Title: The year in the environment
Description: salon.com
Description: salon.com
AlGoreFan - December 29, 2007 04:41 AM (GMT)
| QUOTE |
| The year in the environment One step up, one step back was the refrain in news about global warming, automobiles and biodiversity in 2007. By Katharine Mieszkowski Dec. 29, 2007 This year, Al Gore, the Man Who Was Almost President, received a stunning vindication from the Nobel Committee for his Paul Revere campaign about global warming. "The Earth has a fever, and the fever is rising," Gore said in his Nobel lecture in Oslo, Norway, in December as he accepted the Peace Prize, which he shared with the scientists of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. "The experts have told us it is not a passing affliction that will heal by itself. We asked for a second opinion -- and a third -- and a fourth -- and the consistent conclusion, restated with increasing distress, is that something basic is wrong. We are what is wrong, and we must make it right." In 2007, even the United States stopped asking for a second opinion. The Bush administration now agrees that global warming is a threat. But all the plaudits heaped on Gore couldn't move the United States to, in Gore's words, "make it right." The United States remains the only industrialized nation not to endorse the goals of the Kyoto Protocol; Australia, the other big holdout, belatedly ratified the treaty's goals in December. Not coincidentally, Australia has recently been plagued by serious drought. But the United States, where the governor of drought-ridden Georgia held a prayer vigil in November in hopes of inspiring rain, was still not swayed. At the international climate talks in Bali, Indonesia, this December, the Bush administration refused to agree to any mandatory limits on greenhouse gas emissions, giving developing giant China cover to avoid any such restrictions itself. Yet there are tantalizing signs that the American people are not waiting for the Bush administration to leave power to start taking steps to address the "planetary emergency" that Gore warns about. A Senate committee passed the first legislation that would impose mandatory limits on greenhouse gases. Although the bill may not make it to the president's desk, it's a sign that meaningful climate legislation is on the horizon. In the meantime, action is occurring at state and local levels. To date, some 725 U.S. mayors, representing 25 percent of the U.S. population, have signed a pledge to reduce greenhouse gases by 2012. In August, Illinois became the 26th state to require that some of the state's electricity come from renewable sources. And in October, Kansas became the first state to refuse a permit for a new coal-fired power plant because of the threat it would pose to public health and the atmosphere. Frustration abounds in the scientific community. The IPCC's latest dire report, released in November, made bleaker projections than ever, yet climate scientists fear that the world's simply not heeding their alarm. More than 200 scientists were so fed up that in December they signed a petition calling for the world to take drastic action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in half by 2050. In his Nobel lecture in Oslo, Rajendra Pachauri, chairman of the IPCC, warned that unchecked warming could bring massive ice melting in Greenland and disappearing rainfall in many tropical areas. Yet he reminded the world that the worst threats can still be ameliorated: "The implications of these changes, if they were to occur, would be grave and disastrous," he said. "However, it is within the reach of human society to meet these threats." It looks like the United States -- and the world -- will have to wait for the next American president to begin to meet them. PLUG IN, DRIVE ON With the price of oil inching near $100 a barrel, Americans searched for new ways to save gas and the atmosphere. Many drivers kicked the SUV habit and switched to smaller cars. As of September 2007, 16 percent of cars sold this year were diminutive compacts, including the likes of the Honda Fit and the Mini Cooper, up from 13.8 percent in 2002, according to the National Automobile Dealers Association. While hybrids remain a fraction of the overall car market, this year they continued to gain popularity. Automakers reported an 82 percent increase in hybrid sales this year, compared with last. (That's not counting General Motors, which doesn't break out hybrid sales from others.) Toyota, makers of the popular Prius, saw a 109 percent increase in hybrid sales this November, compared with last. Finally, the Bush administration got in on the act, signing a new energy bill that raises the fuel-efficiency standard for car fleets from today's 25 mpg to 35 mpg by 2020. Those who dream of driving without guilt -- or at least with less guilt -- are tricking out their hybrids to go farther with even less gas. This year, the number of so-called "plug-in hybrids" on the road, which get over 100 miles per gallon, quadrupled as corporate fleets and utilities, and even some individuals, experimented with enhancing their hybrids. Plug-ins are hybrid cars that have been converted, at a cost of some $10,000, to plug into a conventional electric socket and gather juice from the grid. "The plug-in car is the only car that gets cleaner as it gets older, because the grid is getting cleaner," says Felix Kramer, founder of CalCars.org, a nonprofit that promotes the vehicles. Advocates believe that Toyota could sell a plug-in version of the Toyota Prius for just $3,000 extra, although the leading hybrid automaker currently has no plans to do so. General Motors plans to release a plug-in hybrid Saturn Vue in 2009 and the plug-in hybrid Chevy Volt in 2010. The race is on to build cars that sip even less fuel. A group of engineering students at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology have launched a competition with hundreds of other engineering students at colleges around the globe, including India and China, to produce the first plug-in electric hybrid that gets 200 miles per gallon within three years. And Silicon Valley upstart Tesla Motors has plans to start selling its fully electric, $95,000 roadster early next year. Actors George Clooney and Matt Damon have each already reserved one. But what of those who foresee no future in driving at any miles per gallon? These are the stalwart bike activists who pedal to work or the store or school, and this August, the Bush administration gave them a swift quick in the spokes. The secretary of transportation declared that bike paths and trails are not legitimate forms of transportation, as she attempted to blame the tragic Minneapolis bridge collapse, which killed 13 people and injured 100 more, on money being diverted from shoring up the nation's bridges to building paths and trails. That's right. According to Mary Peters, bike paths kill. ANIMAL-LESS PLANET This year, the drumbeat of extinction grew louder, as traditional threats like habitat loss and poaching met the newfangled menace of global warming, putting stress on many critters already under pressure. "We previously assumed that if the land is protected, then the plants and animals living there will persist," said Sandy Andelman, an ecologist with Conservation International. "That may be wishful thinking." No nature preserve, however well protected, can reliably shelter its resident plants, insects, birds and primates from the vagaries of changes to the Earth's atmosphere. More than half of the world's protected areas, such as national parks and forest reserves, are likely to be negatively impacted by global warming, even in a best-case scenario, according to a new study from scientists with Conservation International, the University of Maryland and the University of Wisconsin. Already, almost a third of bird species in the U.S. need help to avoid going the way of the dodo, according to a new report from the Audubon Society and the American Bird Conservancy released in November. That followed the news that 16,306 species are now on the brink of extinction around the globe, according to the latest IUCN Red List. And a third of primate species, humans' closest living relatives, are also staring down extinction, with the 25 most endangered species barely able to fill a ballpark. "If you took all of the remaining individuals of those 25 species that are on the list, and you gave each one a seat in a football stadium, you probably couldn't fill the stadium," says Russell Mittermeier, president of Conservation International, who is chairman of the IUCN's Species Survival Commission's Primate Specialist Group. Yet, efforts to curb global warming could save tropical rain forest habitat, home to many of the world's threatened flora and fauna. Forests are like giant carbon sinks, as the leaves of trees and plants suck up carbon dioxide in the atmosphere through photosynthesis, converting it into wood and other biomass. When a forest is cleared or burned for agriculture or ranching, much of that carbon dioxide is released back into the atmosphere. That's why deforestation accounts for some 20 percent of human-induced greenhouse gas emissions. "We'll never solve the climate challenge unless we address the loss of tropical forests, which puts out as much carbon dioxide as all the planes, trains and cars worldwide," said Stephanie Meeks, acting CEO and president of the Nature Conservancy, at a news conference at the Bali climate talks. The Nature Conservancy is helping the World Bank create incentives to preserve rain forests. An effort called Cool Earth, which has won the support of former British prime minister Tony Blair, among others, is also raising money to preserve forests in the name of climate protection. At the Bali conference, saving rain forests in developing countries became a priority for the next international climate treaty. It's a good start to 2008. |
York_ Unfewst - December 29, 2007 06:35 PM (GMT)
I'm glad rainforests are finlly being remembered! I have been trying to remind people of their importance for years. They were the "trendy cause" a few years back and then were essentially forgotten in the publics eye. I have been tyring to get people to take any kind of action to bring that issue back in to the spotlight. No issue is even close to being as critical. I'm sorry to say, but in comparison, polar bears are meaningless. The Amazon r is the last remaing large rainforest area left. People seem to not understand the actual value of this forest in regard to its elemental contribution.Consider these facts:If deforestation continues at current rates, scientists estimate nearly 80 to 90 percent of tropical rainforest ecosystems will be destroyed by the year 2020. This destruction is the main force driving a species extinction rate unmatched in 65 million years.Once a vast sea of tropical forest, the Amazon rainforest today is scarred by roads, farms, ranches, and dams. Brazil is gifted with a full third of the world's remaining rainforests; unfortunately, it is also one of the world's great rainforest destroyers, burning or felling more than 2.7 million acres each year. More than 20 percent of rainforest in the Amazon has been razed and is gone forever. This ocean of green, nearly as large as Australia, is the last great rainforest in the known universe and it is being decimated like the others before it. Why? Like other rainforests already lost forever, the land is being cleared for logging timber, large-scale cattle ranching, mining operations, government road building and hydroelectric schemes, military operations, and the subsistence agriculture of peasants and landless settlers. Sadder still, in many places the rainforests are burnt simply to provide charcoal to power industrial plants in the area.
A single pond in Brazil can sustain a greater variety of fish than is found in all of Europe's rivers.
A 25-acre plot of rainforest in Borneo may contain more than 700 species of trees - a number equal to the total tree diversity of North America.
A single rainforest reserve in Peru is home to more species of birds than are found in the entire United States.
One single tree in Peru was found to harbor forty-three different species of ants - a total that approximates the entire number of ant species in the British Isles.
The number of species of fish in the Amazon exceeds the number found in the entire Atlantic Ocean. It produces 20% of earths oxygen. It holds 1/4 of the freshwater.Experts estimate that we are losing 137 plant, animal and insect species every single day due to rainforest deforestation. That equates to 50,000 species a year.In 1950, about 15 percent of the Earth's land surface was covered by rainforest. Today, more than half has already gone up in smoke. In fewer than fifty years, more than half of the world's tropical rainforests have fallen victim to fire and the chain saw, and the rate of destruction is still accelerating. Unbelievably, more than 200,000 acres of rainforest are burned every day. That is more than 150 acres lost every minute of every day, and 78 million acres lost every year!1.5 acres PER SECOND! More than 40 percent of the Amazon rainforest is already gone, and much more is severely threatened as the destruction continues. It is estimated that the Amazon alone is vanishing at a rate of 20,000 square miles a year. If nothing is done to curb this trend, the entire Amazon will be gone within 30 years.(sea levels will not have risen one half inch in that time, yet that is what is being worried about...) As the rainforest species disappear, so do many possible cures for life-threatening diseases. Currently, 121 prescription drugs sold worldwide come from plant-derived sources. While 25% of Western pharmaceuticals are derived from rainforest ingredients, less that 1% of these tropical trees and plants have been tested by scientists.The U.S. National Cancer Institute has identified 3000 plants that are active against cancer cells. 70% of these plants are found in the rainforest. Twenty-five percent of the active ingredients in today's cancer-fighting drugs come from organisms found only in the rainforest.More than half of the world's estimated 10 million species of plants, animals and insects live in the tropical rainforests. One-fifth of the world's fresh water is in the Amazon Basin.
One hectare (2.47 acres) may contain over 750 types of trees and 1500 species of higher plants.
But who is really to blame? Consider what we industrialized Americans have done to our own homeland. We converted 90 percent of North America's virgin forests into firewood, shingles, furniture, railroad ties, and paper. Other industrialized countries have done no better. Malaysia, Indonesia, Brazil, and other tropical countries with rainforests are often branded as "environmental villains" of the world, mainly because of their reported levels of destruction of their rainforests. But despite the levels of deforestation, up to 60 percent of their territory is still covered by natural tropical forests. In fact, today, much of the pressures on their remaining rainforests comes from servicing the needs and markets for wood products in industrialized countries that have already depleted their own natural resources. Industrial countries would not be buying rainforest hardwoods and timber had we not cut down our own trees long ago, nor would poachers in the Amazon jungle be slaughtering jaguar, ocelot, caiman, and otter if we did not provide lucrative markets for their skins in Berlin, Paris, and Tokyo.
Logging concessions in the Amazon are sold for as little as $2 per acre, with logging companies felling timber worth thousands of dollars per acre. Governments are selling their natural resources, hawking for pennies resources that soon will be worth billions of dollars. Some of these government concessions and land deals made with industrialists make the sale of Manhattan for $24 worth of trinkets look shrewd. In 1986 a huge industrial timber corporation bought thousands of acres in the Borneo rainforest by giving 2,000 Malaysian dollars to twelve longhouses of local tribes. This sum amounted to the price of two bottles of beer for each member of the community. Since then, this company and others have managed to extract and destroy about a third of the Borneo rainforest - about 6.9 million acres - and the local tribes have been evicted from the area or forced to work for the logging companies at slave wages.
Fuel Wood and the Paper Industry
In addition to being logged for exportation, rainforest wood stays in developing countries for fuel wood and charcoal. One single steel plant in Brazil making steel for Japanese cars needs millions of tons of wood each year to produce charcoal that can be used in the manufacture of steel. Then, there is the paper industry.
One pulpwood project in the Brazilian Amazon consists of a Japanese power plant and pulp mill. To set up this single plant operation, 5,600 square miles of Amazon rainforest were burned to the ground and replanted with pulpwood trees. This single manufacturing plant consumes 2,000 tons of surrounding rainforest wood every day to produce 55 megawatts of electricity to run the plant. The plant, which has been in operation since 1978, produces more than 750 tons of pulp for paper every 24 hours, worth approximately $500,000, and has built 2,800 miles of roads through the Amazon rainforest to be used by its 700 vehicles.Not to mention the huge quantities of CO2 emitted from these low tech plants. In addition to this pulp mill, the world's biggest pulp mill is the Aracruz mill in Brazil. Its two units produce 1 million tons of pulp a year, harvesting the rainforest to keep the plant in business and displacing thousands of indigenous tribes. Where does all this pulp go? Aracruz's biggest customers are the United States, Belgium, Great Britain, and Japan. More and more rainforest is destroyed to meet the demands of the developed world's paper industry, which requires a staggering 200 million tons of wood each year simply to make paper. If the present rate continues, it is estimated that the paper industry alone will consume 4 billion tons of wood annually by the year 2020.
Once an area of rainforest has been logged, even if it is given the rare chance to regrow, it can never become what it once was. The intricate ecosystem nature devised is lost forever. Only 1 to 2 percent of light at the top of a rainforest canopy manages to reach the forest floor below. Most times when timber is harvested, trees and other plants that have evolved over centuries to grow in the dark, humid environment below the canopy simply cannot live out in the open, and as a result, the plants and animals (that depend on the plants) of the original forest become extinct Even if only sections of land throughout an area are destroyed, these remnants change drastically. Birds and other animals cannot cross from one remnant of land to another in the canopy, so plants are not pollinated, seeds are not dispersed by the animals, and the plants around the edges are not surrounded by the high jungle humidity they need to grow properly. As a result, the remnants slowly become degraded and die. Rains come and wash away the thin topsoil that was previously protected by the canopy, and this barren, infertile land is vulnerable to erosion. As the demand in the Western world for cheap meat increases, more and more rainforests are destroyed to provide grazing land for animals. In Brazil alone, there are an estimated 220 million head of cattle, 20 million goats, 60 million pigs, and 700 million chickens. Most of Central and Latin America's tropical and temperate rainforests have been lost to cattle operations to meet the world demand, and still the cattle operations continue to move southward into the heart of the South American rainforests. To graze one steer in Amazonia takes two full acres. Most of the ranchers in the Amazon operate at a loss, yielding only paper profits purely as tax shelters. Ranchers' fortunes are made only when ranching is supported by government giveaways. A banker or rich landowner in Brazil can slash and burn a huge tract of land in the Amazon rainforest, seed it with grass for cattle, and realize millions of dollars worth of government-subsidized loans, tax credits, and write-offs in return for developing the land. These government development schemes rarely make a profit, as they are actually selling cheap beef to industrialized nations. One single cattle operation in Brazil that was co-owned by British Barclays Bank and one of Brazil's wealthiest families was responsible for the destruction of almost 500,000 acres of virgin rainforest. The cattle operation never made a profit, but government write-offs sheltered huge logging profits earned off of logging other land in the Brazilian rainforest owned by the same investors. These generous tax and credit incentives have created more than 29 million acres of large cattle ranches in the Brazilian Amazon, even though the typical ranch could cover less than half its costs without these subsidies. Even these grazing lands don't last forever. Soon the lack of nutrients in the soil and overgrazing degrade them, and they are abandoned for newly cleared land. In Brazil alone, more than 63,000 square miles of land has reportedly been abandoned in this way.
Directly and indirectly, the leading threats to rainforest ecosystems are governments and their unbridled, unplanned, and uncoordinated development of natural resources. The 2000-2001 World Resources Report put out by the United Nations reported that governments worldwide spend $700 billion dollars a year supporting and subsidizing environmentally unsound practices in the use of water, agriculture, energy, and transportation.
There is a clear need for industrial countries to sincerely and effectively assist the tropics in a quest for sustainable forest management and development if the remaining rainforests are to be saved. The governments of these developing countries need help in learning how to manage and protect their natural resources for long-term profits, while still managing to service their debts, and they must be given the incentives and tools to do so. Programs to redefine the timber concessions so concessionaires have greater incentives to guard the long-term health of the forest and programs to revive and expand community-based forestry schemes, which ensure more rational use of forests and a better life for the people who live near them, must be developed.
First-World capital must seek out opportunities to partner with organizations that have the technical expertise to guide these programs of sustainable economic development. In addition, programs teaching techniques for sustainable harvesting practices and identifying profitable, yet sustainable, forest products can enable developing countries to improve the standard of living for their people, service national debt, and contribute meaningfully to land use planning and conservation of natural resources.
I won't post more- you can find it online.Just know this. If the US and EU dedicated themselves to assisting the S. American countries involved by setting up sustainable harvest and maintenance practices, sustainable and productive agriculture (used for FOOD NOT ETHANOL!) and removed the markets for exotic products like woods, etc., the cutting would halt in 5 years. Or do nothing and it will be gone before your grandkids are driving.I have not even mentioned the catastrophic effects predicted from a new desertified continent...(erosion, heat absorption,co2 production....) If you are not actively writing letters, making calls to your reps and "green" orgs , cutting back on paper use enormously , acctively supporting alternative industries like hemp and bamboo and making sure you know and boycott all unsustainable imports from that area and you have the gaul to say you care about global warming, then you a sad excuse for an advocate. GET ON IT!
A single pond in Brazil can sustain a greater variety of fish than is found in all of Europe's rivers.
A 25-acre plot of rainforest in Borneo may contain more than 700 species of trees - a number equal to the total tree diversity of North America.
A single rainforest reserve in Peru is home to more species of birds than are found in the entire United States.
One single tree in Peru was found to harbor forty-three different species of ants - a total that approximates the entire number of ant species in the British Isles.
The number of species of fish in the Amazon exceeds the number found in the entire Atlantic Ocean. It produces 20% of earths oxygen. It holds 1/4 of the freshwater.Experts estimate that we are losing 137 plant, animal and insect species every single day due to rainforest deforestation. That equates to 50,000 species a year.In 1950, about 15 percent of the Earth's land surface was covered by rainforest. Today, more than half has already gone up in smoke. In fewer than fifty years, more than half of the world's tropical rainforests have fallen victim to fire and the chain saw, and the rate of destruction is still accelerating. Unbelievably, more than 200,000 acres of rainforest are burned every day. That is more than 150 acres lost every minute of every day, and 78 million acres lost every year!1.5 acres PER SECOND! More than 40 percent of the Amazon rainforest is already gone, and much more is severely threatened as the destruction continues. It is estimated that the Amazon alone is vanishing at a rate of 20,000 square miles a year. If nothing is done to curb this trend, the entire Amazon will be gone within 30 years.(sea levels will not have risen one half inch in that time, yet that is what is being worried about...) As the rainforest species disappear, so do many possible cures for life-threatening diseases. Currently, 121 prescription drugs sold worldwide come from plant-derived sources. While 25% of Western pharmaceuticals are derived from rainforest ingredients, less that 1% of these tropical trees and plants have been tested by scientists.The U.S. National Cancer Institute has identified 3000 plants that are active against cancer cells. 70% of these plants are found in the rainforest. Twenty-five percent of the active ingredients in today's cancer-fighting drugs come from organisms found only in the rainforest.More than half of the world's estimated 10 million species of plants, animals and insects live in the tropical rainforests. One-fifth of the world's fresh water is in the Amazon Basin.
One hectare (2.47 acres) may contain over 750 types of trees and 1500 species of higher plants.
But who is really to blame? Consider what we industrialized Americans have done to our own homeland. We converted 90 percent of North America's virgin forests into firewood, shingles, furniture, railroad ties, and paper. Other industrialized countries have done no better. Malaysia, Indonesia, Brazil, and other tropical countries with rainforests are often branded as "environmental villains" of the world, mainly because of their reported levels of destruction of their rainforests. But despite the levels of deforestation, up to 60 percent of their territory is still covered by natural tropical forests. In fact, today, much of the pressures on their remaining rainforests comes from servicing the needs and markets for wood products in industrialized countries that have already depleted their own natural resources. Industrial countries would not be buying rainforest hardwoods and timber had we not cut down our own trees long ago, nor would poachers in the Amazon jungle be slaughtering jaguar, ocelot, caiman, and otter if we did not provide lucrative markets for their skins in Berlin, Paris, and Tokyo.
Logging concessions in the Amazon are sold for as little as $2 per acre, with logging companies felling timber worth thousands of dollars per acre. Governments are selling their natural resources, hawking for pennies resources that soon will be worth billions of dollars. Some of these government concessions and land deals made with industrialists make the sale of Manhattan for $24 worth of trinkets look shrewd. In 1986 a huge industrial timber corporation bought thousands of acres in the Borneo rainforest by giving 2,000 Malaysian dollars to twelve longhouses of local tribes. This sum amounted to the price of two bottles of beer for each member of the community. Since then, this company and others have managed to extract and destroy about a third of the Borneo rainforest - about 6.9 million acres - and the local tribes have been evicted from the area or forced to work for the logging companies at slave wages.
Fuel Wood and the Paper Industry
In addition to being logged for exportation, rainforest wood stays in developing countries for fuel wood and charcoal. One single steel plant in Brazil making steel for Japanese cars needs millions of tons of wood each year to produce charcoal that can be used in the manufacture of steel. Then, there is the paper industry.
One pulpwood project in the Brazilian Amazon consists of a Japanese power plant and pulp mill. To set up this single plant operation, 5,600 square miles of Amazon rainforest were burned to the ground and replanted with pulpwood trees. This single manufacturing plant consumes 2,000 tons of surrounding rainforest wood every day to produce 55 megawatts of electricity to run the plant. The plant, which has been in operation since 1978, produces more than 750 tons of pulp for paper every 24 hours, worth approximately $500,000, and has built 2,800 miles of roads through the Amazon rainforest to be used by its 700 vehicles.Not to mention the huge quantities of CO2 emitted from these low tech plants. In addition to this pulp mill, the world's biggest pulp mill is the Aracruz mill in Brazil. Its two units produce 1 million tons of pulp a year, harvesting the rainforest to keep the plant in business and displacing thousands of indigenous tribes. Where does all this pulp go? Aracruz's biggest customers are the United States, Belgium, Great Britain, and Japan. More and more rainforest is destroyed to meet the demands of the developed world's paper industry, which requires a staggering 200 million tons of wood each year simply to make paper. If the present rate continues, it is estimated that the paper industry alone will consume 4 billion tons of wood annually by the year 2020.
Once an area of rainforest has been logged, even if it is given the rare chance to regrow, it can never become what it once was. The intricate ecosystem nature devised is lost forever. Only 1 to 2 percent of light at the top of a rainforest canopy manages to reach the forest floor below. Most times when timber is harvested, trees and other plants that have evolved over centuries to grow in the dark, humid environment below the canopy simply cannot live out in the open, and as a result, the plants and animals (that depend on the plants) of the original forest become extinct Even if only sections of land throughout an area are destroyed, these remnants change drastically. Birds and other animals cannot cross from one remnant of land to another in the canopy, so plants are not pollinated, seeds are not dispersed by the animals, and the plants around the edges are not surrounded by the high jungle humidity they need to grow properly. As a result, the remnants slowly become degraded and die. Rains come and wash away the thin topsoil that was previously protected by the canopy, and this barren, infertile land is vulnerable to erosion. As the demand in the Western world for cheap meat increases, more and more rainforests are destroyed to provide grazing land for animals. In Brazil alone, there are an estimated 220 million head of cattle, 20 million goats, 60 million pigs, and 700 million chickens. Most of Central and Latin America's tropical and temperate rainforests have been lost to cattle operations to meet the world demand, and still the cattle operations continue to move southward into the heart of the South American rainforests. To graze one steer in Amazonia takes two full acres. Most of the ranchers in the Amazon operate at a loss, yielding only paper profits purely as tax shelters. Ranchers' fortunes are made only when ranching is supported by government giveaways. A banker or rich landowner in Brazil can slash and burn a huge tract of land in the Amazon rainforest, seed it with grass for cattle, and realize millions of dollars worth of government-subsidized loans, tax credits, and write-offs in return for developing the land. These government development schemes rarely make a profit, as they are actually selling cheap beef to industrialized nations. One single cattle operation in Brazil that was co-owned by British Barclays Bank and one of Brazil's wealthiest families was responsible for the destruction of almost 500,000 acres of virgin rainforest. The cattle operation never made a profit, but government write-offs sheltered huge logging profits earned off of logging other land in the Brazilian rainforest owned by the same investors. These generous tax and credit incentives have created more than 29 million acres of large cattle ranches in the Brazilian Amazon, even though the typical ranch could cover less than half its costs without these subsidies. Even these grazing lands don't last forever. Soon the lack of nutrients in the soil and overgrazing degrade them, and they are abandoned for newly cleared land. In Brazil alone, more than 63,000 square miles of land has reportedly been abandoned in this way.
Directly and indirectly, the leading threats to rainforest ecosystems are governments and their unbridled, unplanned, and uncoordinated development of natural resources. The 2000-2001 World Resources Report put out by the United Nations reported that governments worldwide spend $700 billion dollars a year supporting and subsidizing environmentally unsound practices in the use of water, agriculture, energy, and transportation.
There is a clear need for industrial countries to sincerely and effectively assist the tropics in a quest for sustainable forest management and development if the remaining rainforests are to be saved. The governments of these developing countries need help in learning how to manage and protect their natural resources for long-term profits, while still managing to service their debts, and they must be given the incentives and tools to do so. Programs to redefine the timber concessions so concessionaires have greater incentives to guard the long-term health of the forest and programs to revive and expand community-based forestry schemes, which ensure more rational use of forests and a better life for the people who live near them, must be developed.
First-World capital must seek out opportunities to partner with organizations that have the technical expertise to guide these programs of sustainable economic development. In addition, programs teaching techniques for sustainable harvesting practices and identifying profitable, yet sustainable, forest products can enable developing countries to improve the standard of living for their people, service national debt, and contribute meaningfully to land use planning and conservation of natural resources.
I won't post more- you can find it online.Just know this. If the US and EU dedicated themselves to assisting the S. American countries involved by setting up sustainable harvest and maintenance practices, sustainable and productive agriculture (used for FOOD NOT ETHANOL!) and removed the markets for exotic products like woods, etc., the cutting would halt in 5 years. Or do nothing and it will be gone before your grandkids are driving.I have not even mentioned the catastrophic effects predicted from a new desertified continent...(erosion, heat absorption,co2 production....) If you are not actively writing letters, making calls to your reps and "green" orgs , cutting back on paper use enormously , acctively supporting alternative industries like hemp and bamboo and making sure you know and boycott all unsustainable imports from that area and you have the gaul to say you care about global warming, then you a sad excuse for an advocate. GET ON IT!
JamesAquila - December 29, 2007 06:47 PM (GMT)
| QUOTE (York_ Unfewst @ Dec 29 2007, 01:35 PM) |
| you a sad excuse for an advocate. |
You're a sad excuse for a human being! :tongue:
scalbers - December 29, 2007 06:50 PM (GMT)
Hi - yes it's a good point that if one considers biodiversity as the main issue, then rain forest protection in the short term (along with illegal wildlife trade and such) are the biggest problem. I see little competition (save for those palm oil plantations) between rain forests and global warming as both are important. Global warming is also worth starting to address in the short term as it takes a long time to respond. Furthermore, climate change by mid-century may itself threaten the health of the Amazon rain forest (and already is in the Montevideo cloud forest).
I would again mention learning about "biochar" or Amazonian Dark Earths. I find it fascinating that learning from ancient Amazonians can help make land more fertile (saving cutting down trees), and sequester carbon in the soil to reverse global warming.
We are fortunate that in Bali, there was some agreement to save rain forests as that simultaneously helps on the biodiversity and CO2 emission fronts (see link below). We should get the US to join in the World Bank fund on forests. Hopefully we can all work together on these solutions, right?
http://news.mongabay.com/2007/1215-redd.html
P.S. In addition to a carbon tax, we could have a tax on paper derived from unsustainable forests?
I would again mention learning about "biochar" or Amazonian Dark Earths. I find it fascinating that learning from ancient Amazonians can help make land more fertile (saving cutting down trees), and sequester carbon in the soil to reverse global warming.
We are fortunate that in Bali, there was some agreement to save rain forests as that simultaneously helps on the biodiversity and CO2 emission fronts (see link below). We should get the US to join in the World Bank fund on forests. Hopefully we can all work together on these solutions, right?
http://news.mongabay.com/2007/1215-redd.html
P.S. In addition to a carbon tax, we could have a tax on paper derived from unsustainable forests?
York_ Unfewst - December 30, 2007 08:32 AM (GMT)
Scalbers- thank you! How completely fascinating. It seems logical to amend with charcoal as we already know it is a "sponge" for elemetal gasses (thus the "activared charcoal filter"). I was not aware of the huge difference though between burning and charing. Again, in retrospect, it is logical. In the simplist of observations, we see ash as grey/white and charcoal as black.When I was a kid, we were told not to eat blacked steak or hamburgers because the carbon caused cancer.The Carbon. I am quite involved with horticulture because of the nature of my business and am an avid gardener and hobby botanist. At my last home, my neighbor was a caterer who had nearly daily deliveries of Omaha Steaks, which came packed in dry ice. I of course knew from elementary school that plants use CO2 in photosynthesis, and so tried growning some vegetables in a box into which I put dry ice. The results were amazing. They grew much bigger than the ones in ambient air. So I knew the value of CO2 in the air, but never considered it as a soil based amendment. I learn something every day!
Incidentally, after reading your link I read a related article on a horticulture site which I found very interesting. Here are a few blurbs:
Incidentally, after reading your link I read a related article on a horticulture site which I found very interesting. Here are a few blurbs:
| QUOTE |
| ...plants require carbon dioxide to conduct photosynthesis. Greenhouses enrich their atmospheres with additional CO2 to boost plant growth, since its very low present-day atmospheric concentration is just above "suffocation" level for green plants. A photosynthesis-related drop in carbon dioxide concentration in a growing compartment will kill green plants....Five hundred million years ago [i]carbon dioxide was 20 times more prevalent than today, decreasing 4-5 times during the Jurassic period and then maintaining a slow decline until the industrial revolution....This decline mirrors the atmospheric change from a temperate/ semi-tropical climate (which suported the cold blooded dinosaurs), to todays "ice box" climate (more suitable to warm blooded mammals)...Even when vented, carbon dioxide must be introduced into greenhouses to maintain growth, as the concentration of carbon dioxide can fall during daylight hours to as low as 200 ppm (a limit of C3 carbon fixation photosynthesis). A similar event on a global scale occurred after the Permian period, when all life on Earth almost became extinct. A repeat of such conditions (a decrease of carbon dioxide concentration to 65-75% of its current level) would kill all existing green plants and undoubtedly eliminate human existence (carbon dioxide deficits stemming from glacial periods were the most likely cause of Earths several mass extinction events.)... "Modern" plant species likely attained their ideal growth habits while evolving in an atmospheric concentration of 500-800ppm CO2. Plants grow up to 70 percent faster in concentrations of 1,000+ ppm CO2 when compared with modern ambient conditions. Present day CO2 levels are quite deficient, being only slightly above the minimum concentration required by plants for photosynthesis...It is amazing to consider that fast growing 'invasives' like Kudzu and Bamboo are, in reality, merely surviving! |
Yikes! Kudzu grows a foot a day ! Any faster and it would be reminiscent of The Rocky Horror Picture show! But, I digress.
Everything sounds positive regarding bio-char. The only concern I had was that it sounded as if they were suggesting that that would be the acceptable solution to rainforest clearing. Certainly it should be required of all biomass producing industries, and could be used to make South American farming sustainable. Again...I was astounded by another Mongobay article though which suggested the Amazon rainforest was sustainably managed and harvested on a large scale for thousands of years at least. Equally amazing (but tragic) is the evidence suggesting that that region was home to huge , civilized populations in the distant past.
| QUOTE |
| Prior to European contact, the Western Hemisphere supported between 90 and 112 million people. To put this already large figure into clearer perspective, Dobyns’ estimate for the Americas’ population in the late 1400s surpassed that of Europe‘s for the same period...Near the Brazilian border of north-central Bolivia, there are some 30,000 square miles of raised forested islands in a grassy floodplain. Scientists speculate that the area may have been an extensive human-constructed landscape optimized for managing local fisheries and the distribution of vegetation. Building raised fields for agriculture and using fire to clear large areas of brush, native dwellers of the Beni region strongly influence if not controlled the distribution of plant species. Trees and crops that would otherwise drown in the waterlogged floodplain flourished in the raised gardens...In an environment like the Amazon, without the benefits of iron tools or domesticated animals, clearing and sowing agricultural fields was a difficult and time-consuming process. Instead, Indians planted trees, yielding twenty years of productivity from their labor, as opposed to two or three years with a standard low-growing crop... The best explanation for this kind of botanical record is the past creation and use of terra preta do indio, meaning "Indian black earth" in Portuguese. This unique, mineral-rich soil was purposely created by pre-Columbian people through a process of adding charcoal and animal bones to regular soil to create a highly fertile hybrid, ideal for agriculture. Beyond the Amazon’s notorious reputation for thin and poor-quality soil, terra preta provided unprecedented life and bounty for its inhabitants. ..Within the first one hundred years of European contact, the Amerindian population was reduced by at least 90 percent. The surviving peoples moved to the remote interiors of the Amazonian region, forced there by the encroaching Europeans. In addition to the loss of population, the remaining natives lost hundreds of years of knowlege, land and careful work.The only traces left behind of these settlements, usually a series of raised lumps of earth, still contain the most lush and diverse growth in the region...Because the Amazon's most skilled agriculturalists were killed off by European diseases, much of what was known about cultivating the rainforest ecosystem has been lost. Undoubtedly, these forest farmers relied on a far different agricultural philosophy than that used today -- one, says Clark Erickson from the University of Pennsylvania, that sustained significant populations without destroying biodiversity. |
http://news.mongabay.com/2006/0514-amazon.html
The White man strikes again. That's 2 virgin continents and their inhabitants destroyed by our European ancestors.We deserve global warming's ill effects and then some!
Anyway- thanks alot! I really appreciate anything that teaches me something new.
Oh- heres a hilarious encore-speaking of Europeans. This is the kind of thing that makes me so cynical of the "New green movement". Or should I say, Green-back...
[i]METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR REDUCING GREENHOUSE GASES
Document Type and Number:
European Patent EP1228164
Pending
Abstract not available for EP1228164
Abstract of corresponding document: WO0104235
A method and an apparatus for reducing discharges of greenhouse gases, particularly carbon dioxide. Carbonaceous materials, wood, pieces of vegetation, products made therefrom, and especially vegetative and municipal wastes poorly suitable for energy production, are treated in such a way that the release of carbon dioxide back to the atmosphere is reduced and restrained substantially. This is accomplished such that an organic mass is carbonized by heating in a charring reactor (2) in an oxygen-free or limited-oxygen volume to charcoal (20)The released heat is exploited on a counterflow principle in a countercurrent heater (1) in the heating and drying of materials to be fed into the process. The resulting charcoal (20) will be exploited in the purification of water and as soil conditioner.
Somebody's gonna get rich...
Oh. I agree completely on a paper tax and have personally always wondered why e-books didn't take over.I have one and my only gripe is that due to lack of sales, not all books are available at all. That is one thing I think every responsible person should buy. The manufacturers should provide them at cost in return for appropriate carbon credits for the paper they save. I buy 100% reycled paper products and hemp paper for writing and designing, so I won't pay much I hope! But hey- what do I know.I'm just a land use designer who promotes xerigation and use of native, sustainable, low maintenance planting. I'm not a politician (speaking of sad excuses for people... James. I rode my bike 14 miles to get to where I was helping with a stream clean up (and that water was cold!!!!) On the way home, I dropped of the plan for the fence I am building (pro bono) at the womens DV shelter, and then went to our local organic produce center to buy dinner. I didn't even have to start my car today! (and I live in the country) So, what did you do today James? I just figured since you are so condign in providing your animadversion on me, you must really be quite an upstanding guy...so what was it you did today?..:blink: :unsure:
stickers/ t-shirts available
The Paraclete - December 30, 2007 08:39 AM (GMT)
We're following yoooooooooou! :coolwink:
Didn't I just see the same rainforest post in another thread? :?:
Let's be original now! If you like to cut & paste then the Free Republic is lookin fer yoooooou! :rolleyes:
I DO like your unbearable image! :laugh:
Didn't I just see the same rainforest post in another thread? :?:
Let's be original now! If you like to cut & paste then the Free Republic is lookin fer yoooooou! :rolleyes:
I DO like your unbearable image! :laugh:
York_ Unfewst - December 31, 2007 10:13 PM (GMT)
Yes Paraclete, I do like to cut and paste so that the majority of people who refuse to ever research anything and feel that the 6 oclock news is enough information can actually maybe learn something new! I have always felt it is important to verify any "facts " I am presented with as the source sometimes will contaminate the data.Case in point: I once was told the moon was made of green cheese! It's not , you know. And the world? It's round.
Since I am not a scientist but rather just a normal taxpaying citizen, the most I can offer is to bundle up the things I learn into "sound-bite" sized packages for those suffering from short attention spans and lack of curiousity.As well, I read for several hours a day (I freed myself from TV 15 years ago) and so figure some people who don't might be interested in what I dig up. I do not ever claim that the information I post is mine. Plagarists go to hell you know....Finally, I don't know why "cut and paste" has some negative connotation to it. It's a pity humans aren't able to recount information so accurately when the speak to each other. (but then whisper down the lane wouldn't be any fun....) Please see my new post. I wrote it myself! :Y:
Since I am not a scientist but rather just a normal taxpaying citizen, the most I can offer is to bundle up the things I learn into "sound-bite" sized packages for those suffering from short attention spans and lack of curiousity.As well, I read for several hours a day (I freed myself from TV 15 years ago) and so figure some people who don't might be interested in what I dig up. I do not ever claim that the information I post is mine. Plagarists go to hell you know....Finally, I don't know why "cut and paste" has some negative connotation to it. It's a pity humans aren't able to recount information so accurately when the speak to each other. (but then whisper down the lane wouldn't be any fun....) Please see my new post. I wrote it myself! :Y:
York_ Unfewst - December 31, 2007 10:15 PM (GMT)
Oh, please feell free to follow me! You might just learn something!!!! :tongue:
JamesAquila - January 1, 2008 12:09 AM (GMT)
| QUOTE (York_ Unfewst @ Dec 31 2007, 05:15 PM) |
| Oh, please feell free to follow me! You might just learn something!!!! :tongue: |
Who is the bigger fool, the fool or those who follow him? :laugh:
The Paraclete - January 1, 2008 04:07 AM (GMT)
H3ll! I've been called a lot worse than a 'fool' over the years! LOL! I'm NOT against cutting and pasting or dropping links for reading pleasure...all I AM saying is paste something NEW please! I already read that last one! :laugh:
IN ANOTHER THREAD HERE!
It's the same as listening to an old LP record skip over & over & over...
:tongue:
IN ANOTHER THREAD HERE!
It's the same as listening to an old LP record skip over & over & over...
:tongue:
JamesAquila - January 1, 2008 04:44 PM (GMT)
| QUOTE (The Paraclete @ Dec 31 2007, 11:07 PM) |
| I've been called a lot worse than a 'fool' over the years! |
You're not the one I was calling a fool.
JamesAquila - January 2, 2008 01:26 AM (GMT)
From this week's 60 Minutes -
| QUOTE |
| SCOTT PELLEY: Swetnam says that this is what we have to look forward to. He estimates, in the south-west alone, nearly two million acres of forests are gone and won't come back for centuries. The Hotshots are already planning for the next fire season. In 2006, the feds spent $2 billion on fire fighting — seven times more than just 10 years ago. You know, there are a lot of people who don't believe in climate change. TOM BOATNER: You won't find them on the fire line in the American West any more, 'cause we've had climate change beat into us over the last 10 or 15 years, we know what we're seeing, and we're dealing with a period of climate, in terms of temperature and humidity and drought, that's different than anything people have seen in our lifetimes. |
The scientists are virtually screaming from the rooftops now. The debate is over! There's no longer any debate in the scientific community about this. But the political systems around the world have held this at arm's length because it's an inconvenient truth, because they don't want to accept that it's a moral imperative.
- Al Gore
"Those who deny an undeniable truth are living in a fool's paradise"
The Paraclete - January 2, 2008 01:31 AM (GMT)
James, I KNOW it wasn't for me...I just like playing with the 'troll'...it's kind of like the cat playing with a mouse before he bites its head off... :laugh:
You see, I just wanted York here to show 'true colors' and that HAS happened...if you can't dazzle 'em with brilliance then just baffle them with BS...Right, troll? ;)
You see, I just wanted York here to show 'true colors' and that HAS happened...if you can't dazzle 'em with brilliance then just baffle them with BS...Right, troll? ;)
JamesAquila - January 2, 2008 03:01 AM (GMT)
| QUOTE (The Paraclete @ Jan 1 2008, 08:31 PM) |
| James, I KNOW it wasn't for me...I just like playing with the 'troll'... :laugh: |
Well it is a shame that the moderators here are allowing this troll free reign to spread his lies and denigrate Al Gore and his supporters.
The Paraclete - January 2, 2008 03:05 AM (GMT)
Now James, don't be harsh with EM, Wayne, and AGMIL...They can't just boot it off...but that last picture here is denegrating enough to ask for a banning! :banned:
The last picture that York put on here is denegrating to just about everybody here including the 'poor' soul whose image was used to make it. I am kindly asking for it to be removed and for this member to be banned for compromising community standards... :rolleyes:
Yes, I know the Hannitized Freeper will be back again...and if it compromises community standards then I will ask nicely that it be banned again & again & again & again... ;)
The last picture that York put on here is denegrating to just about everybody here including the 'poor' soul whose image was used to make it. I am kindly asking for it to be removed and for this member to be banned for compromising community standards... :rolleyes:
Yes, I know the Hannitized Freeper will be back again...and if it compromises community standards then I will ask nicely that it be banned again & again & again & again... ;)
JamesAquila - January 2, 2008 03:07 AM (GMT)
| QUOTE (The Paraclete @ Jan 1 2008, 10:05 PM) |
| Now James, don't be harsh with EM, Wayne, and AGMIL...They can't just boot it off...but that last picture here is denegrating enough to ask for a banning! :banned: |
As moderators they have the power to act but they won't.
The Paraclete - January 2, 2008 03:14 AM (GMT)
James, we have to keep asking in a nice way...and not take it out on administrators and moderators...if enough requests are received then action will be taken...you aren't the only one ticked off about it you know...but we have to take the 'high' road on this! Also ANYONE else who feels offended by York's posts...please let administrators and moderators KNOW about it 'in a rational calm way'...NOT like me OK? :?:
This is Democracy In Action...taking a VOTE! Anyone who is offended by this 'troll'...please let your concerns be noted! ;)
In my opinion York is denegrating members here graphically and is going against community standards by starting a written slugfest. Please do something about it! :rules:
This is Democracy In Action...taking a VOTE! Anyone who is offended by this 'troll'...please let your concerns be noted! ;)
In my opinion York is denegrating members here graphically and is going against community standards by starting a written slugfest. Please do something about it! :rules:
JamesAquila - January 2, 2008 05:25 AM (GMT)
| QUOTE (The Paraclete @ Jan 1 2008, 10:14 PM) |
| James, we have to keep asking in a nice way...and not take it out on administrators and moderators...if enough requests are received then action will be taken...you aren't the only one ticked off about it you know...but we have to take the 'high' road on this! Also ANYONE else who feels offended by York's posts...please let administrators and moderators KNOW about it 'in a rational calm way'...NOT like me OK? :?: This is Democracy In Action...taking a VOTE! Anyone who is offended by this 'troll'...please let your concerns be noted! ;) In my opinion York is denegrating members here graphically and is going against community standards by starting a written slugfest. Please do something about it! :rules: |
Well what's the point of having moderators if they don't moderate?
It shouldn't be up to members to goad them into doing their job. They should have some respect for the truth first and foremost. And when a troll shows up posting cut & pasted BS, they should act. That's the responsibility they accepted and they should live up to it.