The Environmental Mask – Don’t judge a project by its “Green” cover!

In 2021, the Global Climate Risk Index ranked Pakistan as the 8th most climate-affected country in the world. On April 17, 2024, Pakistan’s Envoy to the United Arab Emirates (UAE) Faisal Niaz Tirmizi, in his address to the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) Assembly said that by 2024, Pakistan has become the 5th most affected country due to extreme weather and climate change.

Anyone living in Pakistan has now experienced the harsh realities of climate change firsthand. From avalanches in the Himalayas near Kashmir to heatwaves in Karachi, and from maize crop damage in Sialkot to floods in Chaman, every corner of the country has been affected. A UN fact-finding mission’s August 2024 report highlights the severe impact of this year’s floods, which displaced 33,178 people in Sindh and Balochistan, submerged 25 schools and a police station, and destroyed 80 per cent of crops. This follows the catastrophic 2022 floods, which damaged or destroyed over 2.1 million homes and, according to the World Bank’s post-disaster needs assessment, caused $14.9 billion in damages and $15.2 billion in economic losses.

Climate change: exploring the link between carbon emissions and heatwaves

This raises the question: why are we still not treating it with the seriousness it demands, and why do our so-called pro-sustainability initiatives often merely masquerade as sustainable?

This phenomenon of pseudo-sustainable activities is known as ‘Greenwashing’. A more detailed definition of greenwashing would be the practice of making misleading claims about the environmental benefits of a policy, product or service that paint eco-friendliness. While in the past, this tactic has been a tool of the corporations to capitalize on the growing demand of sustainability without actually investing in it, now with increasing awareness among the voting population, it has also become a political tool to gain votes. And countries like Pakistan have a lot to lose if this practice is not eliminated, because it is not just persisting the environmental damage but also hampering much-needed climate mitigation measures and energy transition.

Let’s look at the ‘Billion Tree Tsunami Project’ to understand this phenomenon better.

Touted as one of the most successful and groundbreaking efforts of a certain political party, this initiative came into was launched in 2014, to “combat deforestation and restore degraded landscapes” in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Keeping aside the allegations of corruption and misreported number of trees planted, even the actual planted trees have been denounced by the ecologists because their harmful impacts outweighed the benefits.

Part I: True cost of coal-powered electricity – a closer look at the hidden damage

Despite getting international acclaim, the Billion tree tsunami project included plants like conocarpus, dodonea and eucalyptus, which have already been proven unsuitable for the native soil. WWF-Pakistan’s first third-party monitoring report revealed that conocarpus was planted in Peshawar, eucalyptus was planted in Peshawar, Kohat and Bannu, and other species including dodonea were also planted in Peshawar and Bannu.

In a report by Dawn, Dr Lal Badshah, an ecologist and Assistant Professor at University of Peshawar, Department of Botany, said that “conocarpus plants were tried in Karachi, Sindh, and it was found that the plant left far-reaching negative impact on the environment in term of pollen allergy. Those plants were also found negatively impacting other herbs and flora too while birds avoided to visit those plants as habitat for nesting.” The plantation of conocarpus and dodonea had an impact so severe, that the Capital Development Authority (CDA) in Islamabad had to spring into action to cut down the harmful trees to control pollen allergy.

Speaking to HUM News, Dr Saeeda Yousaf Assistant Professor at University of Peshawar, Department of Environmental Sciences concurred with Dr Lal Badshah. “Back when this project started we objected to their choice of plants. We raised this issue at every platform possible to stop them from planting trees that were water intensive and not suitable for the soil. The results of that are visible now, because those plants could not have flourished in the conditions in which they were planted and they didn’t”.

She says, however, that with the passage of time, the results of wrong choice of plants and lack of coordination amongst the departments has yielded some lessons, and now the project has actually started bearing fruits.

Microhydro power: lifeline amidst disasters & a blueprint for RE

Former Project Director of the Billion Tree Tsunami Project, Muhammad Asif, spoke on this issue with HUM News and even he concurred with the mistakes in choice of plants. He said, “We had a manual that detailed what species were to be planted in what regions, according to weather and soil conditions. However, there were some mistakes which were rectified later. But most of this criticism was only political… We never planted these trees like Eucalyptus or Cornocopus.”

However, this argument can be checked through the third-party independent monitoring report of WWF-Pakistan, that said initially there were 58 per cent Eucalyptus plants and 5 per cent Conocarpus plants, out of the total number of plants. In 2017 Eucalyptus still made up for 19 per cent of the total plants, second-highest after Chir at 21 per cent, and 3 per cent of the plants were still Conocarpus.