Again, we have chosen short-term profits over the long-term well-being of the world.
The Ecuadorean government abandoned a plan to conserve part of the ever-shrinking Amazon rainforest from oil drilling.
Because they would lose all the profits from tapping the resource, Ecuador had a plan to make money and help the environment — get money from nations around the world to not drill in Yasuni National Park, where approximately 20 percent of the country’s oil sits.
Over the course of 13 years, Ecuador aimed to cash in on only half of the estimated value of the oil: $3.2 billion. In 2007, the country set up a fund through the United Nations, but by the end of 2012, the fund only had $6.5 million.
Now Ecuador has scrapped that plan and plans to drill in the delicate forest, where any negative impact would harm 100,000 species per roughly 2.5 acre area, according to the Guardian.
“Even the sound of the motor will destroy the fragility of this place,” Ivonne A-Baki, who works for the Ecuadorean government, told an NPR journalist.
Ecuadorean President Rafael Correa is saying that less than 0.1 percent of the forest will be sacrificed, and that as much as $18.2 billion could come from oil extraction.
This issue highlights the complexity of the dilemmas of our generation and something that needs to be talked about. I’m not talking about left-right global warming politics here — I’m talking about a real problem that needs a real solution.
We live in a world where our livelihood is being sold to the highest bidder. How much is the Amazon worth? Who are we to even put a price on that?
At the same time, Correa is stuck.
He can either choose to tap a lucrative resource and continue helping his poverty-stricken nation, or he can preserve a unique home to 10 percent of all living species on earth.
Now, while I’m a sucker for helping the impoverished, the risks cannot be forgotten.
It’s easy to think that by limiting the forest drilling area, everything will be fine.
Remember the Gulf oil spill? Lots of oil came from one little rig.
Even if there is no such disaster, environmental impacts should be considered.
First is the burning of all the oil that’s extracted, and all the gas burned to transport that oil. Not to mention additional deforestation — the Amazon has lost 17 percent of its forest cover in 50 years — and the impact of the deforestation on indigenous people and animals.
Half of Yasuni National Park already has oil wells on it, according to the Guardian. Western parts of the preserve have been lost because of the wells’ processing and pumping facilities. Then you have roads to the wells, housing for workers — the list goes on. It is not too long before the Amazon rainforest becomes another industrial sector.
It’s not something you consider every day, but global dependence on oil must stop.
The consumption of oil is not sustainable, as highlighted by the delicate case in the Amazon.
Balancing the welfare of people with the environment is crucial, but we’re not doing that.
The world, especially the United States, continues to focus on consumption — but not its consequences.
We continue to take from the earth without expecting anything to be taken in return.
Justin Jones is a journalism senior. His columns run on Thursdays. A version of this column ran on page 6 on 9/5/2013 under the headline "The Amazon rainforest gets a price tag"
