|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Deforestation is the second largest source of carbon emissions. In a recent study published in the journal of Nature Geoscience shows that environmental experts set a threshold that cutting carbon emissions from deforestation in half by 2020 could get us closer to the 2-degree Celsius increase in global temperature rise.
But how possible can the cutting of carbon emission be? As various countries of the world are frantically trying to meet this threshold, Nigeria is still struggling with keeping to the promises. For consecutive two weeks, world leaders convened in Paris in December 2015 to agree on a successor to the Kyoto Protocol. Reducing deforestation is one key way to reduce carbon emissions. According to The New York times, Over 60 heads of state put an emphasis on forest conservation at COP21. That is appreciable as forests cover 31 percent of the earth’s land area, providing oxygen and absorbing carbon.
However, some of the world’s forests are threatened. For example, Cross River state of Nigeria naturally harbours some of the best preserved rain forests in Nigeria such as the Cross River National Park and the Ekuri Community Forest. These forests are now facing the threat of point-and-kill to pave way for a Super Highway of 260km from Cross Rivers to Benue state. The implication is that, about 5,524sq km of pristine forest will be destroyed. Not only will the forest go but Nigeria would therefore lose its REDD+ status.
Even though it is in the self-interest of the international community, achieving the target of reducing CO2 emission by 2 degrees will therefore be challenging. This is an inadvertent attempt to sabotage the official agreement Nigeria contributed in Paris climate summit.
While the controversy about not carrying out a thorough Environmental and Social Impact assessment (ESIA) on the super high way rages on locally and nationally, the massive deforestation emanating from the entire project of super high way has put Nigeria on UNFCCC watch over their body language that speaks differently from their verbal one.
It is regrettable that the government of Cross River state has not deemed it imperative to evaluate the adverse consequences of this project to the affected communities by the super highway, even though there are jumbo promises made by the government to the affected communities. But how are these promises going to be actualized for the affected communities who are “wearing shoes and know where it pinches”? If the promises are accepted, why have the communities continued to carry placards to protest against the destruction of their forest? In other words, there are no adequate consideration of the impacts of the superhighway on nearby protected areas namely Cross River National Park, Afi Mountain Wildlife Sanctuary, Afi River Forest Reserve, Ukpon River Forest Reserve and Cross River South Forest Reserve.
No project is commendable when it is rejected by the communities it is claimed to benefit.
Till now, the government of Cross River has not substantially evidenced any cost-benefit analysis for each of the routes proposed nor provided clear justification for the superhighway and reasons for building a new road instead of upgrading the existing highways.
Reports from the Federal Ministry of Environment showed that the EIA from the government of Cross River does not even show the Cross River South Forest Reserve on its maps as the highway will cut directly through this important forest reserve with major impacts inevitable. If the socio-economic study focused only on 21 communities against an estimated more than 180 communities within the 20 km corridor what will be affected by the proposed project, it means danger still loom larger as the full impact on these communities, on their livelihoods and vulnerability has not been assessed.
It will be advisable that the state government key in to the template of the Federal Ministry of Environment that touches on the international best practices of Environmental Impact Assessment. Not doing so will mean lack of transparency on the side of the government of Cross River. We may begin to suspect ulterior motives such as land grabbing as speculated in some quarters.
However, we still wonder how such high caliber construction of super highway supersedes basic infrastructural necessities, such as providing efficient and constant electricity to the rural communities of Cross River when its cost of N700 billion can power the affected communities with alternative sources of energy, such as off-grid solar installations that can encourage micro economic activities in the state to thrive.
Let us hope that the right things will be done by the government of Cross River before their insistence of the jumbo super high way constructions becomes sabotage to the just concluded COP 21.
Smart C. Amaefula
