Yasuni Jungle: Only months left to save Ecuador's ecolological treasure!

I saw an urgent discussion on the Yasuni Park in Ecuador this week, and I would appeal to the ATS community to help me with more research or spreading the word.

Ecuador has held back oil industries from invading the pristine area of Amazonian jungle, which is home to countless unresearched plants, and some of the last tribes that choose to avoid the modern world.
In return Ecuador wanted money, since it is a poor country, and they say the world wants it saved, so the world should help to fund saving it.

To me this sounded like black-mail: Hand over the cash or the jungle gets it!

Whatever the case, if the money is not raised at the end of 2011 oil drilling will begin in the region.

Currently not many countries are interested in contributing, especially considering the economic climate.

Here is more:

Ecuador wants donors to give $3.6 billion in exchange for not extracting oil from the Yasuni jungle, home to a vast array of plants and animals.

Here are some facts about the project:

* Ecuador has created a trust fund to hold donations from governments, foundations and individuals willing to pay the Andean country to refrain from drilling for 846 million barrels of proven reserves in three blocks. The fund would be administered by the United Nations Development Program.

* Yasuni as a whole covers an area of 982,000 hectares. Indigenous groups live in isolation in parts of the park.

* The 200,000 hectare section in question holds 20 percent of OPEC-member Ecuador's total heavy crude reserves. Ecuador in mid-2010 said it was asking donors to contribute at least half of the $7.2 billion that the state would receive for oil sales if it were to allow drilling in the area. According to Correa, at current oil prices the reserves could be worth $14 billion.

* By keeping the petroleum underground, 407 million tonnes of carbon dioxide would be kept from being released into the atmosphere, according to the government.

* Scientists say that Yasuni has more tree species than exist in North America, plus a huge variety of insects, snakes and other wildlife including anteaters and the pink-colored fresh-water dolphins that swim in its rivers.

* The park is located near the equator and the region's complex network of rivers creates natural barriers that separate groups of plants and animals, encouraging them to break off into separate species. The nearby Andean mountain chain makes for steep terrain, allowing the park to have a unique biodiversity.

* Ecuador plans to issue certificates to contributors promising their money back, without interest, should the country ever decide to exploit the section. Given that Ecuador defaulted on its international bonds in 1999 and 2008, prospective donors are going to pay close attention to the certificates' fine print before signing on.

* If the fund does not collect at least $100 million by the end of 2011, the government says it will deem the project a failure and all contributions will be refunded, clearing the way for exploitation of the crude. The goal is to collect the full $3.6 billion by 2024.

af.reuters.com...

Who will pay to keep the oil underground to save the Yasuni?

An Aljazeera report on the proposal in 2009.
The comment beneath the clip explains some of the background.

An article written in August this year.
Ecuador wanted $100 million by the end of December 2011.
By August there was $60 million more to go.
It seems around $50 million now.
I wonder if they'll make it.
www.guardian.co.uk...

Yasuni ITT - 2009 proposal documentary.


Still seems a bit like blackmail, shouldn't this be Ecuador's problem?
Or is it the world's problem?

What's the point of stopping people from smoking, if the world has no more lungs?
What air will we breathe?
I wonder about our priorities sometimes.

Well, I guess nobody cares, and maybe that's not surprising considering how immediate and localized survival issues have become lately.

I'm not sure of this whole scheme and how it is marketed with power-points and the UN development fund.

I suppose the two biggest backers in 2009 - Spain and Germany - now have other issues.

But nobody even seems to care where or what the Yasuni is, or offers alternative plans like massive boycotts.

I hate to be negative, but it appears the fat lady has sung for the Yasuni.

I think this whole issue and deal should be vigorously debated and re-negotiated.
It just doesn't seem right somehow (although maybe it sounded better in 2009).

Well somebody just do something before the jungle really becomes another big, sticky mess.

I had never heard of this park before. The biodiversity is stunning in its magnitude. What a precious enclave. To see it disturbed and possibly destroyed for the sake of oil would be a travesty.

I agree that the approach feels like blackmail and the government of the country may be less than trustworthy, but the alternative, to let the greedy oil companies lacking in any scruples whatsoever have their way is just unthinkable.

All those magnificent animals, trees and other forms of wildlife. Amazing!

At the least I will be exploring this further. I hope something will be accomplished.

reply to post by halfoldman


Sounds to me like the Ecuadorian government is just telling it like it is - not "blackmail."

....The only way they can save their economy, and their people and their country, is to play the game. They didn't create the game - but they're forced to play.

reply to post by soficrow

I sure hear you my friend.
But what if the amount is not raised by the end of 2011?
Would it be correct by the rules of "the game" to start drilling?

reply to post by halfoldman

Would it be correct by the rules of "the game" to start drilling?

Sounds to me like they'll have no choice.

People need to eat - even Ecuadorians - and oil is the one commodity they have that's valuable to our world.

We are upset to read of a single child who is abused, or to see a video of an animal being hurt; yet we can look the other way when an entire complex ecosystem full of life is destroyed for the sake of money?

I don't care how poor Ecuador is, to allow any destruction of this park and the people, plants and animals that live there would be an unconscionable crime.

Unfortunately even eco-tourism might destroy the environment or change it in harmful ways. The answer is not clear. However, the environment is never only the problem of the local people or country. This is one world, with one environment and we are all dependent on its health.

Fascinating and alarming environmental facts on the Yasuni.
One tree in the Yasuni has more species of ants than the whole of England.
And sad to think: All the oil in the Yasuni can only provide the world for 5 days.

It seems that limited oil exploration in the Yasuni Park is inevitable.
Out of the $100 million expected by Ecuador at the end of 2011, only $52 million had been raised by September.

www.reuters.com...

The President of Ecuador:

Time may be running out—Correa has indicated that Ecuador wants to see at least $100 million in funding for the Yasuni project by the end of the year, but so far barely more than half that has been pledged. That could scuttle the initiative, Correa said last month in New York:

"The international response to our call has been poor. We're renouncing an immense sum of money. For us the most financially lucrative option is to extract the gasoline".

ecocentric.blogs.time.com...

reply to post by halfoldman


It's ahelluva world we live in, isn't it?

Anyone remember what was important before there was money?

It's now reaching the final week of April 2012, and I wondered what had happened after the urgent call to action towards the end of last year?

A Scientific American article seems to have some answers.

The money sufficiently reached its target, and Ecuador has provided more time for the desired amount of $3.6 Billion until 2013.

Now they want $250 million for next year to avoid drilling.

More disconcertingly the discourse has moved from drilling as the only threat to the Yasuni. Logging, plantations, roads, and illegal hunting form current threats, and even the indigenous people are getting chainsaws and other destructive technology.

Oil exploration ultimately seems inevitable some time in the future, but we are told it's much improved after 50 years.

If that opinion in the article is true, then why pay?
Is it really about the forest?
blogs.scientificamerican.com...