Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Amazon forest has an almost 3x year-on-year increase in fires in February

brazil.postsen.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 57 posts

Re: The Amazon forest has an almost 3x year-on-year increase in fires in February

#21

Post by mistrial9 »

smallerfish wrote: post #14
mistrial9 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has also been 25 years since the Rainforest Action Network (RAN) in the US had their fundraising vodka parties and reliable bumpersticker activism. wtf did they get done? this is miserable

Why do you single them out in particular? There are lots of advocacy groups. Ultimately it comes down to politics in the Amazon states.

actually let us frame it this way -- the RAN got money and also did a few things; ranchers and plantation builders got money, and also cut a lot of forest to do it, even illegally in their own country, because the law enforcement got money, and their political leaders got money and "watched"

what is the common theme there? what suffered while all that happened? who had the staying power to be in the news and show up at work the next day, for years, while it all happened? who went crying alone, injured lost and dismayed, and had to change to some other activity while all that happened?

Re: The Amazon forest has an almost 3x year-on-year increase in fires in February

#22

Post by throwaway5752 »

Madison WI hit a new February all time temperature record. It was the average June temperature. They warned forever that after the ocean and glaciers absorbed a certain amount of excess heat that air temperatures would hockey-stick. I was hoping I wouldn't live through it.

Re: The Amazon forest has an almost 3x year-on-year increase in fires in February

#23

Post by rootusrootus »

smcl wrote: post #19

Interesting that this kind of problem exists elsewhere. What happens in the UK is a developer buys a "listed" building - meaning it has a special status that means you need to preserve it and cannot knock it and down then, say, build a bunch of flats or offices on the same location. These buildings have a very unfortunate tendency to burn down overnight, leaving said developers with little option but to build apartme…

That seems like such an easy thing to fix, though. The land a listed building is sitting on should be zoned only for the listed building. If it burns down, it gets rebuilt exactly, or donated to the public. Allowing developers to benefit from such "accidents" is the problem.

Re: The Amazon forest has an almost 3x year-on-year increase in fires in February

#24

Post by trogsworth »

rootusrootus wrote: post #23
smcl wrote: post #19

Interesting that this kind of problem exists elsewhere. What happens in the UK is a developer buys a "listed" building - meaning it has a special status that means you need to preserve it and cannot knock it and down then, say, build a bunch of flats or offices on the same location. These buildings have a very unfortunate tendency to burn down overnight, leaving said developers with little option but to build apartme…

That seems like such an easy thing to fix, though. The land a listed building is sitting on should be zoned only for the listed building. If it burns down, it gets rebuilt exactly, or donated to the public. Allowing developers to benefit from such "accidents" is the problem.

This, at least sometimes, happens: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-stoke-staffordshire-68...

Re: The Amazon forest has an almost 3x year-on-year increase in fires in February

#25

Post by woleium »

rootusrootus wrote: post #23
smcl wrote: post #19

Interesting that this kind of problem exists elsewhere. What happens in the UK is a developer buys a "listed" building - meaning it has a special status that means you need to preserve it and cannot knock it and down then, say, build a bunch of flats or offices on the same location. These buildings have a very unfortunate tendency to burn down overnight, leaving said developers with little option but to build apartme…

That seems like such an easy thing to fix, though. The land a listed building is sitting on should be zoned only for the listed building. If it burns down, it gets rebuilt exactly, or donated to the public. Allowing developers to benefit from such "accidents" is the problem.

or the site is cleared and goes into a 50 year ‘public use’ lockup, where the developer owns it still, but it must be used for the public good for 50 years. A park or community garden, for example. Basically just enough to make it unattractive as an option for the contractor

Re: The Amazon forest has an almost 3x year-on-year increase in fires in February

#26

Post by dml2135 »

smcl wrote: post #19

Interesting that this kind of problem exists elsewhere. What happens in the UK is a developer buys a "listed" building - meaning it has a special status that means you need to preserve it and cannot knock it and down then, say, build a bunch of flats or offices on the same location. These buildings have a very unfortunate tendency to burn down overnight, leaving said developers with little option but to build apartme…

Anyone who has ever played Civ knows you need to chop those forests to build wonders.

Re: The Amazon forest has an almost 3x year-on-year increase in fires in February

#27

Post by meristohm »

wiz21c wrote: post #17
jna_sh wrote: post #10

This article doesn’t cover one of the key contributing factors to this which is the cyclical nature of drought resilience and deforestation. As rainforest is lost, precipitation decreases due to a decrease in tree perspiration, reducing humidity and the amount of water available to the trees, making them more susceptible to fires. When you then combine that with longer dry seasons, higher max temperatures, and slash…

> the rainforest is in for a bad time you mean: we are in for a bad time ?

Is it okay to consider the wellbeing of others, too?

Re: The Amazon forest has an almost 3x year-on-year increase in fires in February

#28

Post by DANmode »

dml2135 wrote: post #26
smcl wrote: post #19

Interesting that this kind of problem exists elsewhere. What happens in the UK is a developer buys a "listed" building - meaning it has a special status that means you need to preserve it and cannot knock it and down then, say, build a bunch of flats or offices on the same location. These buildings have a very unfortunate tendency to burn down overnight, leaving said developers with little option but to build apartme…

Anyone who has ever played Civ knows you need to chop those forests to build wonders.

Funny reference, but does not deserve to be the top reply.

Re: The Amazon forest has an almost 3x year-on-year increase in fires in February

#29

Post by DANmode »

woleium wrote: post #25
rootusrootus wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That seems like such an easy thing to fix, though. The land a listed building is sitting on should be zoned only for the listed building. If it burns down, it gets rebuilt exactly, or donated to the public. Allowing developers to benefit from such "accidents" is the problem.

or the site is cleared and goes into a 50 year ‘public use’ lockup, where the developer owns it still, but it must be used for the public good for 50 years. A park or community garden, for example. Basically just enough to make it unattractive as an option for the contractor

Start doing things like this, you just might shake enough of the BS money out of the real estate markets to return to sanity.

Re: The Amazon forest has an almost 3x year-on-year increase in fires in February

#30

Post by wahnfrieden »

smcl wrote: post #19

Interesting that this kind of problem exists elsewhere. What happens in the UK is a developer buys a "listed" building - meaning it has a special status that means you need to preserve it and cannot knock it and down then, say, build a bunch of flats or offices on the same location. These buildings have a very unfortunate tendency to burn down overnight, leaving said developers with little option but to build apartme…

I’ve seen it happen before my own eyes in Toronto. Very popular developer Brad Lamb burns down historical buildings downtown in broad daylight with sometimes multiple attempts taken days apart. He’s highly successful and faces no repercussions.
Post reply on HN