Back to SCB ELECTION RESULTS

Up to Table of Contents

WILL THE SOCIETY FOR CONSERVATION BIOLOGY BECOME CARBON-NEUTRAL?

Climate scientists are unanimous in their judgment that human activities, especially emission of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases, are altering Earth's climate in ways that will affect our lives profoundly. For instance, in this century global climate change may produce a one meter rise in sea level, which would put most of Bangladesh and some island nations, and much of the U.S. state of Florida, under sea level. In addition to these well-publicized direct impacts on humans, global climate change will have an enormous impact on biological diversity. For instance, in 2004 a team of conservation biologists at the University of Leeds concluded that under the most plausible projections of climate change, 15% to 37% of all land-based animals and plants may become extinct by 2050.

At SCB's 2006 annual meeting, the Board of Governors will discuss proposals to take responsibility for our carbon impacts. If we choose to become "carbon neutral," we will neutralize the effect of our greenhouse gas emissions so that our activities no longer contribute to global warming. Our two main options are emission avoidance (e.g., investing in solar energy projects that reduce fossil fuel consumption) and carbon sequestration (e.g., restoration of forests to degraded landscapes). For an organization like SCB, carbon sequestration is particularly attractive if we can invest in restoration of the tropical forest ecosystems that harbor 50% of Earth's terrestrial biodiversity in < 7% of the planet's land area.

More than 95% of SCB's contribution to global warming derives from jet fuel burned to take people to our annual meeting. Each passenger on a fully-booked London-New York flight, for instance, is responsible for about 1.2 tons of carbon. The cost of offsetting the impact of an individual's flight to meeting is about US$10-$20, depending on flight distance and how the carbon is offset. Because we would want to offset carbon in a way that not only cleans the air but also benefits biological diversity directly, our costs may be towards the upper end of this range. Blackwell Publishing, the publisher of Conservation Biology, recently became the first major academic publisher to make its operations carbon-neutral. Although I am mildly embarrassed that our for-profit publisher and huge organizations like the World Bank became carbon-neutral before SCB, I am excited that SCB still has the opportunity to be a leader in this arena.

There are many issues to be resolved and many risks involved in carbon-offset investments. For instance, as the global temperature increases, there is increasing risk that the trees in a reforestation project will burn or die. Also, we want to pay only for reforestation that would not otherwise have happened, and we don't want to reward land exploiters who would cynically destroy a forest for timber income and then get paid to replant. Similarly, SCB will want to invest in a botanically diverse forest rather than a monoculture that will not support most native species. Fortunately, the Kyoto protocol, public sentiment, and initiatives by the European Union and others have spurred the development of markets, expertise, consultants, and third-party certifiers that address these issues.

To provide input to the Board, you soon will receive an email inviting you to participate in a brief poll (no more than three multiple-choice questions, and an opportunity to comment) about your willingness to increase the price of meeting registration to make SCB annual meetings carbon-neutral. Please reflect on this issue. If you have time, visit a few Web sites on carbon-neutral initiatives. And when you receive an email on "carbon-neutral SCB," please take a minute to respond.

Paul Beier, SCB Secretary

Back to SCB ELECTION RESULTS

Up to Table of Contents