Keeping Oil Underground in Ecuador

The United Nations partners with Ecuador in a bid to pay for the privilege of keeping oil underground and a tropical forest undisturbed. David Biello reports

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Yasuni National Park in Ecuador is home to one of the richest concentrations of plant and animal species on the planet. More tree species grow in a single hectare of Yasuni than in all of North America and the reserve hosts an indigenous group still living in isolation. 

Now the United Nations Development Programme has set up a fund to pay the government of Ecuador to keep Yasuni unspoiled by leaving as much 850 million barrels of crude oil under the park's ground. 

At $80 per barrel that's nearly $70 billion worth. And roughly 400 million metric tons of CO2 that wouldn't enter the atmosphere. 


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


All Ecuador wants in return is $3.6 billion over the next decade for a pledge never to develop the oil field. Countries that paid into the UNDP fund would receive a credit for the avoided greenhouse gas emissions, potentially offsetting some of their own oil burning. Ecuador plans to use the money to develop renewable energy. 

Germany has committed to pay some $50 million per year over the next 12 years. Other commitments remain sparse on the ground despite the plan having been floated since 2007. 

As it is, oil accounts for more than half of Ecuador's exports as well as one-third of the government's budget. 

But Ecuador's experience with Chevron may have convinced it that oil actually stinks—an epic lawsuit has been fought for nearly two decades over oil spills and toxic waste left behind by previous development. Perhaps Yasuni is a sign of the end of the petroleum age

—David Biello

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe