Brazilian Amazon lost 18 trees per second in 2021 • Hacker News Board

Re: Brazilian Amazon lost 18 trees per second in 2021

#111

Post by ratww » Tue, Jul 19, 2022, 2:48 PM UTC

rglullis wrote: post #107

ratww wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And my point is that Brazil won't get rich by doing what it is currently doing. The primary sector won't enrich the general population or make the country more developed. Only some people favoured by the current government. That's what's currently happening, not some cuckoo theory.

The alternative to "not enrich the country" will be "make it even poorer and unequal than it already is".

Bullshit.

Brasil has >70% people working in the service sector. The percentage of people working in agriculture has actually shrunk since the Lula years. Mechanization and automation will guarantee it keeps shrinking.

The current economic measures are favouring only the primary sector to the detriment of others.

I'm not even calling for ceasing imports of agricultural stuff, all I'm saying is that the current madness is already making the people poorer.

Re: Brazilian Amazon lost 18 trees per second in 2021

#112

Post by Smithalicious » Tue, Jul 19, 2022, 2:49 PM UTC

mschuster91 wrote: post #29

hu3 wrote: post #13

If 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.

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…

I really don't think the CIA should be the global judge, jury and executioner. I don't think the US assassinating the leader of one of the world's largest countries to "send a signal" is conductive to world peace.

Re: Brazilian Amazon lost 18 trees per second in 2021

#113

Post by 411111111111111 » Tue, Jul 19, 2022, 2:49 PM UTC

is_true wrote: post #75

ratww wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

Think of it this way: The countries pointing fingers at Brazil all did the same to become more developed and to make their population richer, they just want to stop Brazil from doing the same so they can keep the prices of commodities they sell higher. They cheated but now don't want you to do the same in order to keep other countries in check, I mean, Europe is burning more and more coal, they are just a bunch of hy…

> They cheated but now don't want you to do the same in order to keep other countries in check, I mean, Europe is burning more and more coal, they are just a bunch of hypocrites.

It's even worse in my opinion, because people here actually do seem to think that "the west" has it under control nowadays, which is one of the dumbest things I learned recently.

There are so many factors which were omitted in order to create that misinformation, but there is only one thing you can trust the industry to do: suppress any information which could negatively impact them, even if it could very well become an existential threat ...

Re: Brazilian Amazon lost 18 trees per second in 2021

#114

Post by dormento » Tue, Jul 19, 2022, 2:50 PM UTC

Sharlin wrote: post #62

mschuster91 wrote: post #29

Earlier 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…

Trying to effect a regime change of a G20 member nation with a population of over 200 million? Yeah, can’t see how that could backfire at all…

Echoing the comments of fellow brazilian brethren in this thread: "As a Brazilian, I would be completely ok with that." /s

(And after yesterdays shameful meeting with the embassies, I only say this half-joking...)

Re: Brazilian Amazon lost 18 trees per second in 2021

#115

Post by rglullis » Tue, Jul 19, 2022, 2:51 PM UTC

ratww wrote: post #111

rglullis wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The alternative to "not enrich the country" will be "make it even poorer and unequal than it already is".

Bullshit. Brasil has >70% people working in the service sector. The percentage of people working in agriculture has actually shrunk since the Lula years. Mechanization and automation will guarantee it keeps shrinking. The current economic measures are favouring only the primary sector to the detriment of others. I'm not even calling for ceasing imports of agricultural stuff, all I'm saying is that the current madness…

It is precisely because so many people working in the service sector that the country does not get rich. Doesn't build any wealth, doesn't get to export anything.

And also, it is not the amount of people working that determines how to enrich the country. It is the overall output. Brazil has nothing but the agro sector at the moment. To build a stronger industry, they need to come up with the resources from somewhere. And agro is as good as any of the alternatives.

Re: Brazilian Amazon lost 18 trees per second in 2021

#116

Post by pfdietz » Tue, Jul 19, 2022, 2:52 PM UTC

specialp wrote: post #31

The 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…

The eastern US forests cover 1.55 million km^2. So, no, it is not "largely gone". Granted, a considerable fraction of this is regenerated after being clear cut.

Re: Brazilian Amazon lost 18 trees per second in 2021

#117

Post by coding123 » Tue, Jul 19, 2022, 2:53 PM UTC

specialp wrote: post #31

The 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…

You absolutely can and we have been doing so since, probably the 1970s. I think this hypocriticalness should continue. The world is FULL of hypocrtical shit and it doesn't stop of from trying to do what is right.

Re: Brazilian Amazon lost 18 trees per second in 2021

#118

Post by Sporktacular » Tue, Jul 19, 2022, 2:53 PM UTC

rodolphoarruda wrote: post #105

Wood extraction in the Amazon is a crime. It's aggravated crime if done in indigenous lands. It's aggravated even more if done for illegal mining activities. The state police (civil and military) from the various Brazilian states that compose the Amazon forest has the legal obligation to investigate and arrest criminals within the region. The problem is the region is just too big. But let's assume that somehow all th…

The problem is that the current government doesn't WANT to investigate and arrest criminals. They cut funding, merged environmental protection and indigenous affairs into the agricultural ministry. This is well documented.

The forest is on the edge of becoming a net carbon producer for the first time. This doesn't simply reverse when it regrows from some saplings. Its capacity to create clouds to replenish water is already heavily compromised. When that stops this simply doesn't reverse. When you burn sections without first clearing it of its animal populations they perish, destroying the ecosystems that often needs animals to help germinate new trees. The mercury used for illegal gold mining doesn't just go out of the river and back into the bottle. Billions of animals die from these actions and the results will be irreversible.

To call the Amazon unstoppable, to say that the humans that are dying is the real problem, smacks of the ignorance that has led us to this point.

Re: Brazilian Amazon lost 18 trees per second in 2021

#119

Post by ratww » Tue, Jul 19, 2022, 2:55 PM UTC

rglullis wrote: post #115

ratww wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bullshit. Brasil has >70% people working in the service sector. The percentage of people working in agriculture has actually shrunk since the Lula years. Mechanization and automation will guarantee it keeps shrinking. The current economic measures are favouring only the primary sector to the detriment of others. I'm not even calling for ceasing imports of agricultural stuff, all I'm saying is that the current madness…

It is precisely because so many people working in the service sector that the country does not get rich. Doesn't build any wealth, doesn't get to export anything. And also, it is not the amount of people working that determines how to enrich the country. It is the overall output. Brazil has nothing but the agro sector at the moment. To build a stronger industry, they need to come up with the resources from somewhere.…

Yes, and? My point is precisely that those people aren't going to start working in agriculture. The number of people working in agriculture is only shrinking, and there's several labour problems with agricultural work in Brazil that won't cause farm/livestock workers to see the money.

I'm not suggesting people move to the services sector.

Re: Brazilian Amazon lost 18 trees per second in 2021

#120

Post by pfdietz » Tue, Jul 19, 2022, 2:57 PM UTC

slowhand09 wrote: post #42

Interesting comments below. Just some food for thought. Fertilized, less land is required to grow equivalent quantities of crops. Petroleum products, especially natural gas is a raw material as well as fuel for nitrogen fertilizer production. Higher petroleum prices mean higher fertilizer prices. Higher fertilizer prices mean higher food prices. Scarcity increases prices. Worldwide food production is down for many re…

Or, PV will continue to crash in price, electrolytic hydrogen will get cheaper than SMR hydrogen, and fertilizer will remain cheap. The big concern with fertilizer is not so much energy use, btw, it's N2O emission.