Deforestation: Problems

[Banjo]

Did you see the segment on the 13 crystal skulls and the Mayan gateway ceremonies?

Hmm, just like that movie... Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull.

 

[jillio]

Hmm, just like that movie... Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull.

Actually, that movie was a reference to this.

Attended a ceremony last week-end. The Mayan elders did a cleansing ceremony at Serpent Mound about an hour from me. They are stopping in several Native American sacred sites in their journey to take the 13 crystal skulls across the country.

 

[Banjo]

Actually, that movie was a reference to this.

Attended a ceremony last week-end. The Mayan elders did a cleansing ceremony at Serpent Mound about an hour from me. They are stopping in several Native American sacred sites in their journey to take the 13 crystal skulls across the country.

Yes, all of the Indy Jones movies are references to real-life historical events and mythologies. I do recall reading some stories on the crystal skulls.

 

[naisho]

Hey I was watching that show (History Channel, Ancient Aliens)

It's good for a laugh...

But the head Alien dude said that rainforest were planted, by Aliens...

So maybe we can get tehm to stop back by and replant or something. *shakes head*

You mean that Giorgio guy? I'm with you on that, I don't know.. maybe it was aliens!

 

[jillio]

Yes, all of the Indy Jones movies are references to real-life historical events and mythologies. I do recall reading some stories on the crystal skulls.

It is really a pretty interesting myth, and the ceremony I attended was fascinating. Pretty cool stuff.

 

[FireTiger]

Do we need another thread?

*pouts*

 

[naisho]

Here's a complicated argument from the 'pros' (if you consider it that) of deforestation. It mainly has to do with the economy and government of those local regions. I feel that the issue is complex and the fix is not so black and white, ie, stop deforestation and all problems go away. It seems more of a gray area more than anything. These countries want a better life and hope to gain money comes first, they will work in sweatshops, hard labor, agriculture and deforestation to get it.

Take the situation of the Brazlian amazon rainforest for example, one of the chief areas of debate:

Deforestation in the Amazon

[FONT=arial,helvetica,verdana][FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Why is the Brazilian Amazon being Destroyed?

In many tropical countries, the majority of deforestation results from the actions of poor subsistence cultivators. However, in Brazil only about one-third of recent deforestation can be linked to "shifted" cultivators. Historically a large portion of deforestation in Brazil can be attributed to land clearing for pastureland by commercial and speculative interests, misguided government policies, inappropriate World Bank projects, and commercial exploitation of forest resources. For effective action it is imperative that these issues be addressed. Focusing solely on the promotion of sustainable use by local people would neglect the most important forces behind deforestation in Brazil.

Brazilian deforestation is strongly correlated to the economic health of the country: the decline in deforestation from 1988-1991 nicely matched the economic slowdown during the same period, while the rocketing rate of deforestation from 1993-1998 paralleled Brazil's period of rapid economic growth. During lean times, ranchers and developers do not have the cash to rapidly expand their pasturelands and operations, while the government lacks funds to sponsor highways and colonization programs and grant tax breaks and subsidies to forest exploiters.

A relatively small percentage of large landowners clear vast sections of the Amazon for cattle pastureland. Large tracts of forest are cleared and sometimes planted with African savanna grasses for cattle feeding. In many cases, especially during periods of high inflation, land is simply cleared for investment purposes. When pastureland prices exceed forest land prices (a condition made possible by tax incentives that favor pastureland over natural forest), forest clearing is a good hedge against inflation.

Such favorable taxation policies, combined with government subsidized agriculture and colonization programs, encourage the destruction of the Amazon. The practice of low taxes on income derived from agriculture and tax rates that favor pasture over forest overvalues agriculture and pastureland and makes it profitable to convert natural forest for these purposes when it normally would not be so.

Revista de Economia e Sociologia Rural - Fitting the facts and capitalizing on new opportunities to redesign rural development programs in Latin America

[/FONT]

[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]2. There are major changes in the structure of employment and sourc es of income for rural populations[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Reliance on non-agricultural employment and income for the rural population has been increasing rapidly and is of great importance.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]2.1. Changes in employment patterns[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Farm employment has declined in most countries, especially its self-employment component. There has by contrast been a rapid rise in the share of rural population employed in non-agricultural wage labor and non-agricultural self-employment. For men, Durston et al. (2000) give the following changes in percentage employed in non-farm activities:[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]With the exception of Brazil, these figures show that employment in non-farm activities of the rural employed population has been rising rapidly. For Brazil, other sources show a clear increase in rural non-farm employment. Between 1981 and 1997, rural non-farm employment increased by 95% in the Northeast, 51% in Sao Paulo, 52% in the Southeast, 69% in the South, and 100% in the center-West.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]2.2. Changes in sources of income[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Corresponding to changes in employment patterns, there have been rapid changes in sources of income, with addition of a rapid rise in transfers, particularly remittances from migrants. For Mexico (World Bank-Mexico, 2004), changes in sources of income for the rural population have been as follows between 1992 and 2002:[/FONT]

​

 

[naisho]

Estudos Avançados - Energy and environment in Brazil

(This figure above compares the energy types and use of Brazil vs the world ('Mundo' means world in spanish - see the renewable/ traditional biomass section)

Biomass
A specific characteristic of Brazil is the high industrial development and the application of biomass energy technologies. Some good examples of this are: ethanol production from sugar cane, charcoal from eucalyptus plantations, electricity co-generation from sugar cane bagasse and the use of biomass in the paper and pulp industries (barks and residues from trees, sawdust, black liquor, etc.). The use of biomass in Brazil is the result of several factors combined, including the availability of resources and of cheap labor, fast industrialization and urbanization rates and the historical experience with industrial applications of that energy source on a large scale. Approximately 75% of the alcohol produced comes from the sugar cane juice (which yields close to 5 liters per tonne of sugar cane). The remaining 25% come from the molasses that results from sugar production (with a yield of almost 335 liters per tonne of molasses). In 2004, total bagasse production was close to 110 million tonnes, which generated a surplus of .2 million tonnes for non-energy purposes. The energy products resulting from sugar cane contributed with 13.5% of the Brazilian energy matrix in 2004.

The use of fuelwood in Brazil is still significant, mainly in the charcoal pits to produce charcoal and to cook food in the residences. In 2004, the residential sector consumed approximately 26 million tonnes of fuelwood, which was equivalent to 29% of the production. Consumption has been growing in recent years due to the higher costs of its direct substitute, liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), which is sold in pressurized steel bottles. Almost 40 million tonnes were used in the charcoal production (44% of the production), due especially to the strong growth of the production of pig iron and the substitution of mineral coal. The remaining 17% represent consumption in agriculture and cattle raising, as well as in the other industrial sectors. Fuelwood and charcoal represented 13.2% of the 2004 matrix, 0.3% higher than in 2003.

 

[VacationGuy234]

I think it's a real concern that not many are taking seriously.

To be sure, it is a real concern(in the rain forest), but people are doing things about it in other parts of the word(for the oxygen issue).


Yes, the rainforest is losing trees, but we are gaining trees in other areas of the world as well.

REFORESTATION LAW IN OREGON AND SELECTED OTHER STATES

Deforestation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I remember I saw a Pen & Teller show about this stuff and it was hilarious. I think it was the show were they tried to ban water (That's right H2O).

The fact of the matter is: People have to plant more trees when they cut one down because of state law. Also, it would be counter productive for the logging industry if they do not because it would put them out of business(makes no sense).

People use Environmental Hysteria to make money. This is why early members of Green Peace resigned because these organizations become money machines.

Greenpeace - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

There needs to be balance between environmental organizations and businesses because humans and their environment need to coexist.

If you want to keep the rain forest there, were do you want to keep the people?

Personally, I think we can have a more environmentally friendly civilization, but there is a line because nobody is going to plant a Redwood tree in their back yard.

 

[jillio]

Do we need another thread?

*pouts*

No. It all has to do with environmental concerns. Just an indigineous perspective of such.

 

[naisho]

To be sure, it is a real concern(in the rain forest), but people are doing things about it in other parts of the word(for the oxygen issue).


Yes, the rainforest is losing trees, but we are gaining trees in other areas of the world as well.

REFORESTATION LAW IN OREGON AND SELECTED OTHER STATES

Deforestation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

One of the things Banjo is concerned about is the native species of animals and plants those forests. They can't be replaced by reforestation.
When you lose that species of poison frog, or spider monkey that are native to the Amazon for example, it eventually is gone forever.

You might say, well we can take them and put them in the new forests we make. If we take those species and put them in the new reforests you are talking about, it can raise other concerns and they might not be so good.

Take for example the Japanese kudzu vine. It was introduced here to the USA and it has actually became a problem now, because the vines are taking over some local habitats, they compete for sunlight (photosynthesis) and end up killing or pushing away their plant competitors.

Insects, bugs, bacteria, viruses, feral animals introduced - would it be good on the pets, animals, wildlife nearby if a monkey or bird species is now introduced, and can carry SARS or bird SARS to other species in the USA?

There are some others off the top of my head, like the asian citrus virus going around.

These are just some thoughts of the complexity of the issue involved.

 

[jillio]

One of the things Banjo is concerned about is the native species of animals and plants those forests. They can't be replaced by reforestation.
When you lose that species of poison frog, or spider monkey that are native to the Amazon for example, it eventually is gone forever.

You might say, well we can take them and put them in the new forests we make. If we take those species and put them in the new reforests you are talking about, it can raise other concerns and they might not be so good.

Take for example the Japanese kudzu vine. It was introduced here to the USA and it has actually became a problem now, because the vines are taking over some local habitats, they compete for sunlight (photosynthesis) and end up killing or pushing away their plant competitors.

Insects, bugs, bacteria, viruses, feral animals introduced - would it be good on the pets, animals, wildlife nearby if a monkey or bird species is now introduced, and can carry SARS or bird SARS to other species in the USA?

There are some others off the top of my head, like the asian citrus virus going around.

These are just some thoughts of the complexity of the issue involved.

The entire state of TN is now made of kudzu.

 

[deafskeptic]

The entire state of TN is now made of kudzu.

Ha ha, I can believe it. That plant can smother whole forests!

 

[VacationGuy234]

One of the things Banjo is concerned about is the native species of animals and plants those forests. They can't be replaced by reforestation.
When you lose that species of poison frog, or spider monkey that are native to the Amazon for example, it eventually is gone forever.

I agree. I'm not saying it's a good situation, nor do I see a good solution. We all have to inhabit this planet and the loss of species is tragic. I think the best we can do is try for a balance and save what we can save.

In the future, I can see oxygen and CO^2 made by machines.

 

[FireTiger]

I agree. I'm not saying it's a good situation, nor do I see a good solution. We all have to inhabit this planet and the loss of species is tragic. I think the best we can do is try for a balance and save what we can save.

In the future, I can see oxygen and CO^2 made by machines.

Well won't be making O^2 - but maybe CO^2 but why?

 

[jillio]

Well won't be making O^2 - but maybe CO^2 but why?

Don't we have enough humans breathing it out?

 

[FireTiger]

Don't we have enough humans breathing it out?

Exactly! and the 'cost' of producing O^2 (oxygen gas)... then again there is ozone that degrades quickly, but is harmful at nose height...

Tesla Coil!!!

 

[Jiro]

Well won't be making O^2 - but maybe CO^2 but why?

for plants

 

[jillio]

Again, but why?

 

[FireTiger]

for plants

Are you depopulating the humans, animals, and the plants that produce CO^2 at night or in adverse conditions?