Charles, Prince of the rainforests and scourge of climate change

Deforestation worldwide could be cut by a quarter within five years at the cost of what Goldman Sachs is expected to pay in bonuses this year, writes Geoffrey Lean.

By Geoffrey LeanPublished: 8:08PM GMT 27 Nov 2009

Visiting St James's Palace the other day was something of a Grimm experience: I went to see a prince, but came face to face with a frog. The frog was huge, haughty-looking and richly coloured – reedbed royalty, indeed. And, as if to complete the fairy tale, I then heard a well-known voice: "I am Sting. A rainforest campaigner, and a friend of this frog."
The animal was an animated model, symbol of the Prince of Wales's Rainforest Project, launched to try to prevent the world's richest habitats from – wait for it – croaking. Extraordinarily, as I discovered on getting to the meeting I had come to attend, the project has brought about the best chance yet of achieving that.
Every year, some 32 million acres of tropical forest (about half of it rainforest) are felled worldwide. Even if you ignore its impact on climate change, this is a disaster: countless species are driven to extinction, harvests are hit as rainfall patterns change, and rainwater runs off treeless landscapes, causing floods.
But felling forests is also responsible for nearly a fifth of all the carbon dioxide humanity puts into the atmosphere each year – more than all the cars, commercial vehicles, trains, ships and aircraft combined. Standing forests store the equivalent of at least 40 times the annual greenhouse gas emissions, which would be more than enough to destroy the Earth's climate if they were to be cut down.
Put positively, preserving forests is one of the quickest and cheapest ways of combating global warming. Lord Stern, author of the eponymous report, reckons that it would cost about $5 to save each ton of carbon dioxide, one quarter of the (low) price at which it is trading on the European market – and the species and rainfall would be preserved free.
Unfortunately, cutting down forest provides quick returns, for small farmers trying to eke out a living, logging companies and governments looking to maximise revenue, not to mention politicians and officials after backhanders. The timber can be sold, and more money made from farming the land or using it to cultivate palm oil or to ranch cattle. But the timber can only be flogged once, and poor rainforest soil is quickly exhausted.
Climate change negotiations have taken a disgracefully long time in getting round to this issue. Forests were left out of the Kyoto Protocol, partly at the urging of some green pressure groups who, with typical tunnel vision, wanted to keep the focus on reducing the burning of fossil fuels in rich countries.
In Copenhagen, proposals will finally be on the table to make sure that forests are worth more alive than dead – under the kind of title only the UN can dream up, Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation, shortened to "REDD". And, in anticipation, some countries have already take action. Brazil has cut its deforestation fourfold in just five years, reaching its lowest level in two decades. Indonesia is offering big reductions. And Guyana, which still has 95 per cent of its rainforest intact, has been fighting off pressure from logging companies.
But the negotiations over REDD, which would provide money to compensate countries for avoiding deforestation, are slow and complicated. Even if a broad agreement is reached in Copenhagen, the details will take years to sort out.
Meanwhile, as President Jagdeo of Guyana and other leaders told the meeting at St James's Palace, they are out on a limb, having told their peoples that forgoing the immediate benefits of deforestation will prove worthwhile. If the money does not materialise, they are likely to lose office. Much more importantly, their countries will never again be persuaded to leave the trees standing.
That is where the Prince of Wales has come in. Back in April, he persuaded the leaders attending the G20 summit in London to set up a study into what could be done immediately, using emergency finance. Its report – agreed by 35 governments and launched at the recent meeting in London – concluded that deforestation worldwide could be cut by a quarter within five years at a cost of £13-£22 billion, paid on results.
It sounds a lot of money, but at the lower end it is about what Goldman Sachs is expected to pay in bonuses this year. And some money is already coming in. The Norwegian government described how it had just agreed to provide £150 million from its oil revenues to Guyana, if it leaves forests standing. The United States joined in, announcing it would spend £165 million next year, predominantly on rainforests. Britain was also due to pledge money, but delayed at the last minute. Let's hope it happens soon: after all, forests would be better REDD than dead.