Thread by @ShellenbergerMD

The photos you saw weren't of today's fires in Brazil

Amazon isn't the "lungs of the world"

Deforestation is 75% below 2004 peak

*Forest* fires not increasing

Fires 7% more than decadal ave.

Here's why everything they say about the Amazon is wrong

forbes.com/sites/michaels…

Some people are reacting to this article by misrepresenting what it says and why I wrote it. I wrote it because I love Brazil & the Amazon. As background, I did fieldwork in the state of Maranhão, which is considered the semi-Amazon, from 1992 - 1995.

I lived in small farming communities whose land was threatened by larger invading farmers, and who were occupying unused lands. I was seeking to understand why some communities were more successful than others.

I first visited Latin America when I was 17. I persuaded my high school principal to let me spend the fall semester of my senior year in Nicaragua to learn Spanish and witness the Sandinista revolution up close.

At the time, I had a very romantic view of small farmer life.

Over time, I came to appreciate how hard life is for people who do not have electricity & running water

Women & children spend many hours pumping & hauling water, washing clothes by hand, chopping & hauling word & tending cooking fires

While I lost my romanticism my political radicalism remained. I went to Brazil four years later (1992) and started to do research in small farmer communities because I was inspired by the Landless People's Movement (MST) and Workers Party (PT)

Over the next several years I grew close to the leadership of the MST and PT and even interviewed Lula, who would be elected president in 2002

But my youthful romanticism of country life disappeared the longer I spent living with small farmers engaged in the kinds of slash-and-burn agriculture that celebrities are today denouncing

Life is hardest for women and children but the men suffer too. The work is hot & difficult. They drink copious quantities of cachaça, Brazilian rum made from sugar cane, to tolerate the work of cutting down scrub forest, which they will later burn to create pasture and crop lands

Don't get me wrong. There is sublime romance and beauty in the poorest and most difficult of settings, including in the burning Amazon and semi-Amazon

But it is dangerous to romanticize the Amazon as a kind of Eden, empty of all humans save the indigenous living in total harmony with nature, as celebrities and global elites do

Life is hard & often very short. People suffer from malnutrition, dehydration & preventable diseases

It is dangerous because it results in all sorts of over-reactions — like sending in the military when funding grassroots fire brigades would be more effective, or seeking to "put out" all the fires when some of the fires are vital for people's survival.

I wish @Madonna @LeoDiCaprio @Cristiano @EmmanuelMacron would visit Brazil, speak to local people about their lives, and talk to experts like @dnepstad1 who have dedicated their lives to understanding the situation on the ground.

Thanks to all for listening & caring.

/END

To those confused by "lungs of world" myth, consider reading this terrific scientific overview by Oxford scientist @ymalhi

Malhi says that while there are lots of reasons to be concerned about fires in the Amazon, oxygen supply is not one of them:

yadvindermalhi.org/blog/does-the-…

@ymalhi Bottom line:

- "Amazon consumes about as much oxygen as it produces"

- 60% of oxygen used by plants & 40% by microbes breaking down dead leaves & wood

- "Net contribution of the Amazon ECOSYSTEM (not just the plants alone) to the world's oxygen is effectively zero"

@ymalhi "The atmosphere is awash with oxygen, at 20.95% or 209,500 ppm (parts per million)" and so "burning up whole Amazon rainforest would use up around 240 Pg C of oxygen, causing oxygen concentrations to drop 0.02% an almost negligible amount bc there is so much oxygen in atmosphere"

Germany
- replaced its forests with farms & ranches
- emits 4x more CO2 per cap
- condemns Brazil, hypocritically

This is the story of how the EU, Greenpeace & celebrities worsened the fires & deforestation by dehumanizing the Amazon

My latest!

forbes.com/sites/michaels…

“Leftist President Rousseff began to roll back federal environmental enforcement in the name of economic development upon assuming office in 2011... her government had shut 91 of 168 Ibama field offices as of 2012.“

reuters.com/article/us-bra…

"Since 1980... Brazilian rice production went up 43%, but its cropland decreased 70%."

"The corn productivity gain alone prevented the cultivation of an area almost the size of California."

Why doesn't anyone ever talk about the good news?!

wsj.com/articles/how-t…

"Nor is deforestation spiraling out of control. It picked up again under Brazil’s new president, a trend worth monitoring but hardly the onset of catastrophe. A few voices, most notably Mike Shellenberger resisted the dominant narrative"

✊❤️ @RichLowry

nationalreview.com/2019/08/amazon…

Me on television explaining why everything they said about the Amazon is wrong

tvnz.co.nz/one-news/world…

Good news from the Amazon — will media properly report it?

- Fires in the Amazon *declined* 36% in September from August
- Since 1998, fires usually *increase* in September
- Government fire-suppression working
- Yes, fires in Cerrado increased but it’s savanna not rainforest

News the media find too horrible to report:

- Area burned globally *declined* 25%, from 2003 to 2019

- World has been *re-foresting* for 35 years

- Area of the Earth covered with forest has *increased* by an area the size of Texas and Alaska combined

forbes.com/sites/michaels…

“Surely it’s good that celebrities raised awareness?”

No. What occurred was media manipulation on a grand scale

French farmers wanted President @EmmanuelMacron to kill trade deal with Brazil & he used Amazon fires as excuse to do so

forbes.com/sites/davekeat…

Europe developed through deforestation & fossil fuels but is telling Brazil not to develop through deforestation & fossil fuels

Conservationists should support farming in Cerrado savanna to reduce forest fragmentation in Amazon but are too dogmatic

forbes.com/sites/michaels…

Deforestation in Amazon was worse than it needed to be due to @Greenpeace dogmatism

By requiring that ranchers and farmers leave 50% to 80% of the forest standing, environmentalists pushed ranches and farms deeper into the forest.

And fragmentation is a major threat to endangered species loss. Big cats and other large mammal species need continuous not fragmented habitat to survive and thrive.

Intensifying ag in the more productive and less biodiverse Cerrado might spare rain forest in the Amazon.

/END

How is California the environmental hero & Brazil the villain?

Per capita CO2 (MMt) 2018
-Brazil: 9.6
-Calif.: 12

% zero-CO2 electricity
-Brazil: 79%
Calif: 52%

Old-growth forest (ha)
-Brazil: 476,573,000
-Calif: 1,011,714

Income per cap
-Brazil: $15k
-Calif: $36k

Califórnia é o herói ambiental e o Brasil o vilão?

CO2 per capita (MMt) 2018
Brasil: 9,6
Calif: 12

% de eletricidade com CO2 zero
Brasil: 79%
Calif: 52%

Floresta de crescimento antigo (ha)
Brasil: 476.573.000
Califórnia: 1.011.714

Renda per cap (US$ mil)
Brasil: 15
Calif: 36

Fontes/Sources

latimes.com/environment/st…

ww3.arb.ca.gov/cc/inventory/p…

fs.fed.us/r5/rsl/publica…

rainforests.mongabay.com/deforestation/…

xinhuanet.com/english/2018-1…