track_snake skrev:
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.
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.
track_snake skrev:
And I said sugarcane occupies 10% of the best farmland in Brazil.
Of coarse you did
track_snake skrev:
That translates to 2.3% of total arable land.
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.
track_snake skrev:
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.htmlI 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.
track_snake skrev:
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
Oh yes those big bad sugar barons, they are so much more evil than big oil aren't they.
/Aryan