An alternative to Amazon Rainforest Deforestation

A few months back saw environmentalists across the globe draw a short intake of breath after right wing President Alan Garcia sold the rights to 70% of Peru’s share of the Amazon. International oil companies effectively had carte blanche to log, drill and generally plunder the world’s largest rainforest.

The President described the rainforest as “millions of hectares of timber there lying idle”, and seemed oblivious to the hugely detrimental effect of the 9 billion gallons of toxic waste having been dumped in the Amazon between 1972 and 2000.

At the current rate of deforestation, in two decades the Amazon Rainforest will be reduced by 40%. Yet the important role the Amazon plays in our ecosystem is well known – the 1.7 billion acres of rainforest inhale massive amounts of warming gasses, ensuring they don’t reach the atmosphere and contribute to the current crises global warming has brought about. Hence Garcia’s logic is skewed – cutting down 70% of Peru’s Amazon share will not only decrease the amount of damaging gasses drawn in by the rainforest, but the sole purpose of the deforestation itself, for fossil fuels, will simply double the catastrophic effect on our atmosphere. As Johann Hari of The Independent succinctly puts it, “Garcia’s plan will turn the Amazon from the planets’ air-con into its fireplace”.

Like a tale of David and Goliath, a battle had ensued between the indigenous people living in the rainforest area and Garcia’s military, who stormed in with live ammunition and stun grenades, killing over a dozen of the indigenous fighters. And yet their resistance has worked, with the Peruvian Congress repealing Garcia’s decision.

An alternative to the drastic decisions made in Peru and the necessary fighting needed to repeal them, Ecuador has taken a different stand, with its own president, Rafeal Correa declaring that he will prevent mass deforestation by oil companies in his country on one condition. The rest of the world should contribute towards the revenue his country would be missing out on by banning oil activity- a massive $9.2bn. At first glance the amount seems immense, but at the cost of saving an increasingly fragile ecosystem (and not to mention the huge financial burden global warming will induce should we not take action now) – the proposal seems more than worth it.