06 November 2008

Pekanbaru/Jakarta, Indonesia — Greenpeace and the Riau-based environmental group Jikalahari called upon the Indonesian government to support the call for a moratorium decree on forests and peatlands conversion made by Riau Governor Wan Abubakar, during a media briefing on board the Greenpeace ship Esperanza, in Riau, Sumatra today.

Governor Wan Abubakar declared a moratorium on peatland conversion in August 2008, expressing his concerns about its impact on the environment and Riau communities, but this is yet to be formalised.(1) Greenpeace took a number of senior Indonesian journalists to witness the ongoing destruction of Riau’s last remaining intact peatland forests from palm oil expansion and the pulp and paper industry.

“Riau is rich in natural resources, but every year our province is being flooded and covered by haze from forest fires due to drastically depleting forest cover located in the peatlands. Unfortunately, that forest loss is not followed by people’s welfare,” said the Governor. “We must immediately implement a province-wide moratorium on forests and peatlands conversion to secure people’s safety and sustainable development in Riau.”

“Peatland forest in Kampar Peninsula is the largest remaining intact forest in Riau, but the area is heavily threatened by conversion for pulpwood and oil palm plantations,” explained Hariansyah Usman, Deputy Coordinator of Jikalahari(2). “It also plays an important role for the livelihood of Riau’s Malay people. If there is no moratorium on forests and peatlands conversion in Riau, the dignity of Malay people will vanish alongside the remaining forest.”

To help turn the Governor’s declaration into reality, Greenpeace and Jikalahari have been conducting an assessment and mapping of Kampar Peninsular using satellite imagery and ground-truthing to develop a rehabilitation plan for peatlands already degraded and drained by palm oil and pulp and paper companies.

“The Indonesian government must support the Riau Governor’s initiative and in fact declare a nation-wide moratorium,” said Zulfahmi, Greenpeace Southeast Asia Forest Campaigner. “This is essential if it is to address Indonesia’s alarming greenhouse gas emissions and to protect Indonesia’s remaining forests and peatlands for future generations.”

Greenpeace embarked on the Indonesian leg of its “Forests for Climate” ship tour in Jayapura, Papua on 6 October, to shine the spotlight on the rampant destruction of the Paradise Forests - the last remaining ancient forests of Southeast Asia.

Greenpeace is an independent, global campaigning organisation that acts to change attitudes and behaviour, to protect and conserve the environment, and to promote peace.

Notes to Editor

(1) Governor’s Regulation to formalise the moratorium currently awaits technical inputs from the government’s moratorium team within Governor Wan Abubakar’s administration.

(2) Jikalahari (Forest Rescue Network Riau) was founded in 2002 and campaigns for sustainable forest management in Riau Province that respects the rights of local and indigenous peoples.

Contact information

Zulfahmi, Greenpeace Southeast Asia, Forest Campaigner, (in Pekanbaru)
+62 (0) 812 682 12 14

Hariansyah Usman, Deputy Coordinator of Jikalahari (in Pekanbaru)
+62 (0) 812 766 999 67

Nabiha Shahab, Greenpeace Southeast Asia, Media Campaigner, (onboard the Esperanza)
+62 (0) 81314213432

Bustar Maitar, Greenpeace Southeast Asia, Forest Campaigner, (onboard the Esperanza)
+62 (0) 813 44 666 135

Martin Baker, Communications Coordinator (Asia), Greenpeace International
+62 (0) 8131 5829513 (in Jakarta)

For photo and video please contact Findi Kenandarti
+62 (0) 8161681840

Photo: A worker harvests oil-palm fruit. Photograph: EPA/Barbara Walton

Palm oil is used in a third of all groceries. But can it ever be produced without causing environmental devastation as some big companies are promising?

By Fred Pearce
guardian.co.uk
November 06 2008

The plutocrats of palm oil are in trouble. The makers of Wall’s ice cream and Dove soap and Flora margarine are worried you’ll get the idea that these products are being produced at the expense of the rainforests of southeast Asia. Because they are. And, so far, efforts to rebrand palm-oil plantations as oases of sustainability have proved about as convincing as those old ads that insisted you couldn’t tell the difference between butter and margarine.

In late November, the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) will hold its sixth annual meeting in on the Indonesian island of Bali. Food manufacturers, commodity traders and plantation owners will applaud the “first trickle” of palm oil certified as wildlife and climate-friendly and definitely not grown on recently deforested land.

Sadly, this will underline how, after six years of trying to identify sustainable sources of palm oil, the RSPO has to admit that 99% of the ubiquitous edible oil – found in a third of all the products on supermarket shelves – cannot be shown to have been produced sustainability.

In the chair in Bali will be Unilever’s director of sustainable agriculture, Jan Kees Vis. The Anglo-Dutch conglomerate Unilever (purveyors of the Wall’s, Dove and Flora brands) began life as Lever Brothers, obliterating the forests of west Africa a century ago to create palm oil plantations. Today, it buys more than a million tonnes of the oil annually from deforested Malaysia and Indonesia.

The world is getting in a fuss about growing palm oil for biofuels. But the vast majority of the crop – more than 80% of which comes from these two countries – goes into foodstuffs and soap products. Rainforests are being burned and felled across the islands of Borneo and Sumatra to create new land for palm-oil plantations.

Fearing a backlash from consumers, Unilever was one of the founders of Roundtable. But six years on, that body is being dismissed as a front for continuation of business as usual in the jungle clearings. Earlier this year, about 200 environment and human rights groups signed an “international declaration against the greenwashing of palm oil by the RSPO”.

And one of Unilever’s leading suppliers has been singled out. The Singapore-based Wilmar International has a huge land bank across Indonesia waiting to be cleared and planted with palm oil. Wilmar was recently forced to concede defeat in a long dispute with Friends of the Earth over whether it was linked to illegal land clearing for palm oil.

Unilever insists that it is sincere. Some other food manufacturers are seeking alternatives to palm oil. But Unilever promises instead that by 2015 all its palm oil will come from sustainable plantations. Leading retailers such as Sainsbury’s make similar promises. Last November, Sainsbury’s announced that it was “switching to sustainable palm oil” in its own-brand food. Critics say such promises are pie in the sky. At Sainsbury’s, a year after that bold promise, just one brand of fish fingers has switched.

Progress seems bound to be slow while most of the producers of palm oil remain in denial about their problems. The Malaysian Palm Oil Council is haughtily dismissive of any suggestion that the methods of its members may be less than perfect – claiming that they only plant on land zoned for agriculture.

But that provides little comfort for conservationists. Particularly in Sarawak, the Malaysian province on Borneo, large amounts of forest land is zoned for agriculture, and the state is aggressively promoting conversion. Researchers say active deforestation is still creating space for palm oil.

Nonetheless, the Malaysian council’s boss, Yusof Basiron, tells anyone who will listen that the RSPO, of which the council is a prominent member, is merely a promotional tool. Its system of certification is a “condition imposed by certain markets to certify practices that Malaysian planters have been undertaking for years.” Such statements appear to breach the RSPO’s own rules which forbid “claiming conformity to RSPO principles and criteria” without formal certification.

Can the likes of Unilever and Sainsbury’s get all their palm oil from “sustainable sources” by 2015 as they promise? In one sense, maybe. Cynics point out that rainforest scientists expect both Borneo and Sumatra to be virtually treeless by then. There will be no more to chop down, so palm oil plantations will no longer be accused for deforestation.

But meanwhile, the patina of sustainability being wrapped round our biscuits and soap and ice cream and margarine and cosmetics and much else is helping fuel their final destruction.

Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/nov/06/1

Who owns the world’s forests? When Andy White and Alejandra Martin posed and answered this question in their 2002 report by the same name, they found that 77 percent of forests worldwide were administered by governments. The good news was that the forested area owned and designated for use by local communities and indigenous peoples was rising.

This year, William Sunderlin and colleagues updated the numbers in their report, From Exclusion to Ownership? Challenges and Opportunities in Advancing Forest Tenure Reform. Their findings are sobering for those who hoped to see an upsurge in community control over forests. Sunderlin found that only a few of the 30 most forested countries in the tropics had made significant changes in forest tenure since the 2002 study. Most are in Latin America.

Brazil alone is responsible for much of the global progress, with an increase of 56 percent in the forest area designated for use or owned by communities and indigenous peoples. Peru and Bolivia recorded significant increases. Columbia also posted a small increase. In Africa, communities made small gains in Tanzania, Sudan and Cameroon. But Zambia and the countries of the Congo Basin registered virtually no change at all. In Asia, India added more than five million hectares to the forested area designated for use by communities and indigenous peoples. Indonesia recorded no gains.

Even in the few countries that have reformed forest tenure, the granting of rights has not guaranteed their realization. In Peru, for example, the government has allocated forested areas for oil, gas and mining exploration in violation of indigenous land titles in the Amazon. In Brazil, the government has failed to prevent illegal incursions into extractive reserves by loggers, ranchers and miners. Even when there’s a will to recognize rights, there’s not necessarily a way: meaningful tenure reform requires administrative capacity, expertise and financial resources to demarcate and enforce community rights.

Are there any reasons for optimism? Sunderlin says yes. Countries ranging from Angola to Venezuela have made changes in law and policy to facilitate recognition of indigenous, customary and community rights to forest lands. These recent developments could set the stage for accelerated tenure transitions in the near future. In addition, rising interest in Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD) will put a new premium on clarifying forest-related property rights.

But unless the pace of change is quickened and extended to more countries, it could take decades to shift the global balance of forest ownership from governments to rural people. Translating rights on paper into control over what happens on the ground is an equally daunting challenge, and one that will depend on sustained commitment from potential beneficiaries, governments, and the international community.

##

Sunderlin, William D.; Hatcher, Jeffrey and Liddle, Megan. 2008. From Exclusion to Ownership? Challenges and Opportunities in Advancing Forest Tenure Reform. Published by Rights and Resources Initiative. The report is available at: http://www.rightsandresources.org/documents/files/doc_736.pdf

Feel provoked to comment on the message above? Interested to see others’ comments? Visit the POLEX-Feedback feature at: http://www.cifor.cgiar.org/Publications/Polex/polexdetail.htm?&pid=809

The Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) established the (CIFOR-POLEX) electronic listserver in July 1997 as a free information service to the global forest community. Previous CIFOR POLEX messages can be found at the CIFOR website http://www.cifor.cgiar.org

Florida: American Palm Oil Council Applauds Tri-Rail’s Switch to Biodiesel Fuel

LOS ANGELES, Nov 05, 2008 /PRNewswire-USNewswire via COMTEX/ — South Florida adoption of palm oil blend shows support for the palm oil industry.

The American Palm Oil Council (APOC), a U.S. association representing the Malaysian palm oil industry, applauds the South Florida Regional Transportation Authority’s decision to run eight of 10 Tri-Rail locomotives on a 99 percent blend of either palm or soy oil.

“Tri-Rail’s move to biodiesel fuel is a clear statement of South Florida’s dedication to preserving the environment as well as a vote of confidence for the palm oil industry. The transition is a great step forward, and we encourage other transportation authorities in the United States to follow South Florida’s lead,” said Mohd Salleh Kassim, APOC’s executive director.

Malaysia has taken a leading role on the global stage of environmental conservation. In September Malaysia was the first country to have a plantation certified by the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO), the world’s only international association formed to codify sustainable industry practices. Another Malaysian plantation was certified shortly after, and more are in the final stages of the audit process. While the RSPO system can be costly, Malaysia is in the process of developing a parallel system that will make certification cost-effective for smaller plantations.

Kassim continued, “The Malaysian palm oil industry is committed to sustainable energy solutions. We want consumers here in the U.S. to know that palm oil purchased in Malaysia is produced in a responsible, environmentally-friendly manner.”

The major Malaysian producers of palm oil, in cooperation with the Malaysian government, have exhibited a strong commitment to zero-burning replanting techniques, protecting species such as orangutans, and the certification of palm oil from established, licensed plantations.

Malaysia has launched a Palm Oil Wildlife Conservation Fund to further proposals to protect and enhance biodiversity. In Malaysia rain forests are not being destroyed for palm oil cultivation. Instead of opening up large new pieces of land, Malaysian plantations replant on existing plantations, chipping the old oil palm trunk and fronds and using the residue as mulch for the newly planted crops.

The American Palm Oil Council, the U.S. association representing the Malaysian palm oil industry, works to educate the American public about the benefits of palm oil, which is used around the world in food applications, biofuel, soaps, candles, and other products.

This communication is distributed by Prism Public Affairs on behalf of the American Palm Oil Council.

SOURCE American Palm Oil Council (APOC)
http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/American-Palm-Oil-Council-Applauds/story.aspx?guid={0E0837F5-B6CA-4D0F-81C6-55204B77CBCD}

Hawaii environmental groups to be represented in Illinois protest agribusiness interests in Palm Oil Biodiesel, Rainforest Destruction

Maui Tomorrow renewable energy advocate to join Rainforest Action Network event at Archer Daniels Midland annual shareholders meeting, spread word about

Press Release: Hawaiian Electric’s plans to import palm oil

November 4, 2008 For more information contact: Rob Parsons, 808-280-1369 robparsons@earthlink.net

For Immediate Release

MAUI renewable energy advocate from Hawaii is traveling to Decatur, Illinois to join an educational effort to sway a major agribusiness corporation away from harmful impacts associated with widespread
mono-cropping of soybeans and palm oil for biofuels.

Former Maui County Environmental Coordinator Rob Parsons will join a protest by Rainforest Action Network at the annual shareholders meeting of Archer Daniels Midland (ADM), one of the world¹s agribusiness giants. Parsons, who serves as Executive Vice President of Maui Tomorrow Foundation, Inc., has obtained a shareholder¹s proxy for the meeting, and will address the group.

“We will remind them that soy and palm plantations are among the greatest threats to the world’s tropical rainforests, said Parsons. “The expansion of these plantations spells a disaster for these biodiverse forest habitats, indigenous peoples’ rights, and climate change.”

Hawaii is the most petroleum-dependent state for electrical production, with over 90 percent of the state’s energy needs coming from imported oil.

Despite abundant potential for solar, wind and wave power, the Hawaiian Electric Company (HECO) has spent the past two years supporting proposals to construct two huge biodiesel refineries by Imperium Renewables on Oahu, and by BlueEarth Biodiiesel LLC on Maui. If constructed, their combined production, 220 million gallons yearly, exceeds the potential output that could be produced in Hawai`i, even if all available statewide agricultural lands were utilized solely for biofuel crops. Thus, the companies are looking to ship palm oil from Malaysia or Indonesia, the world’s top two producers.

“Switching from imported petroleum to imported palm oil does nothing for Hawaii’s energy security”, said Lance Holter, Chairman of the Sierra Club-Maui Group. “We have abundant local energy resources we should be utilizing, including solar, wind, ocean thermal, and wave technologies.”

“ADM and other agribusinesses are destroying rainforests and poisoning local communities to increase their profit margins,” said Andrea Samulon, spokesperson for the Rainforest Action Network. “These irresponsible actions are unacceptable liabilities both for shareholders and for the planet.”

“There is no hope in D.O.P.E. (Dependence On imported Palm oil for Electricity),” said Henry Curtis, Executive Director of Life of the Land. “It’s time for HECO to stop the spin. Destroying rainforests, displacing indigenous peoples, and making deals with human rights abusers will not protect our environment or help Hawaii’s energy security or economy. It will only bring more misery, poverty, and disease to our fragile planet,” said Curtis.

Curtis noted that early last month at Public Utilities Commission contested case hearings, it was exposed that Imperium Renewables of Seatlle hasshelved their plans to construct a refinery in Hawaii, and their Washington state facility has not produced any biodiesel since last April. Similarly, BlueEarth Biodiesel plans for a refinery on Maui are looking precarious. On October 6th, BlueEarth filed documents in US District Court in Dallas, Texas, citing breach of contracts with HECO and others.

“It is incumbent upon the people of Hawaii to demand local solutions for renewable energy, which in turn will bolster our local economy,” said Parsons. “Working with groups such as RAN helps spread the word far and wide that continuing rainforest destruction for biofuel production should be stopped immediately. The Hawaii coalition of groups is eager to help work for solutions to saving the world¹s remaining rainforests.”

“Hawai`i has a chance to show the world how sustainable energy production can be done, and that what’s sustainable can also be profitable,” said Parsons. “Let’s move away from damaging proposals such as the import of palm oil. This is our golden opportunity to influence our leaders and return the
‘power to the people’.

For more information, see http://www.maui-tomorrow.org

By Rita Sastrawan , Paris

The establishment of oil-palm plantations in Kalimantan and Sumatra poses the greatest threat to orangutans today. In fact, the clearing of forest and the establishment of oil-palm plantations has a negative impact not only on orangutan populations but also on climate, the water cycle, carbon emissions and livelihoods in local communities.

Although many people are aware of these facts, oppose the development of biofuels from palm oil and oppose the creation of these plantations, the destruction of the rainforest continues.

The effects of land-clearing are simple and obvious once you have seen it with your own eyes. It is even easier when you witness the rescue of orangutans or experience breathing difficulties and stinging eyes from the smoke of burning forest and peat.

When we consume destructive palm oil in crispy chips or delicious chocolate, or wash our hands with sweetly fragranced soap, we are very rarely conscious of the adverse effects our activities incur. Because we don’t feel the negative impacts firsthand we can’t imagine the way our behavior influences nature and the lives of people on a faraway island. Meanwhile the destructive oil business continues and the market keeps growing.

Unilever is one of the biggest palm oil consumers worldwide using 1.3 metric tons every year. Its heart-shaped ice cream brand under many names and numerous other brands — Dove, Sunsilk, Omo, Knorr, Blue Band, Becel, Best Foods, Ben & Jerry’s and Findus — are only a few of the many Unilever companies.

Avoiding products which may contain palm oil is nearly impossible, but as consumers we can all try to do what we can. Many consumers have made an effort to avoid products containing palm oil, and Unilever has been forced to respond, promising improvement by way of ensuring the palm oil they use is “sustainably” produced.

But where should all this sustainable palm oil come from? As worldwide demand for palm oil is so high, it can’t be met with only the sustainably grown version simply because not enough is available.

With limited supplies of certified sustainable palm oil only now entering the market, Unilever has had to buy unsustainable palm oil from many companies, one of which is Wilmar Group, one of the biggest palm-oil trading companies in the world, handling at least a quarter of all global palm-oil output. Besides supplying Unilever with palm oil, Nestl* and Cargill are also among Wilmar’s customers.

Not only are we eating palm oil, washing our clothes and ourselves with it, driving cars and producing electricity fueled by it, but our savings are often invested in banks connected with this biofuel that is helping destroy the planet. Among Wilmar’s financiers are Rabobank, ABM Amro, Standard Chartered, Citibank, IFC of the World Bank, OCBC, Fortis and ING.

Just as Unilever has many brands which we might assume are independent local companies, Wilmar International also owns plantations under different company names and buys palm oil from family-related companies as well, such as from the Indonesian Ganda Group. Wilmar’s plantations are situated in Kalimantan, Malaysia, Sumatra and Uganda. Their plantations cover nearly 600,000 hectares, and are proposed to grow to up to 1 million hectares, an area as large as South Korea. Two-thirds of these lands still must be cleared of forest and planted with palms.

Forest where orangutans were known to live have been cleared illegally. Plantations were established without official permission or environmental impact assessments. After immense pressure by NGOs, Wilmar International admitted in February 2008 it had violated its own plantation development policies in Indonesia.

Since Wilmar is planning to set up plantations in Central Kalimantan in Borneo, large-scale forest destruction and burning awaits that region. With the merging of PPB Palm Oil and Wilmar International, Wilmar now has 16 subsidiaries in Central Kalimantan. Most of the approximately 250,000 hectares have still not been developed. Another 250,000 hectares in Central Kalimantan are allocated for other companies’ plantations; concessions covering one million hectares in all have already been handed out.

Existing forest should be protected from more onslaughts and oil-palm entrepreneurs should be forbidden to clear further. This and other steps are laid out in the Indonesian “Oranguatan Conservation Strategy and Action Plan”, which should be enforced and implemented.

“To save orangutans, we must save the forests,” the Indonesian President said in December 2007.

That is quite true, but implementation looks quite different. Companies are still cutting down forest and setting fire to peatlands as the cheapest and quickest method to clear new ground for yet more oil-palm plantations.

We see a nightmare relentlessly approaching. The forests will burn and orangutans will have to flee or die of hunger. Borneo is a hotspot of endemic plants and animals, hosting creatures most people haven’t seen in their lives and natural medicines (which the resident Dayak people know well and use), but Borneo is also a hotspot for destruction, suffering and death.

Let your voice be heard. We as consumers are driving the market. Because of our consumption, companies make a profit from rainforest destruction.

Be concerned about your consumer behavior and show your concern by writing to companies. Help us save what is left!

The writer is International Communications Coordinator for Borneo Orangutan Survival International.

Source: The Jakarta Post

Darren Samuelsohn, E&E Daily senior reporter
Please visit the highly informative source of this article: Environment & Energy Daily

Barack Obama cruised to a historic White House victory yesterday while winning larger Democratic majorities on both ends of Capitol Hill, opening the door to an environment and energy policy agenda sure to contrast with the last eight years under President Bush.

President-elect Obama captured 52 percent of the popular vote and comfortably defeated Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) in the electoral college, giving the Illinois senator significant room to maneuver as he takes office Jan. 20 as the country’s 44th president and its first African American leader.

During a victory speech early this morning in Chicago’s Grant Park, Obama included global warming and energy among a list of thorny items that he planned to take on as president. “For even as we celebrate tonight, we know the challenges that tomorrow will bring are the greatest of our lifetime — two wars, a planet in peril, the worst financial crisis in a century,” he said.

Moments later, Obama linked his energy policies with plans to stimulate the economy, adding, “There is new energy to harness and new jobs to be created.”

Obama has 76 days to prepare his new government, a job that likely will include a major expansion and integration of top posts in the White House and across various agencies that deal with global warming and energy issues, said Dan Kammen, a University of California, Berkeley, professor and key Obama adviser.

“You’re starting to see why this isn’t just elevating the EPA secretary to the Cabinet,” Kammen said. “It’s really a much bigger integration.”

The incoming Obama team is considering a “listening tour” around the country on energy and environmental issues before Inauguration Day in an attempt to build momentum for its policies and legislative plans. Kammen said details on the sessions remain in the planning stage.

John Podesta, a one-time chief of staff to President Clinton, has already begun planning the presidential transition in Washington, with key support on energy and environmental issues coming from two former Clinton appointees: U.S. EPA Administrator Carol Browner and Deputy Interior Secretary David Hayes. Key Cabinet-level appointments are not expected until later this month while Obama focuses first on naming his economic team, as well as a White House chief of staff and secretaries of State and Defense.
Previewing Obama’s agenda

As for details of Obama’s agenda, Kammen said he expected the new president to start with a close review of last-minute Bush administration regulations and other policies crafted over the last eight years.

“There’s a whole range of things that need to be corrected,” Kammen said. “Bad decisions by Bush and EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson. They weren’t just marginal. They were bad for the economy. They were bad for the environment.”

Obama plans to sign an executive order granting California’s long-standing request for an EPA waiver allowing it to enforce greenhouse gas standards on automobiles, something Bush officials rejected despite advice from the government’s own policymakers. Obama would also reject a last-minute Clean Air Act regulation that Bush officials say will be finished before it leaves office (see related story).

And the president-elect would launch a “carbon accounting” system that can help lay the groundwork for a much larger global warming cap-and-trade program, Kammen said. He did not have a timeline for how the Obama administration would try to pursue cap-and-trade legislation with Congress, but he said the effort would entail significant government reorganization while helping to restore U.S. leadership abroad.

“The one thing none of us could say during the campaign is how many calls we got from foreign leaders, ministers of energy and finance, around the world who were hoping for an Obama win because they know they can’t solve the problem without the United States,” Kammen said.

Other top-tier items on the horizon for Obama and congressional Democrats include an economic stimulus packages that funds rebuilding of roads, bridges and mass-transit systems, as well as water projects and renewable energy. Obama, for one, wants to follow through on campaign pledges to create 5 million new “green” jobs while spending $15 billion per year to promote the deployment of renewable technologies.
Working with Republicans

The Obama administration will take office with much larger Democratic majorities in the Senate and House and a Republican Party that has lost a significant number of the moderate lawmakers most likely to work across the aisle on energy and environmental issues.

In his Chicago speech, Obama repeated his campaign pledge to work with Republicans. “Let us resist the temptation to fall back on the same partisanship and pettiness and immaturity that has poisoned our politics for so long,” he said.

But whether Obama will have success remains to be seen as the GOP looks to bounce back in another two years.

“I’m hoping they won’t take the country as far left as I think they’re going to,” Sen. John Ensign (R-Nev.), the chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, told reporters last night. “Higher taxes, more spending, more dependence on foreign oil.”

Environmentalists last night celebrated Obama’s win and insisted that their issues would fit well within the president-elect’s plans to rebuild the economy through new energy policies, including home and building weatherization and a modernization of the electric grid.

“There’s a whole laundry list of things that over the next months to a year or so can start to make a difference on the economic front,” said Alden Meyer, policy and strategy director at the Union of Concerned Scientists.

“They have to have a balanced perspective,” added Dave Hamilton, director of the Sierra Club’s climate campaign. “They’re going to have to do what they have to do in a way that doesn’t bankrupt the economy, in a way that actually solves the problems they’re talking about. It requires being in the center and solving problems that are traditionally on the environment or left side.”

Jeff Holmstead, an industry attorney and the EPA air pollution chief during Bush’s first term, said he was suspicious of plans to link economic recovery plans to some of the big picture items an Obama administration may take on at the encouragement of environmental groups.

“The environmental community is clearly trying to argue that the kinds of energy and climate change issues they’ve pushed should be part of an economic stimulus package,” Holmstead said. “From an economic perspective, I think that argument doesn’t work very well.”

Katherine Boyle contributed to this story.

By Ian Wood
04/11/2008

The view that the Round Table on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) is merely a way of making companies appear politically correct without making difference to de-forestation could be about to change if agreement on an important new resolution is reached.

Until now the RSPO have been unable to implement a monitoring system to enforce the criteria that high value protected forests are not converted to palm oil. One of the reasons for this was a lack of maps showing where these areas of forest actually are.

However there are now comprehensive digital maps for Malaysia, Indonesia, Papua New Guinea and the Solomon Islands.

Under the terms of the new proposal these maps would form the basis for an immediate implementation of a logging moratorium in these regions.

Members of the RSPO include major purchasers of palm oil such as Unilever, Nestle and Cadburys along with a number of NGO’s including Greenpeace, WWF and Oxfam. There are also several palm oil producers in active dialogue with the RSPO.

Unilever announced on May 1st that it pledged to switch to fully traceable palm oil by 2015. This was rightly applauded my many parties but will be too late to save some key areas of critical biodiversity.

Palm oil is found in about 1 in 10 products in British supermarkets along with an increasing demand for use as an ingredient in bio-diesel. It is projected that Indonesian palm oil plantations will triple in size by 2020 to 16.5m hectares, an area the size of England and Wales.
advertisement

Each year the burning and degradation of Indonesian peat swamp forests releases a staggering 2 billion tons of CO2 into the atmosphere. This accounts for nearly 4 per cent of global emissions from less than 0.1 per cent of the world’s land surface.

At the same time as the global need for oil palm rises, there is evidence that the industry is neglecting to invest in yield improvement. The average yield in Malaysia in 2007 was 3.5 tons per hectare and in Indonesia the figure is just 2.8 tons/ha.

However some estates manage to produce up to 7 tons/ha which shows the kind of improvement that is possible.

There is also concern about replanting rates. Palm oil trees have a productive life of about 25 years and in Malaysia the replanting rate has dropped to an alarming 2 per cent. The RSPO are also considering a programme to help the sector achieve both better yields and increase replanting of existing estates.

There are vast areas of deforested land in Indonesia and Malaysia that could in theory be used for the ambitious expansion plans of the palm oil sector.

Developing these lands does not create huge emissions of greenhouse gases and would relieve the pressure on remaining areas of forest. Sometimes these areas are occupied by farmers so the RSPO is keen to develop a programme to support development whilst meeting the needs of local people as well as central government.

Where companies have a legitimate claim on a concession previously granted by central government they should be granted compensation if they are now forced to give up or move their concession.

There is a possibility that they could be awarded funds through carbon credits under the Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD) scheme that is currently under discussion.

Under the terms of this new resolution the RSPO will also start a programme to support the responsible development of suitable land. These would include land swaps where forest concessions could be exchanged for waste land concessions and the establishment of soft loan funds.

The RSPO will meet in Bali on 18th November to study and then vote on this new resolution. A yes vote would at last give the RSPO some real credibility and be an important tool to help conserve rain forests.

Source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?xml=/earth/2008/11/04/eapalmoil104.xml

Thirty-one food, cosmetic, and consumer goods companies – and one palm oil supplier – have signed a Rainforest Action Network (RAN) pledge to support a moratorium on the expansion of palm oil plantations into tropical forests, according to an Oct. 22 press release.

L’Occitane, Organic Valley, Ciranda, and several other businesses agreed to urge agribusiness giants Archer Daniels Midland (ADM), Bunge, and Cargill to produce more sustainable palm oil.

In mid-August, RAN contacted more than 350 companies that use palm oil in their products to inform them of the widespread rainforest destruction caused by the proliferation of palm oil plantations in tropical rainforests.

“We applaud those companies who have signed our pledge and committed to source palm oil in a way that does not destroy rainforests,” said Leila Salazar-Lopez, director of RAN’s Rainforest Agribusiness Campaign. “However, we are extremely disappointed that eco-friendly companies like Whole Foods, the Body Shop, and Ben & Jerry’s remain on the fence while forests are burned and communities are forced from their homes.”

Demand for palm oil, a key ingredient in many consumer goods, has risen significantly in recent years. As a result, palm oil plantations are expanding at a rate of 2.5 million acres per year into the tropical forests of Indonesia, Malaysia, and Papua New Guinea, the countries that supply 99 percent of imported U.S. palm oil. Pristine forests are clear-cut and burned to accommodate the expansion, contributing heavily to global climate change, species extinction, and the displacement of Indigenous and local communities. Deforestation is the primary reason that Indonesia, a top producer of palm oil, is now the world’s third-highest greenhouse gas emitter.

Ciranda, one of two suppliers of organic palm oil from South America, signed the pledge, signaling a new era in the palm oil industry in which customers can purchase palm oil from suppliers that commit to protect rainforests and honor human rights.

For more information, visit www.TheProblemWithPalmOil.org.

Source: http://www.eponline.com/articles/68767/

Adianto P. Simamora , The Jakarta Post

Jakarta - Massive forest conversions, rising demand for timber and infrastructure projects are the main causes for Indonesia’s world-leading rate of deforestation, a new study has found.

The study by the Indonesian Forest Watch (FWI) categorically blamed deforestation on forest conversions into palm oil plantations conducted by big companies.

“We find palm oil companies prefer to convert forest areas rather than utilize idle land for their expansion as they get extra incentives from trees in the cleared forests,” said Wirendro Sumargo, FWI coordinator for public campaign and policy dialogue, on Tuesday.

The field study was conducted in Central Kalimantan and Riau and Papua.

It said Central Kalimantan was seeing the fastest rate of conversion of forest area into palm oil plantations.

“In the last 17 years, the rate of forest conversion to palm oil plantations increased by 400 times to 461,992 hectares (per year) in 2007 from only 1,163 hectares (per year) in 1991,” the study said, quoting data from the Central Kalimantan administration.

“Our finding shows that about 816,000 hectares of forest (there) was cleared for palm oil plantations in 2006.”

He said 14 percent of the 3 million hectares of peatland in the province had been converted into palm oil plantations.

In Riau, the local administration allocated 38.5 percent of its total forest area for conversion into plantations.

“As of 2006, there were 2.7 million hectares of plantations, including 1.5 million hectares of palm oil plantations, ” he said.

Wirendro said that out of the 550,000 hectares of forests felled for plantations in Papua, 480,000 hectares had been allocated for growing palm oil.

The Forestry Ministry has said total palm oil plantations increased to 6.1 million hectares in 2006 from 1.1 million hectares in 1990.

The ministry has claimed the rate of deforestation between 1987 and 1997 remained constant at 1.8 million hectares per year before spiking to 2.8 million hectares per year by 2000 mainly because of severe forest fires.

However, between 2000 and 2006, the rate fell to 1.08 million hectares per year, it added.

The Indonesian Forest Watch has said the deforestation rate stood at 1.9 million hectares per year from 1989 to 2003.

The Guinness Book of World Records puts Indonesia as the country with the highest rate of deforestation on the planet, citing a rate equivalent to 300 soccer fields per hour.

Wirendro said another factor contributing to the acceleration of forest deforestation was the rising demand for timber due to the low supply of raw materials from industrial forests managed by pulp and paper firms in the country.

“The capacity of paper industries increased sharply from one million tons in 1987 to 11 million tons in 2007, while the capacity of pulp companies also rose from 0.5 million tons to 6.5 million tons over the
same period,” he said.

“But, the industries could only supply about 50 percent of the needed raw materials. We believe the companies also take timber from outside their concessions, including production forests (to offset the shortages).”

Wirendro said wood product industries, which bought wood from illegal and illegal sources, could be the main driver of deforestation in Indonesia.

There are currently seven pulp and paper companies operating in the country.

The study said the previous government’s transmigration programs had also contributed to deforestation.

In Riau, 773,331 hectares of forest were converted into transmigration areas, while the Papua administration cut down 375,203 hectares of forest to make way for resettlement zones.

By David Fogarty, Climate Change Correspondent, Asia

SINGAPORE (Reuters) - In the far north of Indonesia’s Sumatra island lies a vast stretch of forest brimming with orangutans and rare Sumatran tigers and elephants.

In a quirk of fate, a decades-long insurgency in Aceh province prevented illegal loggers from stripping the place bare.

Apart from its wildlife and timber, though, the forest is rich in another resource; the carbon locked up in the soil and very trees coveted by loggers — legal and illegal.

Keen to earn money from the forest, called the Ulu Masen ecosystem, the government of Aceh province joined a leading conservation group and the financial market to save it.

In return, the province is set to earn millions of dollars through the sale of carbon credits to investors, with a portion of the cash flowing to local communities to encourage them to halt illegal logging and pay for alternative livelihoods.

Money from the initial sale of credits for this project is expected to flow in the coming months.

“I strongly believe there should be a market for carbon credits and forests. It’s about the only mechanism that could provide local incentives,” said Frank Momberg, project director for international NGO Fauna and Flora International, the group at the heart of the Ulu Masen forest conservation project.

The model is being studied and repeated across Indonesia and other tropical developing nations as the world turns to saving the remaining rainforests in the battle against climate change.

The U.N.-based scheme, called reduced emissions from deforestation and degradation, or REDD, could be worth tens of billions of dollars a year for developing nations, with rich nations buying forest credits to meet mandated emissions curbs.

With so much money potentially at stake, banks and carbon trading firms are ramping up their interest.

LOCAL ISSUE, GLOBAL PROBLEM

But much has to be sorted out, such as how to ensure the forests aren’t cut down, how to accurately measure the amount of carbon saved over time, the best method to trade REDD credits and how to ensure local communities get a fair share of the money.

Satellite monitoring as well as developing national carbon accounting systems will be key, and so too will be avoiding “leakage” in which preventing deforestation in one area causes logging to occur in another.

Some conservation groups also fear rich nations will merely buy up vast amounts of REDD credits to meet their emissions targets while doing little to clean up their own industries. Europe also fears a flood of cheap REDD credits could overwhelm its existing emissions trading scheme, depressing offset prices.

“For us the main point, from a trading stand-point, where REDD projects are difficult is on their permanence,” said Trevor Sikorski, director of commodities research for Barclays Capital in London.

“If it’s about deforestation but then that deforestation goes ahead in three years then that carbon would still be released into the air. So it’s all about the reversibility of forests as carbon sinks and that’s the real core issue that has to be addressed,” he said.

Forests soak up vast amounts of carbon dioxide, acting like a set of lungs for the planet. But clearing and burning them is contributing to about 20 percent of all mankind’s carbon emissions that are warming the planet.

The United Nations aims to incorporate REDD into the next phase of the Kyoto Protocol from 2013.

The idea is to complement an existing Kyoto scheme, called the Clean Development Mechanism, that allows wealthy states to invest in clean energy projects in the developing world in return for CO2 offsets called CERs. These are presently trading around 16 Euros per tonne.

“HUGE MARKET”

“The dimensions are massive. If you compare with a CDM project of 60,000 tonnes a year, these projects are sometimes 200 times bigger, so if this comes through, it’s going to be a huge market,” said Renat Heuberger, managing partner of global carbon project developer and advisory firm South Pole Carbon.

Indonesia has rapidly become the center of REDD trial schemes in Asia because it still has large areas of forest, despite rapid deforestation.

FFI has teamed up with Australia’s Macquarie Group to develop three REDD projects in West Kalimantan and Papua. Investment group New Forests, headquartered in Sydney, has signed a deal with the government of Papua to protect 200,000 ha of forest that could save up to 40 million tonnes of CO2 being emitted over the project’s lifetime.

The Australian government has pledged A$30 million as part of a scheme to protect 50,000 ha of forest in Kalimantan and rehabilitate at least 50,000 ha of drained peat swamp.

The Ulu Masen scheme aims to save 3.4 million tonnes of CO2 being emitted each year, or 100 million tonnes over the project’s lifetime.

To market the credits, the government of Aceh last year teamed up with U.S. bank Merrill Lynch and Australian firm Carbon Conservation to sell the offsets, called VERs, into the voluntary carbon credit market.

Carbon Conservation is acting as a broker and joined FFI to develop the project.

The project hinges on regular monitoring of the forest from the air and on the ground and FFI is running a program to recruit and train 1,000 forest rangers, some of them ex-rebels from Aceh’s former GAM separatist group.

SEEING REDD

Community development was also key, said Momberg.

This meant plowing part of the proceeds directly back to the estimated 130,000 people who live around the forest to develop sustainable biofuel production, biomass power generation, mini-hydro power projects as well as promote growth of alternative cash crops.

Failure to do so would mean villagers returning to illegal logging. An estimated 2,000 to 3,000 villagers were involved in the lucrative trade around Ulu Masen, according to a 2006 report by World Bank-backed Aceh Forest and Environment Project.

“If you don’t involve the local communities in either an alternative business or something that is good for them to actually preserve that forest, there’s no long-term suitability of that project,” said Pep Canadell, executive officer of the Global Carbon Project.

“It’s critical and I haven’t really seen a package of interesting possibilities,” said Canadell, a member of an Australian government advisory panel on REDD.

Some conservation groups, such as Friends of the Earth, fear placing a greater value on forests risks a jump in land rights abuses by governments and corporations in the rush for carbon credits, threatening the livelihoods of indigenous communities.

More than a billion people worldwide depend of forests for their livelihoods, so REDD is a huge threat to them if not managed properly, the group says.

FFI’s Momberg said the key was to limit the direct involvement of national governments in funding schemes for local communities. REDD schemes should also meet stringent verification standards to ensure permanence, community involvement and protection of forests’ biodiversity.

“If everything is vested in the national government, that’s where you will find it very difficult to have that fair level of participation at the community level,” said Jeff Hayward, of U.S.-based conservation group Rainforest Alliance.

“Fundamental to verification criteria is who owns the carbon, what rights do they have, how have they decided upon the use of those rights, how fairly are they being compensated, are they informed,” said Hayward, manager of the alliance’s climate initiative.

Momberg said interest in REDD investments has jumped since the United Nations formally backed the scheme last December.

“I’m getting phone calls every month from investors into REDD. The appetite for REDD and voluntary carbon credits was non-existent two years ago.”

(Editing by Megan Goldin)

Source: http://www.reuters.com/article/GCA-GreenBusiness/idUSTRE49S0N820081029?sp=true

1 November 2008, 12:11 pm
Press Release: Greenpeace New Zealand

Greenpeace showcases the solution to Indonesia’s rapid forest destruction and rising carbon emissions

Jakarta, Indonesia, 31 October 2008 – Greenpeace this morning launched its Forests for Climate initiative, the pioneering solution to reduce deforestation, tackle climate change, preserve global biodiversity and protect the livelihoods of millions of forest people. Forests for Climate (FFC) is Greenpeace’s landmark proposal for an international mechanism to fund sustainable and lasting reductions of emissions from tropical deforestation in participating countries in order to meet commitments for the second phase of the Kyoto Protocol (post 2012).

Taking the first step to match donor countries to real projects in developing forested countries, Greenpeace invited embassies of key donor countries, donor agencies, government officials and governors of several Indonesian provinces, to talk about the FFC initiative and to support a moratorium on any new forest conversion in Indonesia prior to any carbon money flowing. The well-attended launch took place at Tanjung Priok, Jakarta’s port area, at an event jointly hosted by Rachmat Witoelar, State Minister of Environment of the Republic of Indonesia.

“Indonesia’s rampant deforestation and fast rising greenhouse gas emissions have been driven by the lure of short term profit. Greenpeace’s Forests for Climate mechanism is the solution as it places a value on keeping the forests alive”, said Arief Wicaksono, Political Advisor, Greenpeace Southeast Asia.

“Indonesia’s Government and society have a responsibility to protect its tropical forests, for the sake of the environment, the country’s development and to prevent the worsening impacts of climate change. It is time for Indonesia to gain the right to funding from industrialised countries to protect one of the world’s lungs,” said Rachmat WῩtoelar.

Under the FFC mechanism, industrialised countries that committed to reduce their emissions would fund protection of the world’s last remaining tropical forests. Developing countries with tropical forests, like Indonesia, which chose to participate and who committed to protect their forests, would have the opportunity to receive funding for capacity-building efforts and for national level reductions in deforestation emissions. FFC prevents deforestation from shifting from one country to the next and is the only mechanism that involves local and indigenous forest peoples™ representatives to ensure their rights and livelihoods are respected.

Greenpeace is pushing for the FFC mechanism to become part of the second phase of the Kyoto (post-2012) agreement on climate change. If countries commit to FFC, funding from industrialised countries for the protection of tropical forests could become available as soon as 2009.

“Indonesia’s remaining forests must be protected to combat climate change, stop biodiversity loss and protect the livelihoods of forest-dependent peoples. First, we need an immediate moratorium on deforestation, followed by international funding through the United Nations to protect forests for their carbon value”, concluded Wicakῳono.

Greenpeace embarked on the Indonesian leg of its “Forests for Climate” ship tour in Jayapura on 6 October, to shine the spotlight on the rampant destruction of the Paradise Forests - the last remaining ancient forests of Southeast Asia. The Esperanza will leave Jakarta on Saturday, 1 November, en-route to Riau.

Greenpeace is calling on the Indonesian government to implement an immediate moratorium on all forest conversion, including expansion of oil palm plantations, industrial logging, and other drivers of deforestation

Greenpeace is an independent, global campaigning organisation that acts to change attitudes and behaviour, to protect and conserve the environment, and to promote peace.

Source: http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/WO0811/S00001.htm