of the work (including that of BotSoc and its partners in the Climate Action Partnership or CAP) is openly aimed at helping communities and ecosystems adapt to climate change (as opposed to mitigating it). This is laudable and needs to be scaled up wherever sensible. However, this cannot be our only response to the challenge facing us. Dont get me wrong. Im not against planting trees. We need to green and soften our neighbourhoods and farms and repair many ravaged ecosystems. Trees, of the right species, in the right place, are a crucial part of this both benign alien and delightful indigenous species. Fruit-, nut-, fodder- and fibre-bearing trees are crucial components of natural resource based livelihoods and sustainable agriculture, and sensible timber and fuel species will play a key part in construction and rural energy. There are millions of reasons to plant trees but mitigating climate change is not one of them.

CLIMATE ChANGE WORDS fOR ThE WEEK

Mitigation can be seen as Avoiding the unmanageable, while Adaptation can be viewed as Managing the unavoidable.

MARCH 2009

| VELD&FLORA