Global Warming

[Russell Chapman]

Alberto Monteiro wrote:
> Russell Chapman wrote:
>   
>> The same source puts Brazil at 5th in the world for the
>> same reason - ironically due to US AGW prevention measures
>>
>>     
> The deforestation in Brazil has _zero_ correlation with AGW
> prevention, biofuels, or anything like that. It's just the
> continuous push of civilization against forests, the same
> event that devastated European forests 500 years ago and
> USA forests 200 years ago.
>   
My understanding (from the other side of the world, of course - I'm not 
trying to say I know what's going on there) was that Brazil's biofuel 
production is predominantly from sugar cane, and the only country in the 
world where it is being effectively used for a net reduction in 
emissions BUT that US policies on ethanol from corn makes corn so 
lucrative for US agribusiness that not enough farms in the USA are 
growing soybeans. This has pushed soybean prices so high that Brazilian 
farms where soybean production was marginal or where cattle were raised 
were now being  turned over to soybean production, pushing the cattle 
graziers further into former rainforest areas. 300,000ha (that's 750,000 
acres for the unenlightened) of the Amazon basin was deforested just in 
the 6 months from July to December last year. Brazil's population isn't 
growing that fast, but international demand for their agricultural 
products is. I specifically mentioned US AGW prevention, because Brazil 
has managed to prove the viability of biofuels through sugarcane, but 
the US is intent on doing it through corn or switchgrass, which just 
can't manage the yield per hectare.
(In an odd piece of synchronicity, I was just reading how the Kamayura 
tribesmen use their biodiesel to run generators so they can watch soap 
operas on TV, then Alberto's population growth post talked about the 
same thing! Those soaps must be popular in Brazil!)


Cheers
Russell C.