Southeast Asia’s Annual Rainforest Fire Emissions = Carbon Reductions from 5 Kyotos!

rainforest burningAt Nairobi, governments are debating the future of the Kyoto Protocol and action to prevent the most serious impacts of climate change. So far, they appear to have ignored pleas to address one of the greatest single sources of carbon emissions: the destruction of South-east Asia’s peatlands and forests. The annual emissions from annual peat and forest fires are about five times as great as the total annual emission cuts which the Kyoto Protocol aims to make by 2012, from 1990 levels.
Indonesia alone holds 60% of all tropical peat, containing some 50 billion tonnes of carbon. This is equivalent to 7-8 years of global fossil fuel emissions. Timber and oil palm plantations are draining the peatlands and also pushing local communities and small-holders into peat areas and rainforests. Once this peat is drained, all this carbon will eventually be released into the atmosphere, unless the peat is subsequently re-flooded and restored. Annual fires, many of them set deliberately by plantation owners, speed up the process. This year’s fire season has been one of the worst on record. Wetlands International warned earlier this week that the boom in biofuels is speeding up the destruction, and further that one tonne of palm oil grown on peat is linked to the release of around 20 tonnes of carbon dioxide released from that peat. Due to its low cost, palm oil is set to become the prime feedstock for biodiesel.

Biofuelwatch member Andrew Boswell says from Nairobi: “Over 6600 people from 75 countries have emailed governments to call for real action to address the causes of the annual peat and forest fires. So far, there are no signs that delegates have listened. UNFCCC exists to prevent dangerous climate change and to stabilise levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. This will be even harder to achieve unless tropical peatlands are protected and restored.
EcoInternet, Biofuelwatch, Save the Rainforest (Germany) and Watch Indonesia are calling on the Conference to agree to international assistance with fighting the fires which are still burning on Borneo, and to set up a working group which will draw up proposals for the protection and restoration of the peatlands which must report back within a year. They stress that those proposals must be developed in close co-operation with local communities and the South-east Asian NGOs representing them and must take full account of the needs of local people, and also of the need to protect those forests which are not part of the peatlands.
Andrew Boswell, Biofuelwatch: Nairobi contact 0720833788 (until 17/11 only); from outside Kenya 254-720833788
Dr Glen Barry, President of EcoInternet, USA:, Tel +1 920 776 1075
1. Biofuelwatch is a UK campaign which seeks regulation to ensure that only sustainably-sourced biofuels can be sold in Britain in the European Union. See
2. EcoInternet (EI) provides the most successful Internet based environment portals, search engines and international Earth advocacy network ever, regularly achieving environmental conservation victories around the world. EI specializes in the use of the Internet to achieve environmental conservation outcomes. EcoInternet's mission is to empower the global movement for environmental sustainability by providing information retrieval tools, portal services and analysis that aid in the conservation of climate, forest, water and ocean ecosystems; and to commence the age of ecological sustainability and restoration. On average 30,000 visits a day are made to our environmental portals. See
3. Save the Rainforest (Rettet den Regenwald e.V.) campaigns against the abuse of rainforest by industrialised countries and organises support for indigenous people in the forests. See
4. Watch Indonesia is a German-based working group for democracy, human rights and environmental protection in Indonesia and East Timor. See
5. For a fully referenced background paper about the peat and forest fires in south-east Asia, and their contribution to global warming, see
6. For the figures provided by Wetlands International, see

You may also like...

2 Responses

  1. Nick says:

    Since 1895, the media has alternated between global cooling and warming scares during four separate and sometimes overlapping time periods. From 1895 until the 1930’s the media peddled a coming ice age.
    From the late 1920’s until the 1960’s they warned of global warming. From the 1950’s until the 1970’s they warned us again of a coming ice age. This makes modern global warming the fourth estate’s fourth attempt to promote opposing climate change fears during the last 100 years.
    Recently, advocates of alarmism have grown increasingly desperate to try to convince the public that global warming is the greatest moral issue of our generation. Last year, the vice president of London’s Royal Society sent a chilling letter to the media encouraging them to stifle the voices of scientists skeptical of climate alarmism.
    During the past year, the American people have been served up an unprecedented parade of environmental alarmism by the media and entertainment industry, which link every possible weather event to global warming. The year 2006 saw many major organs of the media dismiss any pretense of balance and objectivity on climate change coverage and instead crossed squarely into global warming advocacy.

  2. Mandy Meikle says:

    Hi – I have just re-sent the email but surely these delegates are all at the conference now? I just got a spate of out-of-office replies. Anyway, it might help!
    I also wanted to say that I think Kyoto is already “token meaninglessness” – I campaign on energy issues & am one of those who thinks we need to reduce fossil fuel use dramatically (say 90%) by 2030. Kyoto is too little, too late. However, didn't modify the text as I should be working!
    good luck with it all – I'm happy to help despite my pessimism for the future!
    Mandy Meikle
    RESPONSE: Mandy,
    All the emails are the official UNFCCC focal points for all Annex I countries, so they are being monitored. Certainly Kyoto is disasterously lacking. But I am not aware of another international mechanism in place that can be strengthened and expanded to bring the carbon cuts we know are necessary. Should we take 20 years to negotiate again or start with what we have and make it better?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.