First step is to get rid of their climate change-denying madman President.
Brazilian Amazon lost 18 trees per second in 2021
51–60 of 224 posts
Re: Brazilian Amazon lost 18 trees per second in 2021
#52If we really care about what happens in Brazil we should offer economically viable solutions rather than pointing fingers and accusing them of doing something that we did in the past for a long time.
Agree. Imagine outsiders telling you that half your country is untouchable. I wonder if some future carbon credit system could pay them for the carbon sequestration that the Brazilian Amazon provides.
> Imagine outsiders telling you that half your country is untouchable
As a Brazilian, I would be completely ok with that. We can handle people telling us those things.
Re: Brazilian Amazon lost 18 trees per second in 2021
#53What is morally and ethically worse - eating an animal fed and raised domestically, or eating soy-laiden "plant-based" foods that were grown on recently-raized rainforest several thousand miles away? It's our demand for goods that is causing this.
Most soybeans are used as animal fed. Also, the feeding animal 10KG to get 1KG looks rather wasteful? Lastly, you missed the methane pollution, water usage, ethics etc.. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feed_conversion_ratio
I'm fully aware of that, which is why I said "domestically FED and raised".
>Also, the feeding animal 10KG to get 1KG looks rather wasteful?
Depends heavily on what animal product you are producing. Obviously we won't be eating beef all the time. It also depends on what kind of farmland you have available, and what uses those crops have.
Where I am (Wales, UK), the combination of the farmer' lobby and the "Welsh culture and heritage" lobby has meant that largely unprofitable sheep farming has been subsidised, and what should be productive wooded hillside makes lamb that no-one wants. I'm not saying that raising animals is always the best use of land.
Re: Brazilian Amazon lost 18 trees per second in 2021
#54If we really care about what happens in Brazil we should offer economically viable solutions rather than pointing fingers and accusing them of doing something that we did in the past for a long time.
As someone born in Brazil, I'm tired of this condescending bullshit. There are several economically viable solutions, but Brazilian government should be interested in pursuing them, rather than only pursuing things that only benefits the current friends of the government (such as deforestation). US/EU/etc forcing Brazil to get its shit together would be BETTER for the population. We don't need the deforestation to pr…
This is also "sins of the father" style reasoning. The fact that other people did a thing in the past doesn't mean I agree or support it. I have ancestors who fought with the confederacy; does this mean I shouldn't be opposed to human trafficking in 2022? I think that would be an unreasonable jump to make.
Re: Brazilian Amazon lost 18 trees per second in 2021
#55What is morally and ethically worse - eating an animal fed and raised domestically, or eating soy-laiden "plant-based" foods that were grown on recently-raized rainforest several thousand miles away? It's our demand for goods that is causing this.
Many of the domestically raised animals still eat imported soybeans.
How many of the animals that are
>"Domestically FED and raised"
??
Re: Brazilian Amazon lost 18 trees per second in 2021
#56The United States once had one of the largest forests on Earth. The Eastern Forest covered almost everywhere east of the Mississippi. 2,560,000 km2 of forest. Now it is largely gone. Replaced with farmland and sprawl. So it is hard to criticize. Even areas that are now heavily forested like Vermont were clear cut almost entirely by the turn of the century. The Amazon should be preserved, but to do that the world is g…
> So it is hard to criticize. Even areas that are now heavily forested like Vermont were clear cut almost entirely by the turn of the century. As someone born in Brazil, I don't see why it's hard. Please criticise away. My country should be learning from the mistakes of others, not repeating them in order to favour some higher political caste. To quote flaviojuvenal below, "Brazil had no trouble to grow in 90s and 20…
[deleted]
Re: Brazilian Amazon lost 18 trees per second in 2021
#57If humanity cares about its existence in the long term then we simply cannot clear cut the amazon.
Re: Brazilian Amazon lost 18 trees per second in 2021
#58There seem to be two lines of thinking:
1. Who are we (US, Canada, China - heavily developed nations) to criticize?
2. Bolsonaro is bad mkay
I think the root of the problem in both situations is people in power both in the government and out of it who do not seek sustainability and often are susceptible to corruption or influence. In both situations, the profits did not go to your average human.
Re: Brazilian Amazon lost 18 trees per second in 2021
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are only four economically viable solutions: 1) Boycott or put drastic tariffs on Brazilian meat and soy, aka the products that are made out of the areas which were former rainforest. The problem: China won't give a fuck about Western sanction and Bolsonaro and his goons will happily sell to them (aided by the fact that China still has issues with pig fever in their domestic meat production). 2) Pay off Bolsona…
"regime change is bad except when it's for a reason i like"
[deleted]
Re: Brazilian Amazon lost 18 trees per second in 2021
#60The United States once had one of the largest forests on Earth. The Eastern Forest covered almost everywhere east of the Mississippi. 2,560,000 km2 of forest. Now it is largely gone. Replaced with farmland and sprawl. So it is hard to criticize. Even areas that are now heavily forested like Vermont were clear cut almost entirely by the turn of the century. The Amazon should be preserved, but to do that the world is g…
Why do governments not start an international reforestation / ecological fund and pay some of their GDP into it so that it would make economic sense for Brazil, Australia and others to preserve their forests, kelp, reefs etc. These carbon credit half measures are pitiful. Western governments pay part of their GDP for NATO, but defending against ecological collapse might be higher priority. Governments tax citizens by…
With my idealists hat on: that would be great. Plus, it would suddenly make economic sense to build desalination plants and pump water into deserts and plant trees there.
With my realist hat on: that money will disappear as quickly as dodgy ngo can write empty “project proposals”. Trees will be planted, press fotos made, and trees will die. 70 years of “development aid”.