silva In mid May the Brazilian Environmental Minister Marina Silva resigned without giving any reason in public. One reason why was hinted at by Denise Hamu, secretary-general of the Worldwide Fund for Nature in Brazil who commented: “the environmental area was relegated to no priority. She got tired of the thankless struggle,” It’s not normally the sort of thing that would be of great interest to anyone outside Brazil, nor probably even to most Brazilians. Now without wanting to do a Sting it’s worth pointing out that what happens in the Amazon rainforest is likely to have a big effect on climate change globally.

While England may be rubbish at finding a decent Eurovision entry the Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research has what is probably the most accurate climate simulation model in the world. It is currently predicting that by 2100 most of the Amazon Basin will have lost its trees to shrubs, grasses or savannah. The process of rainforest collapse should become evident by 2040 and will conclude with half of what is now covered with rainforest  changing into desert. The photos illustrate the difference and it is much more than just an aesthetic one. It will affect the entire population of South America fairly quickly and very directly and the medium term results with be felt by those of us who plan to be around in 30 years or so. Only this site’s small but enthusiastic band of Canadian readers may feel some benefit. It’ll be horrible for the rest of us.

A little bit of science is necessary at this point. Most of the Amazon’s rainfall is caused by transpiration – the water released by plants when they open their stomata to acquire CO2. As CO2 levels rise globally Rainforest the stomata are open for shorter periods and so release less water vapour which reduces the rainfall. The scientists predict a reduction of around 20% To compound the problem additional warming will be caused by a persistent El Nino like climate itself caused by global warming. Add these two factors together and the best guess is that the current 5mm per day average rainfall across the basin will drop to 2mm by 2100 – except in northeastern Amazonia where it will plummet to almost zero.

desert2_OPT Most of us have now absorbed the idea that carbon is stored in trees and soil. As the vegetation dies and decomposes it will start to release 35 gigatonnes of CO2  and another 150 gigatonnes will no longer be stored in the soil.  Temperatures in the Amazon will rise by 10C. This pattern is likely to be repeated in other rainforest across the world.

The Brazilian military dictatorship described the Amazon as the “green frontier” and encouraged a lot of capitalists to get very rich from hyper exploiting it. In a recent statement to a Brazilian newspaper Silva points the finger at the governor of Mato State claiming that he has made a fortune from destroying the rainforest. Blairo Maggi (and I didn’t make that up) is also one of the world’s biggest soy producers and to grow soy in the Amazon you have to chop down trees, release carbon, reduce rainfall and start to make a desert within 30 years. Capitalist logic! Wouldn’t it be great

Silva’s successor Carlos Minc is the sort of man who like to cut through red tape and apparently set a local record for granting building permits for a petrochemical plant in Rio state – just the sort of treehugger you’d want to preserve a forest that is one of the principal climate regulators on the planet.

12 responses to “The Brazilian environment minister and you”

  1. So all we need is workers power in, ooh, about 15 years time, to avoid being fucked?

    Like

  2. Well something like that or at the very least an emergecny plan that can only be enforced by workers’ power. It really does seem like it’s a choice between socialism or barbarism.

    Scary…

    Like

  3. Muon – maybe it’s because most lefties don’t get the science that we haven’t yet integrated this existential threat into our politics. It is alarming that the comments policy on this site has generated more furore than the fact that gigatonnes of carbon will be released so accelerating global warming.

    Like

  4. I reckon we should create a mass movement of direct action to save the world powered with the same sort of desperation and idealism that inspired the Aldermaston marches, the mass movements against the bomb, the Vietnam war etc.

    The very survival of humanity as we know it is at stake.

    Mass movements cannot of course be wished out of thin air. I think direct action stunts like closing down petrol stations- we did it re the Iraq war locally, it’s quite easy to do- and other such stunts may be an idea. They’re good fun; they draw new people in and have an immediate palpable effect.

    As for the left infighting amongst themselves well- with honourable exceptions such as your good self Liam- I’m getting really frustrated with the whole damn lot of them. We’re what-0.01 % of the population- that’s if the organised left make 6000 which is probably generous.

    There’s a daily war going on- trade unionists being murdered, rainforests razed, 30 000 kids dying every day from easily preventable diseases. Imagine a disaster in Britain with all the corpses piling up in Wembley stadium- it would be a national event scarring our conscience for generations. yet it happens every fucking day without a murmur of attention from the media.

    We’re wiping out whole species- we’re fucking up the future and yet what is happening?

    Sometimes I think we need to rip up the whole bloody lot and start again. OK borrow from lessons of the past and the inspiring stories but ditch the dogmatism and basically start again

    Of course if I want a response on here I should say it’s all the fault of the SWP/Galloway/ any other demon of your choice

    But the rest of society if they ever blunder onto one of our arguments will just think you lot are just mad/weirdo/ saddos who can’t see reality in the face

    We ought to star engaging with people’s everyday concerns, their sense of rage and helplessness whether its rubbish piling up outside their house, gas bills going up again, mortgages rising while house prices fall, war, global destruction

    Anyway enough of my rant I’ll get back to having a beer and watching a documentary about The Who on the telly.

    Best of luck with the Heathrow demo tomorrow. That’s important. Unfortunatley I’ve got a dayschool for my OU course- I was going to get one of those cheap flights down to join in later

    Like

  5. ‘Muon – maybe it’s because most lefties don’t get the science that we haven’t yet integrated this existential threat into our politics. It is alarming that the comments policy on this site has generated more furore than the fact that gigatonnes of carbon will be released so accelerating global warming.’

    I’d agree to some extent, although the fact that the science gets contested (by wankers) doesn’t help. I know of a head of geography in a grammar school who shows all the kids that Channel 4 RCP influenced climate sceptic documentary.
    But I think that the massive gap between day to day bread and butter concerns of workers and what needs to be done is what makes building a real mass social movement around this hard.

    I do take some reassurance from the fact that awareness around the issue has increased so much, (I never used to have the urge to set fire to 4 x 4’s for example) but my greatest hope is that the oil price hike will buy us some time.

    Oh and exclusive business class airline silverjet have gone bust, stranding loads of yuppy wankers. Good.

    Where did you get the specific figures from in the original post? Some of them seem extremely specific, and specificity in climate modelling seems a hazardous business imo.

    Like

  6. ‘I was going to get one of those cheap flights down to join in later’
    Tell me that’s irony. Of course it is..

    Like

  7. We had an interesting discussion about this in our (sadly short-lived) socialist reading group in Swindon last year.

    personally i think it is a mistake to assume that climate change can only be addressed under socialism.

    A change of political will within the American or European political establishment to seeing combatting climate change as being equivelent to a war could lead to a big boost on state spending that would be economically beneficial, and the new technocolgy for reducing emissions, such as clean burn coall fired power stations could be massively profitable.

    Like

  8. Muon: Yeah it was slightly crap joke. Sorry!
    Andy: Will some companies be theoretically able to make profits out of technology? Of course. It would be better though if these innovations could be used for free by all- indeed it may become a necessity. So we would fight for this.,

    Other companies profits are directly at loggerheads (excuse the pun) with conservation- e.g. palm oil production in Indonesia. Is it possible that some individual companies or capitalists can become enlightened? Sure. I just wouldn’t bank on it!

    We should put demands on our rulers to take the massive emergency measures to reverse climate change, to deal with the fall-out of already irreversible change and green our own workplaces by taking them over.
    Can capitalism survive if some such measures are taken? Possibly. But we’d need to build mass movements to enforce these measures and we may in the process discover better ways of doing things.
    In other words can the capitalist class be forced into taking change? Yes probably. But it would take such a massive mobilisation such that social revolution is on the cards. In which case we may as well go the whole way. And some measures such as democratic planning and community control of resources are not compatible with capitalism.
    It’s a variation in the classic permanent revolution thesis!

    Like

  9. a variation in the classic permanent revolution thesis!

    “But I think that the massive gap between day to day bread and butter concerns of workers and what needs to be done is what makes building a real mass social movement around this hard. ”

    Muon, I think that’s it in a nutshell.

    Of course in many countries workers or peasants suffering from floods, landslides, depleted fishing stock, decreasing yields- there is a direct link.

    But still it’s about organising islands of resistance then joining the dots.

    And here and many other industrialised countries where it has not yet become a day to day urgent issue it’s about making bridges between now and the future by showing that immediate short term reforms that are about day to day concerns- whether fighting racism, better working conditions, fights over fuel payments, quality of life issues, crime and control of our lives- that fighting on all these can and should be integrated with fighting for a better future and a better world.

    I think many people do care about the bigger picture but can’t see how to join the dots or even get around to it because so bogged down in more pressing concerns.

    When we learn for ourselves that all these things are connected it begins to make sense

    Thanks for your insights, Muon

    Like

  10. ‘personally i think it is a mistake to assume that climate change can only be addressed under socialism’

    It’s obviously possible to imagine a massive shift by our rulers towards a form of low carbon capitalism. It’s just that in practice, competition between both firms and nation states makes it very unlikely to actually happen. Any section of capital that carries on the old way will have a big advantage in the short term.

    And some individual capitalists (those that own power stations for the most part) would benefit from coal with ‘capture and storage’ technology. But the ones that had to buy the energy would lose out, and would have a strong short-term incentive to find some old fashioned carbon-profligate energy supply.

    I think that Chris Harman summed up the problem when reviewing Monbiots excellent book ‘Heat’ which has some excellent technical suggestions. He called it a revolutionary programme to deal with climate change, but sadly lacking any suggestions as to the agency that would implement the programme (ps I’m paraphrasing..).

    So its the working class or bust I reckon.

    Like

  11. Muon – I am not able to make a useful judgement on the science but the information I’ve cited comes from a book called The Weather Makers by Tim Flannery. George Monbiot often makes the point that our appreciation of the extent of the problem is changing rapidly and the level of carbon reduction required by 2030 is in the order of 90% of current levels.

    Of course some type of capitalist solution is possible but we can guarantee that it will be the world’s poor who will pay for it.

    Like

  12. “some type of capitalist solution is possible”

    May be but given that it would mean taking on the big logging companies, the big oil companies and in effect intervening in the market I think only a mass movement will be able to force the capitalists to act.

    We need to make specific demands and mobilise for them- if the capitalists give in on some then that will be progress. If- as I think is far more likely- they can’t or they won’t then by organising around these demands we win workers to the idea of having to have an alternaive political system based on workers’ democracy.

    On the science this seems quite interesting though it focuses on the US it makes more general points.

    Click to access Scientific%20Assessment%20FULL%20Report.pdf

    Climate change is already a disaster for many of the world’s poor facing effects of deforestation- lowered soil fertility, flooding and lack of fuel.

    Like

Leave a comment

Trending