By Guilherme Wilbert for the Saker Blog
The imperialists want your riches South America!
U.S. SOUTHCOM Commander:”This region is so rich in resources.. it’s off the charts rich.”
“60% of the world’s lithium is in the region; you have heavy crude, you have light sweet crude, you have rare earth elements, you have the Amazon..” pic.twitter.com/33dQ6EXKAo
— Kawsachun News (@KawsachunNews) July 20, 2022
The environment is one of the key pieces for the development of any nation, with the so-called “green economy” becoming a protagonist in recent years. And while this discourse is increasingly inflamed by its enthusiasts within NGOs (which generally do not enjoy the public prestige they did a few years ago), the lack of management with environmental protection is still seen.
Countries in Europe such as Portugal, France, and Italy are literally feeling the heat of this European summer, with the largest river in the third country running almost dry. Residents of Greece and the UK face fires reaching residential areas.
The Brazilian CNN reports that: “The European Forest Fire Information System put 19 European countries on “extreme danger” alerts for forest fires on Wednesday, in a span that stretches from Portugal and Spain in the southwest, to Albania and Turkey in the southeast.”
Some climate establishment analysts like to push the Global Warming discourse as one of the causes for events like forest fires and huge heat waves that were not felt years ago, but they usually sin in their reasoning because they disregard simple elements that explain what is happening without the Global Warming alarmism.
It so happens that forest fires in Europe now are happening because the European summer happens precisely in the driest time of the continent, which allows big fires to appear in some countries. And it is curious to note how some (of the few) forests in Europe that are on fire are not being considered for internationalization, as is being seen in the attempt to do the same in the Brazilian Amazon.
All the events we are watching now in Europe are being treated in a very different way than when the media wants to talk about the Brazilian Amazon (depending on who is in government), for example.
Jair Bolsonaro, the current president of Brazil, a person who occasionally appears in my texts, has become persona non grata for some WWF enthusiasts and other organizations because he tried to make it more flexible during his government for miners to use Brazilian lands for mining, which causes a political-judicial imbroglio in some areas because they are of indigenous demarcation.
While Lula, the country’s former president who is currently trying to return to the post, was seen as a “friend” of the green economy only because his discourse fit the media establishment of his time.
And this causes arguments such as the above-mentioned “internationalization” to start popping up in the air, as seen when Macron openly said that the “Amazon is not only Brazilian,” with some more committed analysts explaining that Macron was referring to the Amazon region of French Guiana, bordering Brazil, which also carries the biome.
But it would be too naïve to believe this explanation at this point of the championship.
It is worth pointing out that the Brazilian Amazon is a humid forest, which does not allow, even in the driest times in Brazilian territory, large-scale burning. What does happen in the Amazon are burnings that are usually criminal or provoked by regional citizens as an attempt to clear their land, be it for animal husbandry, planting something or the like. And these burnings are not seen as criminal because they are part of a kind of “tradition” to those who apply the tactic.
And also the argument to be used about “deforestation” of the Amazon usually carries sad numbers, which do not always appear from Brazilian institutes, it is worth pointing out, but also not the way they say, since much is done by the Brazilian Government until today to preserve the forest, which just within the state of Amazonas in the country, carries the size of Mongolia in territory (in almost perfect territorial measurement).
The so-called “Legal Amazon”, a term coined in Brazilian Federal Law (Federal Law 1.806/1953), is a region within the Brazilian state where the entities of the Brazilian federation that carry the biome are located.
At the level of territorial comparison, it would encompass entire countries such as the aforementioned Mongolia, Nepal, Tajikistan, Angola, Venezuela, Italy, New Zealand, Laos, and English Guyana.
So you can understand the magnitude of the Amazon.
The only thing is that, even if the evils they say were happening in the Amazon, they don’t have the right to even consider the idea of “internationalizing” the Amazon. This hurts Brazilian sovereignty.
How it would hurt the European if the opposite happened.
The Northern Empire’s divide and conquer tactic has been known for a long time and various ways are seen to provoke an ethnic regional imbroglio in Brazil (because indigenous people live there) and ordinary Brazilians. In what later, if successful, could become a country within the internationally administered Amazon, reducing the Brazilian territory by 60%.
For the anachronism: they did it in Sudan (with due proportions), with the country having separatist regions to the South of its territory today after a series of inter-ethnic and religious civil wars.
So the media, which carries the chance to inform the people directly of what is happening, ends up hiding some facts and pushing what is convenient for them.
As in the parallel drawn with the fires in Europe and in the Amazon, where in the Amazon case, with the arguments already known being treated in a much more delicate way and with an imperial (colonial) look than in the case of Europe, which doesn’t have a very large forest area, besides being losing the little it has to fire.
In the Brazilian case, it is always seen as an incapacity of administration and destruction and the solution would be to let foreigners take over this region (according to them). While with Europe, which also suffers basically the same problems alleged in the Amazon (including deforestation with European forest areas practically disappearing), it is not considered to hand over the administration of their lands to foreigners.
On the contrary, Europeans claim that they can and will use their lands as they wish, the most practical example I can think of being Germany’s recently, which entirely destroyed a 12 thousand year old forest region for charcoal extraction. There have been reactions from groups that fight for environmental preservation.
And, not to forget that there has never been any talk about turning forested or inhospitable regions (with a great variety of fauna and flora) into international regions or countries in Europe: in 1918, a presidential advisor to Woodrow Wilson, former American president, openly said that in place of the great Russia, five other countries could emerge: one in Siberia (precisely the inhospitable and forested region of Russia) and another four in the European part. Which obviously did not occur. And it never will.
Just as it will not happen in the Amazon. And just as it will not occur in the forests (which still exist) of Europe.
Each country is also sovereign to dictate its environmental policies, respecting the appropriate treaties and conventions, but always preserving the national interest allied to the green economy movement, so far beneficial to all.
Guilherme Wilbert is a Brazilian law graduate interested in geopolitics and international law.
Somente ‘esquece’ de dizer que a maior parte daquela terras que estão sendo queimadas não são particulares, são invasores, grileiros, atuando em terras públicas, do Estado brasileiro. Quanto ao ‘costume’ das queimadas, esse é um (mal) costume do invasor de terras que não quer gastar para desmatar, precisa que seja de forma ‘rapida’ e ao final tenha uma situação de ‘fato consumado’.
He just ‘forgets’ to say that most of that land that is being burned is not private, they are invaders, grileiros, operating on public lands owned by the Brazilian State. As for the ‘usual’ of burning, this is a (bad) usual of the land invader who does not want to spend to deforest, needs it to be ‘quickly’ and in the end to have a ‘fait accompli’ situation.
The stewardship of the Brazilian Amazon is exclusively of the Brazilian government. Now if the Brazilian government is being very reckless and very irresponsible with the use of the “natural resources”, that’s a total different matter.
Consequência lógica do pensamento:
O capital ecológico da Europa já foi gerido irresponsavelmente nos séculos passados, de sorte que a Europa deve sofrer intervenção internacional e ter suas terras distribuídas ao restante da população do globo.
O mesmo se aplica aos Estados Unidos da América.
Aceite as consequências lógicas de seu pensamento.
Ignorância é uma coisa que efetivamente mata.
A ignorância dos cidadãos do ocidente coletivo é simplesmente estarrecedora.
Na legislação brasileira, toda propriedade agrícola deve ter um mínimo de 20% de sua área preservada, para as regiões de colonização antiga.
Na Amazônia legal, isso passa para 40%, ao passo que na área da floresta amazônica propriamente dita, são 80% de área a ser preservada.
E não fica nisso meu caro: além da área de reserva legal (em percentuais descritos acima) há as áreas de preservação permanente: faixas de terra de tamanho variável ao longo dos cursos d’água, chegando a até 500 metros de largura; faixas de terra no entorno de nascentes.
Onde na Europa isso existe? Onde nas pradarias norte-americanas isso existe?
Se você somar todas essas áreas de cada propriedade particular com as áreas indígenas, com as áreas dos parques florestais, você terá algo como 30% de sua área total.
Os EUA protegem desertos e isso conta como área protegida!!!
Aqui protegemos florestas e savanas.
Veja uma palestra da Embrapa, em que é esclarecido que a área protegida no Brasil equivale a 15 países europeus!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oDixTvtEsx8
Indexadores utilizados para localizar o vídeo:
“embrapa área de preservação no brasil evaristo de miranda 43″
Vejam a definição legal da área de preservação permanente (Lei 12.651/12):
CAPÍTULO II
DAS ÁREAS DE PRESERVAÇÃO PERMANENTE
Seção I
Da Delimitação das Áreas de Preservação Permanente
Art. 4º Considera-se Área de Preservação Permanente, em zonas rurais ou urbanas, para os efeitos desta Lei:
I – as faixas marginais de qualquer curso d’água natural, desde a borda da calha do leito regular, em largura mínima de:
I – as faixas marginais de qualquer curso d’água natural perene e intermitente, excluídos os efêmeros, desde a borda da calha do leito regular, em largura mínima de: (Incluído pela Lei nº 12.727, de 2012).
a) 30 (trinta) metros, para os cursos d’água de menos de 10 (dez) metros de largura;
b) 50 (cinquenta) metros, para os cursos d’água que tenham de 10 (dez) a 50 (cinquenta) metros de largura;
c) 100 (cem) metros, para os cursos d’água que tenham de 50 (cinquenta) a 200 (duzentos) metros de largura;
d) 200 (duzentos) metros, para os cursos d’água que tenham de 200 (duzentos) a 600 (seiscentos) metros de largura;
e) 500 (quinhentos) metros, para os cursos d’água que tenham largura superior a 600 (seiscentos) metros;
II – as áreas no entorno dos lagos e lagoas naturais, em faixa com largura mínima de:
a) 100 (cem) metros, em zonas rurais, exceto para o corpo d’água com até 20 (vinte) hectares de superfície, cuja faixa marginal será de 50 (cinquenta) metros;
b) 30 (trinta) metros, em zonas urbanas;
III – as áreas no entorno dos reservatórios d’água artificiais, na faixa definida na licença ambiental do empreendimento, observado o disposto nos §§ 1º e 2º ;
III – as áreas no entorno dos reservatórios d’água artificiais, decorrentes de barramento ou represamento de cursos d’água naturais, na faixa definida na licença ambiental do empreendimento; (Incluído pela Lei nº 12.727, de 2012). (Vide ADC Nº 42) (Vide ADIN Nº 4.903)
IV – as áreas no entorno das nascentes e dos olhos d’água, qualquer que seja a sua situação topográfica, no raio mínimo de 50 (cinquenta) metros;
IV – as áreas no entorno das nascentes e dos olhos d’água perenes, qualquer que seja sua situação topográfica, no raio mínimo de 50 (cinquenta) metros; (Redação dada pela Medida Provisória nº 571, de 2012).
IV – as áreas no entorno das nascentes e dos olhos d’água perenes, qualquer que seja sua situação topográfica, no raio mínimo de 50 (cinquenta) metros; (Redação dada pela Lei nº 12.727, de 2012). (Vide ADIN Nº 4.903)
V – as encostas ou partes destas com declividade superior a 45º , equivalente a 100% (cem por cento) na linha de maior declive;
VI – as restingas, como fixadoras de dunas ou estabilizadoras de mangues;
VII – os manguezais, em toda a sua extensão;
VIII – as bordas dos tabuleiros ou chapadas, até a linha de ruptura do relevo, em faixa nunca inferior a 100 (cem) metros em projeções horizontais;
IX – no topo de morros, montes, montanhas e serras, com altura mínima de 100 (cem) metros e inclinação média maior que 25º , as áreas delimitadas a partir da curva de nível correspondente a 2/3 (dois terços) da altura mínima da elevação sempre em relação à base, sendo esta definida pelo plano horizontal determinado por planície ou espelho d’água adjacente ou, nos relevos ondulados, pela cota do ponto de sela mais próximo da elevação;
X – as áreas em altitude superior a 1.800 (mil e oitocentos) metros, qualquer que seja a vegetação;
XI – as veredas.
XI – em veredas, a faixa marginal, em projeção horizontal, com largura mínima de 50 (cinquenta) metros, a partir do limite do espaço brejoso e encharcado. (Redação dada pela Medida Provisória nº 571, de 2012).
XI – em veredas, a faixa marginal, em projeção horizontal, com largura mínima de 50 (cinquenta) metros, a partir do espaço permanentemente brejoso e encharcado. (Redação dada pela Lei nº 12.727, de 2012).
§ 1º Não se aplica o previsto no inciso III nos casos em que os reservatórios artificiais de água não decorram de barramento ou represamento de cursos d’água.”
————————————
Google-translate from mod:
Logical consequence of thought:
Europe’s ecological capital has already been irresponsibly managed in the past centuries, so that Europe must suffer international intervention and have its lands distributed to the rest of the globe’s population.
The same applies to the United States of America.
Accept the logical consequences of your thinking.
Ignorance is something that effectively kills.
The ignorance of the citizens of the collective West is simply terrifying.
In Brazilian law, all agricultural property must have a minimum of 20% of its preserved area, for the old colonization regions.
In the Legal Amazon, this goes to 40%, while in the area of the Amazon rainforest itself, there are 80% of area to be preserved.
And it is not my dear: in addition to the legal reserve area (in percentages described above) there are permanent preservation areas: variable size land tracks along watercourses, reaching up to 500 meters wide; lanes of land around the springs.
Where in Europe is this? Where in American prairies does this exist?
If you add all these areas of each private property with indigenous areas, with the areas of forest parks, you will have something like 30% of your total area.
The US protects deserts and this counts as a protected area !!!
Here we protect forests and savannas.
See a lecture from Embrapa, in which it is clarified that the protected area in Brazil is equivalent to 15 European countries!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=odixtvtesx8
Indexers used to locate the video:
“Embrapa Preservation Area in Brazil Evaristo de Miranda 43 ″
See the legal definition of the permanent preservation area (Law 12.651/12):
Chapter II
Permanent preservation areas
Section I
The delimitation of permanent preservation areas
Art. 4º It is considered an area of permanent preservation, in rural or urban areas, for the purposes of this law:
I – the marginal bands of any natural watercourse, from the edge of the regular bed rail, in a minimum width of:
I – The marginal lanes of any perennial and intermittent natural watercourse, excluding the ephemerals, from the edge of the regular bed rail, in a minimum width of: (Included by Law No. 12,727, 2012).
a) 30 (thirty) meters, for watercourses of less than 10 (ten) meters wide;
b) 50 (fifty) meters, for watercourses that have 10 (ten) to 50 (fifty) meters wide;
c) 100 (one hundred) meters, for watercourses that have 50 (fifty) to 200 (two hundred) meters wide;
d) 200 (two hundred) meters, for watercourses that have 200 (two hundred) to 600 (six hundred) meters wide;
e) 500 (five hundred) meters, for watercourses that have width greater than 600 (six hundred) meters;
II – the areas around the natural lakes and lagoons, in a strip with a minimum width of:
a) 100 (one hundred) meters, in rural areas, except for the water body with up to 20 (twenty) hectares of surface, whose marginal range will be 50 (fifty) meters;
b) 30 (thirty) meters, in urban areas;
III – the areas around the artificial water reservoirs, in the range defined in the environmental license of the project, subject to the provisions of §§ 1 and 2;
III – the areas around the artificial water reservoirs, resulting from busbar or dam courses, in the range defined in the environmental license of the enterprise; (Included by Law No. 12,727, 2012). (See ADC No. 42) (Vide Adin No. 4,903)
IV – areas around the springs and water eyes, whatever their topographic situation, in the minimum radius of 50 (fifty) meters;
IV – the areas around the springs and perennial eyes, whatever their topographic situation, within the minimum radius of 50 (fifty) meters; (Wording given by Provisional Measure No. 571, 2012).
IV – the areas around the springs and perennial eyes, whatever their topographic situation, within the minimum radius of 50 (fifty) meters; (Wording given by Law No. 12,727, 2012). (See Adin No. 4,903)
V – the slopes or parts of these with a slope greater than 45º, equivalent to 100% (one hundred percent) in the line of largest slope;
VI – the restingas, as dune fixers or mangroves stabilizers;
VII – the mangroves, in all their extent;
VIII – the edges of the trays or flat, until the relief line of relief, in a range not less than 100 (one hundred) meters in horizontal projections;
IX – At the top of hills, mountains, mountains and mountains, with a minimum height of 100 (one hundred) meters and medium inclination greater than 25º, the areas delimited from the level curve corresponding to 2/3 (two thirds) of the minimum height of elevation always in relation to the base, which is defined by the horizontal plane determined by a plain or adjacent water mirror or, in wavy reliefs, by the quota of the seal closest to the elevation;
X – the areas at altitude greater than 1,800 (one thousand and eight hundred) meters, whatever the vegetation;
XI – the paths.
XI – In Veredas, the marginal strip, in horizontal projection, with a minimum width of 50 (fifty) meters, from the limit of the bold and soaked space. (Wording given by Provisional Measure No. 571, 2012).
XI – in Veredas, the marginal strip, in horizontal projection, with a minimum width of 50 (fifty) meters, from the permanently bold and soaked space. (Wording given by Law No. 12,727, 2012).
Paragraph 1. The provided for in item III shall not apply in cases where artificial water reservoirs do not result from a bus or water courses. “
->”It is worth pointing out that the Brazilian Amazon is a humid forest, which does not allow, even in the driest times in Brazilian territory, large-scale burning. What does happen in the Amazon are burnings that are usually criminal or provoked by regional citizens as an attempt to clear their land, be it for animal husbandry, planting something or the like. And these burnings are not seen as criminal because they are part of a kind of “tradition” to those who apply the tactic.”
No comments, anymore.
As you write its quite simple:
Its European companies who exploit Amazonas for rare expensive hardwood and minerals, and blame the Brazilian Government for “environmental issues” when local natives exploit the soil they live on.
Same procedure as in Africa, the Royals of Europe/US hunting the biggest lions, antelopes, elephants “thinning out”, while blaming the Africans for poaching and “killing endangered species” when they use their God given right to feed and clothes themselves from their own soil.
It is said all poaching on wildlife in Kenya stopped when International travel were closed in the lock down period 2020-2022. https://i.redd.it/p4c5nf4r8wf61.jpg ohohohohh.
All roads seems to lead back to the Empire of hypocrisy and lies.
Brazilians extract hardwood, minerals and plants used by big pharma and cosmetics industries and sell them to companies based in the EU and USA, keeping the same colonialist/extractivist cycle from the last 500+ years: quick profit, no investment in value-added goods production – we just extract as much as possible, as quick as possible and sell it to the highest bidder, just to buy value-added goods from these same bidders. That’s what people like Michael Hudson call “comprador elites”.
By the way, the main issue is not uncontrolled extractivism: it’s the destruction of the forest to raise cattle or to plant soybeans for export. These farmers are already exhausting the soil and water sources of the midwest and are moving north to the Amazon, leaving barren soil that will take decades to be fertile again.
Worse than that: some of these agricultural operations in the Amazon regions are huge money laundries for drug trafficking, with no government fiscalization at all – common scene in the region is a huge farm, with some isolated warehousing facilities guarded by private armed personnel and a landing track where small planes can land at will… Police is outgunned and bribed to leave them alone.
Bolsonaro has helped them a lot by dismantling government agencies and making it easier to acquire guns, to the level that today the Brazilian Armed Forces are outgunned by private owners.
Are you sure these “government agencies” were not 5’th column paid environmentalists obstructing a natural exploitation by local Brazilian farmers good for Brazil?
From outside I see Bolsonaro in many cases fighting for his people and for Brazil, especially in this case with Western media outrage about the fires in Amazonas.
But Im without local knowledge and must shut my mouth if Brasileros tell me otherwise.
I understand the misinformation that exists in relation to Bolsonaro. It is the product of an empire-funded coup that began exactly in 2014 (coincidence with Ukraine is not?). His psyops group is very good and for a while managed to deceive the Brazilians, but we learned very fast and now his media scams no longer work. You’ll see here and there an article or an observation trying to sideways introduce its name into relevant topics.
I ask you to observe Brazil from January and maybe we can show the realness of our country (good or bad). For now what we have is just lies and psyops.
Thanks. You are not the only Bras who told me I misinterpreted Bolsonaro’s performance and they were quite pess ed at the situation :-D. I guess I have to get myself better informed. All the best.
Perhaps you should rely on other, better informed Brazilians than the hard leftists that populate this forum. They defend the reelection of a crook that is responsible for the world’s worst corruption scandal in the history of mankind. Do not be fooled by them.
Bolsonaro is, by far, the best PBR in the history of the Brazilian Republic.
[This moderator is not permitting snide references to moderators doing their job.]
I don’t consider myself left or right. I am a Brazilian who observes without passions what is happening. About the possible election of Lula da Silva I do not care, if he fails I will be here criticizing and pointing out the mistakes. One thing that attracted me to this blog was the cordiality of the participants. I believe we can raise the level of our arguments.
The Brazilians I know are quite intelligent people. They wanna know how an estrangeiro look at it, as they know an angle seeing it from outside helps their own understanding. Thats why I sometimes give my superficial perception.
I see Lula had heart and love for his country. This love made Brazil flourish with soul in his period as you should know love penetrates everything. Y
es a lot of criminality and gay parades, but nevertheless the country improved with optimism in the period when he was there. The corruption goes on both sides.
I see Brazil elected Bolsonaro because everybody was tired of the criminality and the leftist care for criminals, perverts and corruption. Remember Brazil is a religious country who consider the family as a foundation.
Bolsonaro made differences, made a blow to the gay movement, made similar moves in a Trump direction distance to the liberals.
The try to sell Bras production of airplanes to US was a gross error but never realized as far as I know. I remember many of Brazil’s own produced medical products as better than Western but realize more and more is and has been being sold out to wall street.
Brazil could be worse off than with Bolsonaro. Its still a functioning country. Chile your neighbour has real tough times with dictatorship, military management and neo-liberals, and we all going through tough times with AI and IOT sneaking in everywhere.
Dont throw the waste water out before you are sure to have something better :-).
Respeitando as opiniões do artigo, gostaria de fazer algumas observações:
The systematic destruction of forests in the amount observed in Europe, Asia, America (all of it) contribute and some extent to the climatic events they observe. The adoption of “metrics” as carbon concentration create an unnecessary noise to this topic. Of course the metric was created due to the inability of most to understand or want to understand that the planet is being modified (to say the least).
I agree that European and American hypocrisy are something at least stupid to believe and that there is a desire to steal the Brazilian Amazon since the crazy Margaret Hilda Thatcher in the 80s.
Each country has the right to manage its resources the way it best interprets, but we need to think about our people, our current and future interests, this is not happening. There is no point in fighting to keep the Amazon with us and a group of traitors from Brazil stealing the riches, destroying and causing suffering. All countries have traitors, we need to be vigilant.
But we need to be aware, as Brazilians, I realize that the technique of mixing themes is very dangerous for our country. In fact, in terms of forest preservation, Brazil was an example until 2019, before, we had all the systems of control and governance. Today this is not true, President Bolsonaro is a fifth column in disguise, his role is basically to destroy all controls, he decided to exchange control systems for an American (isn’t that cool?). There are thousands of documented facts, just a search. So yes, Europeans want the Amazon and no, Bolsonaro does not protect it and does not think of Brazil.Any Brazilian of two neurons knows this.
I was in the Amazonas some 26 years ago. I liked the way Brazil treated the natives in Amazonas. The natives were per law to be treated as children without responsibility for their actions, saying they were protected and left alone to the extent they were leaving other local Brazilians in the same peace, mutual respect.
Most of the native environmentalists (media heroes) in Amazonas are paid and brainwashed by European forces like the Catholics or other NGO’s.
When I was there, I too discovered Amazonas has 1 million different insects and they are all bloodsuckers. Its an hard life living there but interesting, but not at all like we see Amazonas on television.
So the local guys harvesting hardwood, gold, mining, rubber are having a quite hard life to make an income.
We should respect them rather than blaming them as scapegoats.
The prospectors and loggers of amazonas are not “nice guys”. They’re bandits who kill and destroy. Life is difficult for everyone, but it doesn’t give permission to destroy. Don’t look at the pawn, but in the tower and the bishop, they’re the only ones we need to get rid of. And we know who they are.
It would be interesting to see an Englishman trying to teach the Russians the history of Russia. The same applies to Brazil.
I know. Its hopeless. When I were in Amazonas I discovered myself completely without knowledge of anything. Every time I tried to help someone I lost. But I learned a lot a lot a lot.
“Spain, Portugal, Greece Reject EU 15% Gas Usage Cut
Further cracks in a united front to tackle an energy crisis in Europe have arisen Thursday, with Spain, Portugal and Greece rejecting the bloc’s plan to reduce natural gas consumption by 15% between this August and next Spring.
Just hours after a dire warning by IEA chief Fatih Birol that Europe would need a 20% cut in consumption to make winter tolerable, officials in Madrid and Lison said they would not support the 15% initiative in the face of a potential Russian gas cutoff.
According to both Spain and Portugal, mandatory reductions are unfair, particularly considering that both countries use far less Russian gas than other European Union member states. ”
Source: oil price.com
The price of natural gas $8 per MMBTU in USA. 5 times higher than normally at mid summer.
Fires burning forests is normal part of life circle of ecosystem and regeneration. Actually trying to stop them has caused some serious problems of monosystem for nature weakening diversity.
Bulls eye. Same when farmers burn their crops, its good for the soil and provide fire belts.
Yes, in the case of california and new zealand forests where controled burns to reduce combustible materials.
But this the amazon, it is supposed to be dense and wet. So, no fires.
What is happening is the removal of the forest for agriculture, and that don´t regenerate back to being a forest…
Go to Porto Velho and you can see Brazilians can do this all by themselves without any help from foreigners. Here there is the highest per capita population of lawyers of anywhere, all busy working on behalf of grabbing a slice of the pie. This is a frontier boom town exploitation like few places else in the world right now.
All those people on welfare and yet no one to reduce fuel loads on the forest floor. It is like California not using prisoners to tend to their forests.
I liked how to you just casually glossed over all of the melting ice at the poles thats been happening for years. Probably just because its really dry in europe right now xD
“In climate research and modelling, we should recognize that we are dealing with a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore that the long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible.” (TAR, p.774.) ‘IPCC Third Assesment Report.’
There is no unusual melting ice, just normal nature variations. Russia made some newly satellite photos 2013-2020: https://www.gismeteo.ru/news/klimat/rekordnaya-ploschad-odnoletnego-lda-v-arktike/ . But even this is misgiving as we have to see it under many more years which again could be said to be misgiving.
The basic principle is the earth circulate longer from the sun (colder) or closer to the sun (warmer). The planets magnetic interconnections are regulating this whole system.
All postulated human influence to our weather conditions are bs. https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/features/Milankovitch/milankovitch_3.php
You are right, it has been happening for years; we could celebrate an anniversary soon:
“Reports from fishermen, seal hunters, and explorers who sail the seas about Spitsbergen and the eastern Arctic, all point to a radical change in climatic conditions, and hitherto unheard-of high temperatures in that part of the earth’s surface.
Many old landmarks are so changed as to be unrecognizable. Where formerly great masses of ice were found, there are now often moraines, accumulations of earth and stones. At many points where glaciers formerly extended far into the sea, they have entirely disappeared.
Formerly, the waters about Spitsbergen held an even summer temperature of about 3° Celsius; this year recorded temperatures up to 15°, and last winter the ocean did not freeze over even on the north coast of Spitsbergen.”
MONTHLY WEATHER REVIEW
NOVEMBER, 1922
But this is what mother earth do, change. Islands go and islands come. Glaciers build up and go to the sea.
You should take a look at the interactive map of Australian dry-wet season weather for 100 years, and see it confirms “a chaotic non-linier system”, plus the Russian photos of Arctic ice mass during the last 20-30 years you will see the same chaotic non-linier picture.
Remember the earth circulates around itself and around the sun and the moon pulls tide and low and streams and wind, thus making constant erosion and sediments, additions and subtractions, changes.
We humans can and should only live with and adapt ourselves to these nature changes, and not foolishly think we control them.
But that is what humans do, change the climate. They carry goats to a humid, forested island and within a few decades the goats have destroyed the forest and left a desert.
Burning a trillion tons of fuel doesn’t change the climate? Get real.
Please do continue: What did the goats do to the desert then? This is a riveting story, and I bet they destroyed it, too. Was it some sort of pygmy trees they started with? I am a little pressed to make a mental picture of the whole setup.
The world consumption is 2 billion tons/year acc. to https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/steo/report/global_oil.php, thus far from your liberal figure.
Goats do whatta goat gotta do, and Islands do whattan Island gotta do. Vulcanos do whatta vulcano gotta do, and nobody can do a shit about it.
What do volcanos do? They destroy the forest and leave a desert yes. Will you cry about them too? So you mean a volcano is more natural than a human? I tell you both are natural phenomena.
Beware, Brazil. Uncle $hmuel wants what you have.
Meanwhile in north western Norway we see temperaures below 15C, warmest day so far 23C.
So, what happens in the Amazon basin, 5 000 km from Washington, DC…..and what happens “in this region”….”in our neighbourhood”…”impacts our national security in the homeland and the United States”
and yet completely oblivious to how NATO muscling in on Ukraine, next door to Russia, might impact on Russia’s security fears. The hypocrisy makes one want to throw up.
During the LULA/DILMA presidencies, the burns/deforestation in the Amazon fell 70%, while today we see an area equivalent to the state of Rio de Janeiro destroyed. This is insane. Fortunately, president LULA (I call him president and not “former president”) will win the next october election, puting an end in this apocalypse. BTW, Amazon is part of the brazilian territory and will be now and in the future. We don’t even think in dividing our country.
“The only thing is that, even if the evils they say were happening in the Amazon, they don’t have the right to even consider the idea of “internationalizing” the Amazon. This hurts Brazilian sovereignty.”
Absolutely true. But in the minds of those whom I would call ‘green imperialists’ or ‘humanitarian imperialists’, there is nothing more important than managing the Amazon (and Congo, et al.) in the way that fits their particular ideas of what is ecologically correct, or what is most beneficial to humankind.
With a bit of self-reflection, those people might realize that all conquerors and empire-builders begin with benevolent motivations. No one gets up in the morning and looks in the mirror to think about the forests they might destroy today, or the people they might enslave. Like you and me, they think about the positive actions they might carry out today. They like their spouses and they love their children, just like other people.
Never mind that the good people of the United States carried out the systematic removal of indigenous people from the Atlantic to the Pacific, and that much of this took place the bloody civil war from 1861-1865. At that along with the westward expansion, those Americans exploited their vast natural resources to the hilt. This removal became the inspiration for a certain Adolf Hitler in his dream for German-speaking ‘Lebensraum’ in Europe.
Now, with the benefit of hindsight, good American liberals [along with the not-good conservatives ;-)] are ready to tell the global South how to manage its environment for the benefit of all.
Just don’t try to tell them that they are neo-imperialists, because they are certain to go into a frothing lather. And then launch a Twitter storm to cancel you for such an unenlightened view.
OK, no argument, Brasil’s Amazon is Brasilian sovereign territory, and no foreign countries, organisations or individuals have any right to dictate what should be done there. HOWEVER, the greatest victims of Brasil’s mal-administration of the Amazon region / biome are none other than Brasil’s own most productive citizens, the farmers and ranchers of the greater Southeast. The destruction of the Amazon rain forest has already caused the desertification of much (most?) of the “Cerrado” biome of the Southeast and Center-West regions. The lost evapo-transpiration of the rain forest has directly caused record drought and wildfires throughout what was once the most productive region of the country. Sovereignty is certainly a laudable goal, but RESPONSIBLE management is at least as important.
^^;;^^
Morcegão