-----------------------------
TIME is one of the most respectable magazines in the world. It is probably only you and a few others who think the link is laughable...

But what I am saying is that there is a connection between expansion of sugar cane plantations and cattle and soybeans expanding into the Amazon.

The link is OK, the laughabale is that claim it is a basis for decision making. I prefer to listen to scientist and experts actually doing research into the matter




Yes, and you'd still be wrong. Not even the Time article supports you in this belief.

What?

So you think that TIME is not listening to scientists?

Well, my respect for TIME Magazine is greater than that.

The connection is there even if it is indirect. Cattle ranchers are filling up empty spaces after illegal loggers in the Amazon region. Soybean farmers are moving in when cattle ranchers are leaving. And sugar barons are buying more arable land from cattle ranchers and soybean farmers in the sugarcane farming regions of Brazil. To expand their sugarcane plantations as an answer to increased demand for ethanol fuel.

One of the reasons why soybean farmers are looking for more land (in the Amazon) is that soybean farming is fast increasing in Brazil partly due to that US soybean farmers have shifted to corn for ethanol encouraged by subsidies in the US. That is highlighted in the TIME article.

Stupid authorizataining, find you own arguments instead.
The main problem is the loggers, the cattle ranchers and finally the soybean industri, everybody understands that.
A dollar spent in controlling them is much more effective than hunting sugarcane farmers.

The cattle ranchers sell their land in Mato Grosso to expanding sugarcane plantations. They invest their money in the Amazon region where they get much more land for the same money.

This is the so-called 'spreading effect'. I didn't say the main culprit are the sugar barons. This is a process involving illegal loggers, cattle ranchers, soybean farmers and sugar barons.

Illegal logging is according to Mongabay.com only responsible for 3% of the depletion of Amazon rainforest. They blame cattle ranchers much more ordering the clearing of Amazon land and using illegal loggers for that. Soybean farmers usually take over the land after a few years when the cattle move to another recently cleared strip of land.

The expansion of sugarcane plantations is the background driving force for the expansion of cattle ranching and soybean farming into the Amazon.

/track_snake

(My underlining.)

These two statements seem to contradict eachother..

If you just have a look at the area of amazon area that disapears and compair that to the area used for sugercane production – 1% of Brazils arable land – you can very easy see that your assumptions are wrong.

/Aryan

The area of the rainforest in the Amazon that disappeared in 2007 is about equal to the state of Massachusetts.

It is about 10% of the high-quality agriculture land in Brazil that is used for sugarcane plantations. And it is widely recognized that my statements are correct.

/track_snake

So you think that TIME is not listening to scientists?

Well, my respect for TIME Magazine is greater than that.

Those that have discussed with you before know that you have a hard time keeping facts and fiction apart but that you a star in googling for suspect oil industry supporting articles, but this time you even surprise me in stating so much foolishness and in one reply.

2,3% of Brazils arable land is used for sugarcane (no not 10% yet!) and less han half of it, 1% of Brazils arable land is used for ethanol production, ca 80.000 sq km by 2008 see
http://www.brazilintl.com/agsectors/sug ... arcane.htm

Here is a list of the annual forest loss of the amazon area according to mongabay.com http://rainforests.mongabay.com/amazon/ ... tions.html

No data for 2007 jet, but as you can see unfortunately a whopping 600.000 sq km rainforest have been lost since 1970 , ca 17.000 sq km each year.

It has taken thirteen years from 1993-2006 to triple sugarcane production, lets say all this increase was not because the sugarcane industry has become more efficient (which it has) but solely because more arable land has been used, than only 2000 sq km was needed each year to compensate for the increased production, while almost ten times as much rainforest has been cut down in the meantime..




By looking at the graphs above it is obvious that even with a vivid fantasy like yours it is not even possible to imply a distant correlation in the grow of sugarcane production and the amount of deforestation in the Amazon area, let alone that one could point out any causation.

/Aryan

This last graph is showing the sugar production. Sugarcane for ethanol should be added to that; but still the majority of sugarcane harvests are for traditional sugar production in Brazil.

This last graph is showing the sugar production. Sugarcane for ethanol should be added to that; but still the majority of sugarcane harvests are for traditional sugar production in Brazil.

And I said sugarcane occupies 10% of the best farmland in Brazil.

That translates to 2.3% of total arable land.

As I said, it is not only me that make the connection between sugarcane and rainforest depletion in the Amazon. It is made by so many other; including this:

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news ... hanol.html

Of course you cannot single out sugarcane only as responsible for the Amazon deforestation. It is a combination of illegal loggers, cattle ranchers, soybean farmers and sugar barons.

/track_snake

If you totally disregard the increase of production per hectare and just do the simple math not even a distant correlation between in the grow of sugarcane production and the amount of deforestation in the Amazon area can be proved, let alone that one could point out any causation.

Whatever you say, total sugarcane production of which less than half is used for ethanol production has not even tippled since 1990.

If you totally disregard the increase of production per hectare and just do the simple math not even a distant correlation between in the grow of sugarcane production and the amount of deforestation in the Amazon area can be proved, let alone that one could point out any causation.



Of coarse you did



Glad we can get that right then, it also translates to less than 1% of Brazils area. Less than 0,5% of Brazils area is used for ethanol production, just to get that picture right.

And to make it complete 0,2% of Brazils total area has been cut down in the Amazon rainforest each year! the last 40 years.



I do not even have to check this link to know that it does not give any scientific support to your valse accusations that sugarcane ethanol should be the cause of deforestation in the Amazon rainforest and neither did George Monbiot because it is just not true.



Oh yes those big bad sugar barons, they are so much more evil than big oil aren't they.

/Aryan

The expansion of sugarcane plantations is the background driving force for the expansion of cattle ranching and soybean farming into the Amazon.

/track_snake