 |
| Fires detected from August 2018 to 2019 |
An increased rate of wildfires from global warming, along with intentional fires by farmers and organizations for agriculture, have attracted a considerable amount of attention from the media in the past few weeks. Global warming is by no means a new topic, yet the conditions continue to worsen every year, with the Arctic melting at a historic rate, warming twice as fast as the rest of the world. In order to meet higher demands for soy and cattle, many farmers are setting fires in the Amazon as a form of deforestation. This is also occurring in Indonesia, as well as many other countries.
It has long been a high value of the United States to fix the problems that we have, as demonstrated by our thirty-three amendments to the United States Constitution. Yet as long as global warming has been denounced as a serious problem, I do not think we have taken sufficient action, especially being seen as one of the leading nations of the world.
Questions:
1) What is your opinion on Brazil President Jair Bolsonaro's statement: "No country in the world has the moral right to talk about the Amazon. You destroyed your own ecosystems"?
2) What do you think is the right course of action to protect ecosystem in the coming years?
3) Do you think there is a turnaround for this continually worsening issue?
New York Times Article
TIME Article
I understand where Bolsonaro’s statement is coming from because the Amazon is Brazil’s territory and no leader would want to be told how they should handle situations regarding their territory. According to this Forbes article I found, a lot of the information we are seeing in the media is not completely accurate. For example, “the Amazon producing 20% of the world’s oxygen” is not correct according to Daniel Nepstad, an executive director at the Earth Innovation Institute. According to him, the Amazon does produce a lot of oxygen, but it also “uses the same amount of oxygen through respiration” (Forbes), so it’s not producing any extra oxygen for us. When Bolsonaro was making his statement, I think he was trying to say that the world shouldn’t be talking about the Amazon when they actually don’t know what the facts are, and that each nation should be focusing on their own environmental problems, but he really could have worded it to be less direct.
ReplyDeleteI have to disagree with Marisa: though she makes a good point that each country should have a priority on their own environmental issues, because anything that impacts the environment will impact us all it is valid for people to voice their concerns about what other country’s leaders are doing with regards to the environment. However, though what countries like Indonesia are doing by burning forests are certainly harmful, larger developed countries should hold responsibility for their actions as well, and actually do something about it.
ReplyDeleteBolsonaro has a disregard for the environment: part of his platform was to give farmers more land by removing protective environmental laws, and since taking office he has repealed them. And because of this I believe citizens from outside of Brazil are valid to criticizing him and his actions. In addition, the loss of large parts of Amazons is not solely because of oxygen, but the loss of biodiversity and indigenous people's homes being destroyed by the fire (https://survivalinternational.org/news/12209), as well as how the addition of a large amount of carbon dioxide from the fires will only speed up climate change.
At this point, I do not believe there is a turnaround: the best case scenario would be to mitigate the effects.
I have no comment as for the argument Bolsonaro is putting out, but as for your third question, I sadly do not believe there is a way to turn this around before the deadline of 2020 deemed by scientists as a good deadline to reach to be able to bring climate change to its equillibrium. Although,"The UK government believes it can use the opportunity of COP26, in a post-Brexit world, to show that Britain can build the political will for progress, in the same way the French used their diplomatic muscle to make the Paris deal happen." Like what Audrey said to just mitigate effects of global warming is our best option and as technology improves, I believe it can be done. The reason I believe it wont be possible to reach that 2020 deadline is mostly because of the loss of basic agreement between nations, this is a global issue but many of our leaders simply aren't doing anything and show any signs of doing so. Like you said Bolsonaro is repealing laws to help suppress this, although the UK is doing things as well as China, the US who is an emission releasing giant seems to not want to even try to do anything with Trump declining to attend the climate group G7 summit to talk about the crisis. All we can do right now is what is provided as well as hope our leaders have a light bulb moment.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Audrey in that people from other countries have the right to criticize Bolsonaro. Every effort to preserve forests is helping to combat climate change which affects the entire planet. Given that the Amazon is the largest rainforest in the world, it should be one of our top priorities to preserve. I think that Bolsonaro is making the $20 million in aid personal, when it's really just to help conserve the rainforest--the wildlife, the numerous unidentified plants that have the potential to cure diseases, the greenery that takes in CO2, the indigenous people, etc. It's almost as if the president is concerned more about his and the country's ego than about the rainforest itself. He fired the head of the space agency that released data showing a 278% increase in deforestation because it made the country's image look bad. It's important to look at data like that in order to take the next best steps and to accept help when the rest of the world's fate is on the line.
ReplyDeleteIt's good that people recognize climate change as the influential factor. President Bolsonaro is completely correct in saying that first world countries like the US have destroyed their own ecosystems. I also agree that these countries don't have a moral right to talk about the Amazon. The more important reason people talk about the Amazon is not from a sense of morality or sanctimonious superiority over Brazil, but because the issue at hand is a threat to all people across the world. There is no end-all-be-all solution to this problem, but there could be a turnaround should it pass through the House. The Energy Innovation and Carbon Dividend Act is not up to vote yet, but it is an important bill to note if you are interested. Of course more must be done, but this bill is a good start to a possible turnaround.
ReplyDeleteIn regards to Bolsonaro's quote, I think that while other countries do have a right to speak out against the conditions in the Amazon rainforest, I think in terms of trying to solve this issue, countries should be focusing on how they can help to lessen the damaging effects of climate change. In response to the third question, I think since the effects of climate change will only continue to worsen, there isn't really a way for there to be a turnaround. The warming of the Earth will only increase as the years go by, so I think the best thing that we can do is work to lessen the effects of climate change on our environment. By reducing the amount of fossil fuels being burnt into the atmosphere and being consciously aware of how to treat the environment better, I think it would help to minimize the effects of climate change.
ReplyDeleteI think Bolsonaro's comment is ridiculous and inappropriate, because we all live on the same planet, breath the same air, and face the same devastating impacts on the environment. Therefore, every single person on this planet has an obligation to preserve the Earth our species and many others live on. I think the focus should definitely be placed on containing the fires in Brazil, as well as trying to halt the rapid and deteriorating effects of climate change. This could mean reducing carbon dioxide emittance, and producing more biodegradable waste rather than plastics and styrofoam. While I do believe that we can help stop the issue from worsening, I do not believe that all of the damage done can be completely reserved. Our planet has been permanently destroyed because of human action.
ReplyDeleteI believe that while countries can have their own opinions about how other governments handle environment crisis such as this. However, since this affects all countries in the world, countries do have a right to criticize the Brazilian government’s actions. This crisis can be used as an example of the growing need to do something about protecting our ecosystems. Therefore, I believe that the best way to achieve this is through more legislation for environmental protection. Not only do we need legislation, the government also needs to properly enforce these laws. Personally, I believe that there may be a turn around if the governments of the world work together to solve the problem of carbon emissions and prevent the destruction of ecological destruction.
ReplyDeleteI think Bolsonaro's statement is somewhat thoughtless. In this time of crisis, he should be working to solve the problem, not becoming defensive about his practices. However, his position is understandable. He is being held to standards that other nations don't seem to hold themselves to. Furthermore, according to BBC, he actually has been working to solve the problem: he banned fire-based land clearing for 60 days, accepted 4 Chilean firefighting aircraft, and sent 44,000 soldiers to fight fires. Unfortunately, it still seems he is letting political issues get in the way, as he denied aid from the G7 due to a dispute with the French president.
ReplyDeleteProtecting the ecosystem is a difficult process. There are already many efforts to raise awareness, but "green" products have become a marketing point more than an actual environmental protection practice. Even if awareness is raised, companies will simply do the bare minimum to be able to market their products as eco-friendly. Instead, there should be a financial incentive to protect the environment. To do this, we need better technology, benefits for environmentally friendly practices, and more difficulty in engaging in environmentally harmful ones.
I don't think we can prevent many of the forecasted results of climate change. There are simply too many greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. Trying to stop catastrophic climate change is already a lost cause. Reversal will be a very slow process incorporating many technologies that do not exist yet. Not only will we have to stop damaging the earth, we will need to reverse the damage that has been done.
While Balsonaro’s statement does hold some truth, I believe that other countries should still have the right to be concerned about the Amazon, further bringing more attention to the issue. The Amazon ultimately affects our entire planet’s ecosystem, which obviously includes every country, and the burning of it poses as a serious threat to our planet in that it is causing extreme damages. With that, I believe that all countries do have the right to be involved in resolving this issue. I believe that there needs to be many immediate changes that need to be made in the coming years. I think something that’s really important in our ecosystem is reducing waste in our oceans. There are many ways in achieving it that almost anyone can do, but it’s just a matter of these actions being carried out. Lastly, I do believe that this issue can be stopped. However, I don't think that the damage done can be reversed.
ReplyDeleteIn terms of Bolsonaro's ecological statement against other countries, I believe that he has strong reason in saying so. In the context that other countries had been criticizing Brazil for neglecting their environment, it is absolutely hypocritical to say such a thing. Every single country on this Earth has been neglecting the environment in one way or another. There is no place for criticism as the deterioration of the ecosystem is only the problem of every nation. In the following years, I believe that there must be a stronger coalition of countries that focus on protecting and restoring the environment i.e. similar to the Paris accord. In that way, countries feel more obligated to support one another in a time of crisis. At this point of time, however, there is not enough progress or effort being made by the most influential countries to revert the disastrous effects against the environment. Only time will tell where humanity takes Earth.
ReplyDeleteI think President Jair Bolsonaro's statement is absolutely justified. We as humans are the ones who have been destroying our planet, causing global warming, wildfires, etc. It is through our careless behavior such as by driving cars and buses that pollutes our (previously) fresh, clean air to a sky filled with smog. Take the city of Los Angeles for example; over the past few years people have been starting to be more conscious of how much smog they produce, however years ago, the air in LA was alway grey and brown... This did not just happen out of nowhere; we have been the ones harming our planet. Additionally, I think that as far as this global issue, if we really, ad truly try, we could help our planet to at least fix some of the errors. However, there are some aspects that are irreparable and we, along with our planet, are forced to suffer the consequences of our poor actions.
ReplyDeletePresident Bolsonaro's statement, while correct, does not excuse or justify his behavior whatsoever. His comment is actually extremely hypocritical because he is implementing protectionist economic policies currently while not only destroying the Amazon, but encouraging its destruction for financial gain. The Amazon is his responsibility, and a comment based in projection and hypocrisy doesn't protect him from the consequences of destroying such a beautiful and unique ecosystem. A few companies have already stopped doing business with farmers from the Amazon in order to express their opposition to the practice and to enact real, fast impacts on the farmers who have burning down the Amazon. H&M, VF Corporation (parent company to Timberland, Vans, and North Face), and Mowi (one of largest seafood companies worldwide) are a few examples. Luckily, this is due to consumers' opposition to practices in the corporate world that have favored monetary gain over fair environmental practices, as companies have begun to reflect this as well. These types of actions, along with sanctions and other removals of trade systems from other countries will also impair Brazil economically, and force them to reconsider and hopefully rescind their policies surrounding the Amazon.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Balsonaro’s statement, I believe that it does hold some sort of truth; however, it is still inappropriate. Balsonaro’s comment is a little selfish and thoughtless, in my opinion, because we all live on the same planet, breathe the same air, and suffer the impacts on the environment. Since this affects all countries in the world, countries do have a right to criticize the decisions of the Brazilian government. There is not a turnaround for this worsening issue because you can go back in time to fix problems, thus this problem of climate change will continue to worsen. A possible way to slow down the effects of climate change could be reducing the amount of carbon dioxide emittance and more legislation to protect the environment.
ReplyDeleteThere is an irony to President Jair Bolsonaro's statement, which to a degree contains some truth. However, I personally do not agree with the statement in its entirety. It is up to us to be able to now scrutinize the policies being made around us. We can’t go forward is we can’t acknowledge our own mistakes and make amends. To ignore the problem of climate change and other pressing issues we face is denial. Governments and citizens need to be taking part in ways to slow down and minimize environmental damage, in order to prevent help the climate issues we are now facing.
ReplyDelete