wondering where the sponsor slot is?? well I I don't want my videos to sell you stuff you don't need! vids like this are made entirely with the support of patrons like Anton Raichuk. join Anton here: www.patreon.com/ClimateAdam and while I'm thanking people, huge thanks to Richard Betts (coauthor of the first study) for his feedback on the script. find him on twitter, insta and threads @richardabetts
What if the environmentalists and these native cultures don't agree? Some environmentalists like Peter Singer oppose hunting on moral principle, but of course native cultures widely practice it. So what happens when environmentalism and native cultures split?
It just makes me cry that even in the 80s I already had "save the rainforest" stickers plastered all over my school supplies, and yet 40 years later here we are.
@@richardallan2767 Surely that's not what they meant. I'd expect the lies they're mentioning are bezos's and other people's greenwashing campagns. But i don't know maybe that's just my wishful thinking
Love this video, Adam! As someone who has spent a month in the Amazon, I’m really passionate about the conservation of the rainforest. Another point to highlight is the fact that it’s a home to so many medicinal plants including powerful psychedelics like ayahuasca which are ceremonially used by many indigenous tribes there.
wow that must have been an incredible visit (carefully avoiding using the word "trip" here!). and for sure there is just so much we still have to learn from the rainforest and the people that live there.
Animal agriculture is the leading cause of deforestation, habitat destruction, water pollution, ocean dead zones and *species extinction* . -United Nations FAO
@@claudiaroedel1368 Animal agriculture uses 83% of global farmland and only provides 18% of global calories. When we switch to a plant based food system, we can restore/reforest 76% of global farmland AND be able to feed all humans. -journal Science
@@leviahimsa The problem with that statistic is cropping is a total use, were as land allocated to grazing is not always under use. For Example a cattle station in Australia can be the size of a small country on paper, but it is not grazed on every square meter all the time. The land is also mostly not viable to cropping. Not that you cant grow anything there at all. It is just not a even swap or a fair comparison based on area. I think the Journal of Science are stretching a bit with that concept.
@@raclark2730 Do you think most cows are grazing? The meat and milk from animals that rely solely on grazing provide just 1% of the world’s protein. FCRN If everyone in the US switched from grain-fed to pasture-fed beef, because they grow more slowly on grass, the number of cattle would have to rise by 30% and the land area used to feed them would rise by 270%. - Environmental Research Let. Even if the US felled all its forests, drained its wetlands, watered its deserts and annulled its national parks, it would still need to import most of its beef. Grass-fed cows’ diets contain more cellulose fibre compared to grain fed, requiring more fermentation to break the grass down, causing two to four times more methane to be released from the cows directly. Methane is much worse for global warming than carbon dioxide (CO2), as it has about 130 times more warming potential than CO2. Plus, they take longer to grow and reach slaughter weight so they live longer and therefore have higher overall lifetime emissions. Plus, they require around 41 percent more land than grain-fed cows. Cows alone are responsible for 70 percent of deforestation in Brazil, so choosing to eat grass-fed beef will further exacerbate this destruction. When it comes to the environment, grass-fed beef is not the lesser of two evils, and if you truly want to eat a sustainable diet, a plant-based diet is best as it produces fewer greenhouse gasses and requires far less land and water.
Oh, the goosebumps I got when you said “this fate isn’t sealed”. I’ve started doing street outreach with a local nonprofit. What else can I do? I wish I could snap my fingers and fix it. Thank you for what you do. You have a unique gift to offer because of your relatability combined with your education. Thank you for this information!
@@danrayson mmm, hugs. Pardon me for thinking this comment might not have been left with the intent to be helpful. It’s totally fine if you’d like to be like that. Thank goodness we’re separated by our keyboards!
@@danrayson do you believe it’s only youth who believe in climate change and veganism? They’re just the generation that stands to lose the most so understandably they care a great deal. I understand you may see it as propaganda. It’s possible I may think some of what you believe is propaganda.. Whatever happens, may the world benefit.
I love the constant reinforcement of "it's not too late and there is hope" but also the dose of reality of "things will be bad if we don't act *now*" in all your videos. It's so easy to lose hope, but I think it's worth remembering that anyone who does work related to climate change hasn't given up hope yet, so why should everyone else? If the people leading the fight are still fighting, then there's a fight, and a fight means hope!
You seemed to gloss over the effects of animal agriculture on deforestation. Switching to a plant based diet is best for the environment and definitely for the animals.
@@ClimateAdamif getting rid of fossil fuels keeps getting mentioned, why not they the need to eliminating animal husbandry? According to climate scientists that's the most direct anyone can take.
Also, on the individual level, we can add our grain of sand by reducing consumption of meat. In a globalised world our demand for meat translates into higher pressure on ecosystems.
Animal agriculture uses 83% of global farmland and only provides 18% of global calories. When we switch to a plant based food system, we can restore/reforest 76% of global farmland AND be able to feed all humans. -journal Science
Individualising systemic problems is why we're in this mess. Rich people and their evil economy must go-- the planet isn't burning because you ate a burger, it's burning because billionaires are destroying the world to profit from burgers, cars, fast fashion, shitty architecture, etc, etc...
The hydrological cycle isn't something that is fast or easy to fix. The soils are really poor and with the removal of the crazy amount of biomass the last organic matter could just wash away and not infiltrate if they finally get some rains. Let's see if they get summer temperatures this coming winter as well
The necessity of proving that its worth it to save the planet is mind boggling to me. Also, of course it makes us richer collectively to preserve ecosystems, but guess what ? Inequality actually means more concentration, means colossaly rich people feeding on us dying ..
@@AndreiPetcu_ Want to see some change? Get people to eat LESS meat. Many people think that won't work, but if advertising can raise sales and grow the industry, then eating less can shrink the industry too. You have more power than they want you to know.
@jimthain8777 Capitalist society conditions us to individualise systemic problems. Eating meat per se isn't the issue, industrial agriculture is. It's the profit motive that's wrecking the planet, not your failure to recycle that one bottle. We must abolish capitalism.
HHello Adam, I love your channel. Great video again. I am brazilian and I you like to mention that two of the great threats to amazon jungle is the grow of soybeans and the land for pasture ox. We grow soybeans to sell to China so they can feed their pigs and our cow meat is export all over the world. I also would like to say that things are getting better as we changed our government, the last one was a disatrous in all the aspects! Keep doing your great work. Congratulations!
Animal agriculture is the top cause of deforestation, habitat loss, and biodiversity loss! Most of the deforestation of the Amazon was caused by raising cows for beef and growing soy for farm animal feed. Brazil is a top exporter of beef and soy. 90% of soy grown there is used for farm animal feed! What could each of us do to help? Boycott animal products!
Climateadam, we cant keep growing the economy if we expect to get to net zero. The worlds resources aren't infinte. so thats why, if we keep growing the economy, infinitely, we will run out of resources leaving us to go to extinct. a new wellbeing economy is necessary, one that reduces production and consumption, and reforms government basically
And how do you force people to reduce consumptpion? A slippy dream, if you don´t wnat to use guns for that. We need realistic solutions to solve the global problems an not fairy tales.
In the terms of possible restoration, are there transition plant spp that are more drought tolerant that could be used for a kind of relay spp for rainforest spp?? Also as related to ag - more examples of soil building than can rebuild soil moisture make rainforest spp able to come back? (This to be done in tandem w climate mitigation you discussed)
Good points and all forests have pioneer species that grow in tree falls and other disturbances. Also if re planting is done within proximity of remnant vegetation the animals themselves will bring in more species by dispersal.
Hey Adam, love your work 👍🙏 I did an assignment about this very discussion in 1997! Back then, the situation was bleak!!! Off the top of my head, I'll try to remember what I learned... I'm bad at math, but back then, it was a '7x2'-fold effect???... 1. Deforestation: Deforestation was destroying the land-lungs of Earth by 20,000 square kilometres per year 2. It was being destroyed by slash and burn, which meant that not only were the lungs being destroyed, but the Amazon was turning from a storer of CO2 to a producer of CO2! So for every acre of forest we destroy, we not only lose an acre of CO2 absorbable land, but we also put the CO2 already in that land back into the air! Isn't this the same as saying that for every acre of forest lost is 2 acres of CO2 emitted into the atmosphere??? 2 acres or forest destroyed = 4 acres of CO2 emitted!? 3 acres of forest destroyed = 6 acres of CO2 emitted? 4 acres of forest destroyed = 8 acres of CO2 emitted? 3. It was being destroyed to produce cattle farms. Cattle produce methane gas. So... the storer of CO2 was being destroyed at 20,000 kilometres per year, turning it from the storer of CO2 to a producer of CO2 in order to produce methane gas! That's a triple effect (x2) right there!!! 4. Then... the cattle compact the soil, which prevents CO2 from being absorbed back into the soil to be stored. So... after the triple effect (x2) of destroying the lungs in order to produce CO2 emissions in order to produce methane, the cattle ranchers then made sure that no more CO2 could be absorbed back into their lands. This is a 4-fold (x2) effect!!! 5. Because the ground was being stripped of vegetation, there were no roots to hold the ground together to prevent erosion. So... erosion started to become out of control, which meant that the nutrients needed to regrow the forest was being washed away! 5th fold (x2)!!! 6. With the destruction of the forest came not only the destruction of diversity but the destruction and risk of extinction of key species that pollinated the forest. This is a 6-fold effect (x2)!!! 7 (a). The ranchers were violent and unaccountable: Back then the people and governments of south America said, 'How dare' the rest of the world tell south Americans that they don't have the right to economic survival when every other country on earth does?! So... not only was the 6-fold (x2) effect happening, and not only was there a lack of willingness to change, but the destroyers of the forest also ARGUED... in favour of destroying the forest to produce cattle! This is the 7th fold x 2!!! 7 (b). There was a famous rubber tapper and Union leader and environmentalist named Chico Mendes. He taught the locals how to sustainability tap rubber from the forest to create a sustainable income for South America... he was murdered by a cattle rancher in 1988!!! Adam... when you say there can be an economic boon for South America through sustaining the Amazon, you are really grasping for the 'rainbows and butterflies' straws!!! In the 1960s, there was a real and decisive and 'COLLECTIVE WILL' from America to strive to put an American on the moon! This 'COLLECTIVE WILL' came from an entire country having the same dream! And, the reason that the entire country had that dream and that 'collective will' in the first place was out of fear of nuclear war!!! America was losing the 'space race' to Russia! Russia had the better rockets!!! When speaking about a 'rainbows and butterfies' solution; it's not about feasibility nor viability... it's about who has the power!!! It's about convincing the murderous megalomaniac leopards in power to change their spots and give up the only power they know!!! That ain't happening without a war to overthrow them by a country that cares! The same FEAR that struck America during the space race needs to hit South America in order for there to be a 'COLLECTIVE WILL' to change!!! What's that going to take? What... is that... going to take??? Basically... I think that, in a world run by psychopaths, the entire human species is doomed to extinction!!!
EU ACABEI DE ENTREGAR TEU IP PARA AS FORCAS ARMADAS DO BRASIL AGORA. VOCÊ ESTÁ SENDO RASTREADO PELO GOVERNO DO BRASIL AGORA. VOCÊ TEM QUE LER DOUTOR DALRON ELERY VIRÃO BARROSO W87 WIKILEAKS E VOCÊ TEM QUE LER UMA MAYERIA DE 8 DE ABRIL DE 2023 E TAMBÉM DE 14 DE ABRIL DE 2024, MINISTRO DA RÚSSIA TRAZ 20 TONELADAS DE BOMBAS ATOMICAS EM AVIÃO DE CARGA MISTERIOSAS PARA O BRASIL.
I wonder what the character of Brazil’s new leadership is, how it compares to their old leadership, and how the difference between those characters relates to the larger climate-politics sphere 🤔🤔🤔
It's not about the "new leadership": Brazil is a parliamentarian democracy. And in both chambers climate deniers have a vast majority. And they have the power to destroy Amazon.
It has been showed too that around 2 out of 7 water cycles have been taken out. Amazon rain forest creates its own rain 7 times before the rain hits Andies and/or runs through Amazon river to the sea. And for worse the taken out rain zones are from the beginning of the cycle (Atlantic side is most deforested area). This is driving rapid scale droughts that will dry up the trees and make them vulnerable for fire. Rain forest itself does not burn, but after being dried up, it will burn and worsen situation rapidly. But yes, there is still lots that can be done. Firstly deforestation has to be stopped. If I were in power in Brasil all cleared areas since year 2000 should be given to government and reforested (satellite images). This would mean that any further deforestation would not give new land for large farms. And large scale new forest area too. Also at the same time all illegal activities should be put under strict control with army corps. All illegal profits that can be taken by legal means should be given to those who fight against this corruption and destruction. We are fighting against dying planet and the cause of most of us. Stop destroying our planet. There is one factor that we just started to realize. Amazon rainforest has been full of civilizations before (see drone mappings and the removal of the forest cover). And those ruins has been covered by rain forests. This may show a path how rain forests are resilient for at least town scale destruction. They have recovered before. But now the timescale is more dense and the climate is warming creating yet another threat layer. All of the current threats are manmade, so we have to act before it is too late.
This video didn't mention that under the previous administration, animal agriculture was the chief cause of deforestation between raising cows for beef, and growing soy for farm animal feed. Less than 10% of that soy was used for direct human consumption. Humans consume only 7% of the soy grown world wide. Brazil has been one of the top exporters of beef and soy. Lula is better, but the video said that only 34% of deforestation stopped under his administration at 6 months. What can each of us do to fight this source of deforestation and greenhouse gasses? Plant based diet!
Have you seen all the LIDAR images of the Amazon rain forest? The immense cities etc hidden by the rain forest? Before the Spnish turned up there about 500 years ago, there was nowhere near as much rain forest. Vast amounts of it was populated and it would appear that many of the trees in the Amazon are actually cultivated. As in they were put there by man for various reasons from food to materials such as timber. What would be really interesting is if someone works out how much more rain forest we have in the Amazon today, than they had for thousands of years before the Europeans arrived and all but killed everyone off who was living there. Allowing much of the rainforest one can see today, to grow to its current acreage.
"The immense cities" - you are exaggerating the size of the early cities in the Amazon. That they were as large as they were did come as a surprise, but they were still quite small compared to cities today.
Thank You on reviewing the Amazon, but how about presenting the second largest & still +/- intact rainforest? It's in the Congo DRC. Worth mentioning the 'black' continent's ecological benefits in research papers too before they disappear. As for working towards a Green Revolution, why not mentioning China's state-led socialist model? It first enabled 1.4bn people to prosper, but China's recent solar/wind/plantation projects are truly astonishing! Unlike UK's protectionist capitalistic model, which makes the majority poorer & profits the elites ... by criminalising environmental activists & expanding gas & oil explorations at a time of Climate Warming.
@@ValerioCordeirodosSantos. The Artic is in very bad shape: burning Taiga & melting Permafrost ... releasing massive amounts of CO2 & Methan. Just look up the recent Ural floods in Kazakhstan, etc. Antarctica is also melting at unprecedented speed. So, let's unite & protect forests worldwide, plant trees, invest in electrifying transport & industry NOW. Stop Ecocides & Genocides, urgently!
Good grief - plenty of time to keep below 1.5 degrees over pre,industrial levels? Except we have broken through 1.5 already. Ok, mot the 10 year average, but if you think there is going to be a reduction in the temperature over the next decade, then you have no understanding of the time lag involved in greenhouse gases. 1.5 is baked in. The real question is whether holding to 2 degrees is possible. It is great to be optimistic, but this channel is tilted towards a kind of fantasy which completely ignores massive social changes required to make the changes necessary.
Actually a 20-year average, apparently: "Back in 2015 in Paris, nearly 200 countries agreed to try to keep the rise in warming under 1.5C, to help avoid some of the worst climate impacts. That threshold in the Paris agreement is generally accepted to mean a 20-year average" -- BBC, "More climate records fall in world's warmest February"
@@UCCLdIk6R5ECGtaGm7oqO-TQ "Generally accepted" or playing with numbers t let the profits from fossil fuels and industrial mono-culture keep on flowing? I remember Paris and I don't remember any talk of a 20-year average.
@@UCCLdIk6R5ECGtaGm7oqO-TQ do ypu follow Paul Beckwith? He has some interesting things to say about this and also the changing of the baseline for "pre-industrial"
@@AlanBolshevik Yeah I've listened to a fair few of Paul's over recent months. There just seem to be a lot of differing views on how things should be calculated.
I live here in Amazonis since 9 years. My son is born here and the RDS Rio Negro is his home. I would be very glad, if your video is true. But I´m in deep concerne, especially about tje part with World Ressurces Institut Brasil. The paper is full of mistakes, and you adopt the errors in your video.
Green, sustainable economic growth in the Amazon? Including mining, agriculture, infrastructure, etc.? How do you envision that? 1. the obviously simplest point: mining. Take the supposedly most environmentally friendly type of mining - the planned potassium mine in Autazes. 10,000 tons a day are to be washed out in a few hundred meters. Nothing happens on the surface. But the 10,000 tons a day have to be removed - from a flood plain! Building roads and a port without destroying the environment? - And we're not even talking about land for drying, sewage, groundwater, etc.! 2. agriculture: Even if ecologically sustainable, the products have to be transported for commercial cultivation. This also requires the construction of roads. The asphalting of the BR-319 alone will destroy 50 km of virgin forest for every kilometer of road. And of the destroyed forest area, up to 100 km of virgin forest will be heated. 3. And we still can save the Amazon, but not with electo-capitalism and greenwashing!
SOLAR FTFW a single 50 watt panel in my WINDOW PANE with a switch and charge controller is enough to charge a 12 volt battery and run an inverter for LESS THAN $400. people are so brainwashed solar must be expensive and on their roof, nope you can start cheap and small and scale up. stop making excuses NOT to try solar!
Adam, can you explain what exactly power review is and how it might relate to the paper by ralph ellis. Dust, not co2 is driving climate.... or at least I think that is what he's saying.
Capitalism - root problem. Real democracy can be created when people get right to decide online about anything. Then they can heal from this addiction for more, which rules our minds world wide.
Agree. Online information gathering from multiple independent sources, free of advertisements, would give People unaltered Freedom of Choice when voting. There's a need for Sovereign Identity checks though, with this AI technology introduced online. Problem: online platforms like Google, RUclips & other Cloud Capitalists are not interested in Democracy, but in Maximising Profit.
"Brazil: Amazon deforestation drops 34% in first six months under Lula." (On screen text at the 11' 12" mark) I think most people assumed that it would have stopped completely when he took power!
@@ClimateAdam No doubt! Boycotting animal products allows each of us to speed the process. Brazil is a top exporter of beef and soy used almost exclusively for farm animal feed, which was a primary reason for the deforestation under the previous ruler.
@@someguy2135 It's exported by Cargill, the world's largest private corporation, and Cargill exports the soy mainly to China (for hogs) and Europe (for chickens).
@@someguy2135 Yes in the U.S. a corporate is a legal person protected by the Bill of Rights. Cargill is a tool of U.S. imperialism so Cargill operates in over 100 countries at any one time, just as the U.S. has over 700 military bases in over 100 other countries. I had an op-ed expose published on Cargill in the University newspaper where Cargill is headquartered. Then I had a follow up article published in a local newspaper. Stop Cargill’s destruction of the Amazon By Drew Hempel () | June 29, 2006 Print Email On May 22, Greenpeace, my former employer, took direct action against Cargill, shutting down their illegal soybean facility in the heart of the Amazon rainforest. As Greenpeace reports: “Our activists unfurled a banner on the conveyor belts at Cargill’s facility, but angry Cargill employees nearby blasted the sign down with high-powered hoses. Police arrived on the scene and arrested 16 of our activists. The Arctic Sunrise itself blockaded the Cargill port, preventing exports of soy from leaving the facility. In the nearby city of Santarém, a group of Cargill’s supporters surrounded the police station holding our activists, but were dispersed by military police.” Greenpeace activists were mobbed and attacked with pepperspray, but the action itself was based on two years of solid research tracking and exposing how the soybeans support KFC and McDonald’s chicken production. As Greenpeace reports: “Cargill, based in the United States, is the largest soy producer and exporter in the Amazon, operating 13 silos in the heart of the Amazon rainforest.” “Soy is now a leading cause of rainforest destruction in the Brazilian Amazon. In total, an estimated 12,000 square miles of what was once rainforest has already been destroyed, mostly illegally, to grow soybeans. Cargill makes no secret of helping establish soy farms in the Amazon, some of which are complicit in other illegal activities such as land grabbing and slavery.” I worked for Greenpeace in the Minneapolis office back in 1996 but Germany Greenpeace shut down all the U.S. Greenpeace canvass offices because in Germany only volunteer-based activism is emphasized. Considering the huge disinformation about Cargill in its headquarters, the Twin Cities, I think there should definitely be more paid research, supported by grassroots donations, to expose and stop Cargill’s destruction of the Amazon rainforest. The “Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy”, works on global trade agreements and they are located just off Nicollet and Franklin in Minneapolis. Supporting their work would be a great first step in helping solve this real catastrophe in global food policy. In 2000 I had an op-ed published in the Minnesota Daily while working there as a part-time staff writer. The op-ed gave a general expose on the structural crisis that Cargill is part off - how Cargill depends on a huge amount of tax subsidies, only to undermine family farmers, worldwide, creating massive starvation and dependence on the U.S. This is called the “Food for Peace” plan, set up by Hubert H. Humphrey for the Cold War politics. For example, Cargill dumped grain in Somalia at one-ninth the local farmer’s price, thereby greatly destroying the traditional subsistence economy of Somalia. Well, now Cargill is helping to cause global climate destabilization. The Amazon, through its unfathomable ecological complexity, creates 25 percent of the world’s oxygen and about the same of the world’s freshwater. Soybeans do not take in as much CO2 as the Amazon rainforest. I have a certificate on conservation biology and sustainable development from the School for Field Studies in Costa Rica after a semester of studying rainforest development issues in Fall of 1992. The rainforest crisis is the product of the U.S.-controlled International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, the CIA and large private corporations dependent on huge public tax infusions, like Cargill. Both my exposes of Cargill are still available to read freely online as “Cargill: Our taxes, global destruction” (, 2000) and “Cargill, Soybeans and the Destruction of the Amazon” (Pulse of the Twin Cities , 2004) To create radical policy change requires focused effort and my previous successes in environmental and social justice policy changes have come with a certain amount of backlash by the powers that be: sabotage of my email account, phone-tapping, threats of censorship and censorship, psychological warfare attacks and assault. Recently I had the pleasure of meeting a relative of the V.P. of Public Relations of Cargill whose job it is to “keep Cargill under the public radar,” as he described. So any action that citizens can take definitely makes a difference! I hope readers can join in the peaceful effort to change the current inertia about radical ecological sustainability. It will make our future much more peaceful.
Trees make rain and rain feeds trees well kinda and trees hold onto soil and provide homes for wild life. People its a tree what does it do other then sit there and grow. Trees we can talk too. People nonsense. Trees hear me. People yep just a tree. Tree 😭😭😭😭 just hear me humans.
doomers gonna doom. oops i should go check in on my $350 SOLAR SYSTEM producing watts of clean energy that would've come from the oily wall outlet otherwise.
@fuddster Even if we had the technology our society doesn't have the cohesion or long term planning ability to implement it. But keep telling yourself that. We all have to cope some way.
@fuddster denial》anger》bargaining》depression》acceptance (me) Appreciate your arguments (used to believe it myself) but it's too late. We've set off the tipping points. 3+ °C is already baked in and we're on track to hit 8.5 C (global extinction) before this is all over. Best case scenario is 3 billion people find a way to live on this earth with your magical technology that doesn't exist yet. If you consider that a win, then sure - wE cAn TuRn iT ArOuNd!
Thank you Adam. We make our choice each time we vote with our purchases; gasoline vehicles to happy happy retirement investments (we never investigate) increases. Those earning under $43k a year only impact the climate by 7%. The top earning 1% of the world population impact the climate at a 50% rate. That means a majority of people earning above $43k have far, far, far more impact on the future of this planet than they believe. A sizeable number of people believe the fate of the planet is beyond their impact. Its almost a cult like belief we can't do enough or anything. People in cults never believe they can do anything different and hope lies in the tiers above them. That is false.
"Bloomberg" The US Is Losing the Race With Brazil for Soybean Dominance. In 2023, when Brazil's soybean exports reached record levels, 73% of shipments went to China. Sorry but globalization makes us spoiled children. As comedian Louis CK said even small disruption of wi-fi on plane makes us mad and complain, even internet on plane itself is big breakthrough. In my country people made complains why no bananas, if you think from Ecuador it makes immense journey to shop shelves.
Isn't it a bit _colonial_ for some Brit to tell the Brazilians (and Peruvians and Colombians and Venezuelans) what to do, or not do, with their own forest?
Isn't it a bit colonial for Brazilian white agrobusiness to decide they want to clear the rainforest to produce more animal feed for the world market, without any consideration for the indigenous peoples, the fauna and flora, or the rest of the world?
If at least he was talking about the research of brazilian institutes... oh wait, that's what he's doing 😅 I believe it's really rude and counterproductive that you are complaining about an ally rising visibility to an important matter. Like people were guilty for being born in certain places, even though they use their privileges to try and pop the bubble. Hold people accountable for what they have the power to change. From a brazilian woman.
Plus, it's not our forest. We don't own it because it is a living "thing". We exist within it and pur ways of living are supported by it. If anything, we belong to it, as we'll die as it dies. And yeah, if it does need a brit to talk about this so the world listens a little more, let the brit talk, for god's sake.
@@louiseradtke1059ESTÁ floresta ES totalmente e somente pertencente ao BRASIL, porque DO contrário, todo o solo em que se localiza todas a CIDADES DOS ESTADOS UNIDOS ainda são meio ambiente, SÃO coisas vivas e assim TEM QUE SER internacionslizadas e pretendidas a todos da humanidade. Então tudo que está localizado em cima deste solo TEM QUE SER destruídos d dados a humanidade, yewlowstone e big onde não farão isso.
Maybe, it all depends on what we chose to do over this decade. If we go as we have so far, you'll be proven right. If we change course, well, then the future is up for grabs.
That's what we scientists refuse to acknowledge, right? The fact that we're incapable of abandoning capitalism. We are in direct competition for our next meal, the drugs I need to stay alive, the roof over my head. There's no way to stop. Solar engineering (clouding our skies globally) is what humanity will of course try. The next silly question, whether we will do so soon or wait until after we'll need to blacken them entirely, is what we're looking at now. But again, that doesn't matter. Not when the basic method we use to live on this planet is destruction.
1:03 dude, go to Peru find the grandma with the expensive wool she doesn’t get paid for - teach those people your fancy oxford climate science… somebody has mucho dinero over there! Or the company making $30k each coats with her wool! Maybe Merlin sheldrake can tell you? Or Gabor Mate?
Thank you Adam, after your unnecessary stupid field trip to ´reaction videos´ against someone who should be an ally instead, this is a very well done and important report again. I hope you have a lot of brasilian listeners here, would be interesting to read their opinion in the comments.
- We live in the same climate as it was 5 million years ago - I have an explanation regarding the cause of the climate change, it is the travel of the universe to the deep past since May 10, 2010. Each day starting May 10, 2010 takes us one thousand years to the past of the universe. Today March 31, 2024 the state of our universe is the same as it was 5,074 million years ago. On january 20, 2050 the state of our universe will be at the point 14 million and 500 thousand years in the past. On september 15, 2100 the state of our universe will be at the point 33 million years in the past. Mohamed BOUHAMIDA.
I have been hearing this same nonsense for the last 60 years. All of us little people can not change a big climate that has a life of it's own. The earth has went through many climate changes since earth was formed. If you believe in the ice age then you know the earth has gone through many climate changes.
Phd in cluelessnes. How can someone learn so much and know so little. In the last 60 years global vegetation cover has increased by at least 20% due to increased CO2 fertilization. In the last 40 years alone global total forest cover increased by 2.24 million square kilometers despite deforestation still happening. CO2 is nothing but good news for nature and humanity too. 40% of todays agricultural output is due to the increase from 280 ppm to 400 ppm of atmospheric CO2 and its fertilization effect. Without this increased level of CO2, 3 billion people wouldn't have food to eat causing mass extinction of dozens of nations, hundreds of cultures, thousands of ethnic groups and languages. Environmentalists and greenies hate humanity because they work to cause death and suffering to everyone.
@@Optimistprime. Talking about cluelessnes. physdotorg article states: "researchers found that new tree cover had offset tree cover loss by approximately 2.24 million square kilometers (1982-2016)". Another article on NASA and physdotorg: title: CO2 fertilization greening the Earth. "The greening over the past 33 years reported in this study is equivalent to adding a green continent about two-times the size of mainland USA (18 million km2) (1981-2015)." Break out of your information bubble. Get alternative sources of news or you will remain in the dark. Did you know, that plants use some 30% less water now than 60 years ago, entirely due to increased CO2 levels? That is why the Sahara is shrinking.
@@Thomas-gk42 What part of CO2 fertilization is old nonsense? Do you think NASA, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Department of Earth and Environment at Boston University, Peking University China, Laboratory of Climate and Environmental Sciences, Gif-suv-Yvette France and Boston University are unreliable sources? Because the above study I quoted from, comes from their joint effort.
wondering where the sponsor slot is?? well I I don't want my videos to sell you stuff you don't need! vids like this are made entirely with the support of patrons like Anton Raichuk. join Anton here: www.patreon.com/ClimateAdam
and while I'm thanking people, huge thanks to Richard Betts (coauthor of the first study) for his feedback on the script. find him on twitter, insta and threads @richardabetts
What if the environmentalists and these native cultures don't agree? Some environmentalists like Peter Singer oppose hunting on moral principle, but of course native cultures widely practice it. So what happens when environmentalism and native cultures split?
Europeans can Clear cutting their forests And get rich. Why doesn't Brazil get the same opportunity to become rich
It just makes me cry that even in the 80s I already had "save the rainforest" stickers plastered all over my school supplies, and yet 40 years later here we are.
it's because it's all lies...
That's because we haven't abolished capitalism and composted all the rich people.
@@alexc.c.4025 YES! the amazon clearly doesn't actually exist. it's just an advert for jeff benzos.
(you absolute melon)
@@richardallan2767 Surely that's not what they meant. I'd expect the lies they're mentioning are bezos's and other people's greenwashing campagns. But i don't know maybe that's just my wishful thinking
@@richardallan2767That's hurtful to melons.
Love this video, Adam! As someone who has spent a month in the Amazon, I’m really passionate about the conservation of the rainforest. Another point to highlight is the fact that it’s a home to so many medicinal plants including powerful psychedelics like ayahuasca which are ceremonially used by many indigenous tribes there.
wow that must have been an incredible visit (carefully avoiding using the word "trip" here!). and for sure there is just so much we still have to learn from the rainforest and the people that live there.
Animal agriculture is the leading cause of deforestation, habitat destruction, water pollution, ocean dead zones and *species extinction* . -United Nations FAO
Spot on, also the most significant cause of animal exploitation, abuse and death.
Not so fast. A lot of the deforestation blamed on cattle it's land grab. Clean a stretch of land, put 3 cows in it, and call it a "cattle ranch"
@@claudiaroedel1368 Animal agriculture uses 83% of global farmland and only provides 18% of global calories. When we switch to a plant based food system, we can restore/reforest 76% of global farmland AND be able to feed all humans. -journal Science
@@leviahimsa The problem with that statistic is cropping is a total use, were as land allocated to grazing is not always under use. For Example a cattle station in Australia can be the size of a small country on paper, but it is not grazed on every square meter all the time. The land is also mostly not viable to cropping. Not that you cant grow anything there at all. It is just not a even swap or a fair comparison based on area. I think the Journal of Science are stretching a bit with that concept.
@@raclark2730 Do you think most cows are grazing?
The meat and milk from animals that rely solely on grazing provide just 1% of the world’s protein. FCRN
If everyone in the US switched from grain-fed to pasture-fed beef, because they grow more slowly on grass, the number of cattle would have to rise by 30% and the land area used to feed them would rise by 270%. - Environmental Research Let.
Even if the US felled all its forests, drained its wetlands, watered its deserts and annulled its national parks, it would still need to import most of its beef.
Grass-fed cows’ diets contain more cellulose fibre compared to grain fed, requiring more fermentation to break the grass down, causing two to four times more methane to be released from the cows directly. Methane is much worse for global warming than carbon dioxide (CO2), as it has about 130 times more warming potential than CO2.
Plus, they take longer to grow and reach slaughter weight so they live longer and therefore have higher overall lifetime emissions. Plus, they require around 41 percent more land than grain-fed cows. Cows alone are responsible for 70 percent of deforestation in Brazil, so choosing to eat grass-fed beef will further exacerbate this destruction.
When it comes to the environment, grass-fed beef is not the lesser of two evils, and if you truly want to eat a sustainable diet, a plant-based diet is best as it produces fewer greenhouse gasses and requires far less land and water.
Oh, the goosebumps I got when you said “this fate isn’t sealed”. I’ve started doing street outreach with a local nonprofit. What else can I do? I wish I could snap my fingers and fix it.
Thank you for what you do. You have a unique gift to offer because of your relatability combined with your education. Thank you for this information!
@@danrayson mmm, hugs. Pardon me for thinking this comment might not have been left with the intent to be helpful. It’s totally fine if you’d like to be like that. Thank goodness we’re separated by our keyboards!
@@danrayson do you believe it’s only youth who believe in climate change and veganism? They’re just the generation that stands to lose the most so understandably they care a great deal.
I understand you may see it as propaganda. It’s possible I may think some of what you believe is propaganda.. Whatever happens, may the world benefit.
become politically active. be a voice. be a constituent. form community and fight. it's clean up time
What else can we do? Stop believing that capitalism can solve the problems it causes. We must end the profit motive before it destroys us all.
@@RaiseTheApple it is clean up time!! Let’s go team!! 👏
I love the constant reinforcement of "it's not too late and there is hope" but also the dose of reality of "things will be bad if we don't act *now*" in all your videos. It's so easy to lose hope, but I think it's worth remembering that anyone who does work related to climate change hasn't given up hope yet, so why should everyone else? If the people leading the fight are still fighting, then there's a fight, and a fight means hope!
Well - I gave up about 30 years ago and continued to work.
Those who need hope to work - are an uncertain candidate for the future.
You seemed to gloss over the effects of animal agriculture on deforestation. Switching to a plant based diet is best for the environment and definitely for the animals.
Definitely could have discussed the drivers of deforestation more! But actually this was a topic touched on in my last vid, all about our diets!
I don't think most people realize how much just reducing their meat intake could achieve.
@@ClimateAdamif getting rid of fossil fuels keeps getting mentioned, why not they the need to eliminating animal husbandry? According to climate scientists that's the most direct anyone can take.
Also, on the individual level, we can add our grain of sand by reducing consumption of meat. In a globalised world our demand for meat translates into higher pressure on ecosystems.
Animal agriculture uses 83% of global farmland and only provides 18% of global calories. When we switch to a plant based food system, we can restore/reforest 76% of global farmland AND be able to feed all humans. -journal Science
Someone is buying those trees they cut down, if less people bought that wood, then less trees would be cut down.
Individualising systemic problems is why we're in this mess. Rich people and their evil economy must go-- the planet isn't burning because you ate a burger, it's burning because billionaires are destroying the world to profit from burgers, cars, fast fashion, shitty architecture, etc, etc...
ROFL
@@shadetreader Well we will also have to COLLECTIVELY reduce our consumption of meat anyway, so why not get used to it and send the right message.
The hydrological cycle isn't something that is fast or easy to fix. The soils are really poor and with the removal of the crazy amount of biomass the last organic matter could just wash away and not infiltrate if they finally get some rains. Let's see if they get summer temperatures this coming winter as well
I think basilding is a lovely word and we should use it for something. Thank you for an excellent video!
hehh, the part where he went "is this needlessly pessimistic" I was thinking this is to optimistic.
Someone needs to tell New South Wales govt that trashing our own rainforests here at home isn't the epic win they think it is :(
Britain once used to host a dense biodiverse forest too. How about rolling that back?
Totally. There is a whole largely deforrested Planet out there, and many finger pointing at the Amazon.
Many years ago, a government official in South America had this response to activists from the USA: “Reforest Portland.”
The necessity of proving that its worth it to save the planet is mind boggling to me.
Also, of course it makes us richer collectively to preserve ecosystems, but guess what ? Inequality actually means more concentration, means colossaly rich people feeding on us dying ..
All them greedy politicians and people in charge of the fossil fuel industry need this video 😞😓
Why? They already know all of this, in fact they actively facilitate it.
I think we could all do with some anarchism and mutual aide, y'all! 😂
Also the meat and dairy industries!
@@AndreiPetcu_
Want to see some change?
Get people to eat LESS meat.
Many people think that won't work, but if advertising can raise sales and grow the industry, then eating less can shrink the industry too.
You have more power than they want you to know.
@jimthain8777 Capitalist society conditions us to individualise systemic problems. Eating meat per se isn't the issue, industrial agriculture is. It's the profit motive that's wrecking the planet, not your failure to recycle that one bottle.
We must abolish capitalism.
HHello Adam, I love your channel. Great video again.
I am brazilian and I you like to mention that two of the great threats to amazon jungle is the grow of soybeans and the land for pasture ox. We grow soybeans to sell to China so they can feed their pigs and our cow meat is export all over the world.
I also would like to say that things are getting better as we changed our government, the last one was a disatrous in all the aspects!
Keep doing your great work. Congratulations!
I think we'll see some big shifts in land use in the next decade. I hope it will be enough to halt the extinction event, it very well could be.
I sure hope you're right about that!
Animal agriculture is the top cause of deforestation, habitat loss, and biodiversity loss! Most of the deforestation of the Amazon was caused by raising cows for beef and growing soy for farm animal feed. Brazil is a top exporter of beef and soy. 90% of soy grown there is used for farm animal feed! What could each of us do to help? Boycott animal products!
Why didn't this get a ❤ from @climateadam?
@@ecofriend93 Thank you for saying so. Maybe he didn't see it?
@@ecofriend93 IIRC, Adam eats a plant based diet, so he walks the walk!
9:33 "or reduced inequality"
Powerful people would lose their cash cows. Sounds difficult, but change is in the air
Thanks Adam!
great video!
Climateadam, we cant keep growing the economy if we expect to get to net zero. The worlds resources aren't infinte. so thats why, if we keep growing the economy, infinitely, we will run out of resources leaving us to go to extinct. a new wellbeing economy is necessary, one that reduces production and consumption, and reforms government basically
And how do you force people to reduce consumptpion? A slippy dream, if you don´t wnat to use guns for that. We need realistic solutions to solve the global problems an not fairy tales.
In the terms of possible restoration, are there transition plant spp that are more drought tolerant that could be used for a kind of relay spp for rainforest spp?? Also as related to ag - more examples of soil building than can rebuild soil moisture make rainforest spp able to come back? (This to be done in tandem w climate mitigation you discussed)
Good points and all forests have pioneer species that grow in tree falls and other disturbances. Also if re planting is done within proximity of remnant vegetation the animals themselves will bring in more species by dispersal.
Hey Adam, love your work 👍🙏
I did an assignment about this very discussion in 1997! Back then, the situation was bleak!!!
Off the top of my head, I'll try to remember what I learned...
I'm bad at math, but back then, it was a '7x2'-fold effect???...
1. Deforestation: Deforestation was destroying the land-lungs of Earth by 20,000 square kilometres per year
2. It was being destroyed by slash and burn, which meant that not only were the lungs being destroyed, but the Amazon was turning from a storer of CO2 to a producer of CO2! So for every acre of forest we destroy, we not only lose an acre of CO2 absorbable land, but we also put the CO2 already in that land back into the air! Isn't this the same as saying that for every acre of forest lost is 2 acres of CO2 emitted into the atmosphere??? 2 acres or forest destroyed = 4 acres of CO2 emitted!? 3 acres of forest destroyed = 6 acres of CO2 emitted? 4 acres of forest destroyed = 8 acres of CO2 emitted?
3. It was being destroyed to produce cattle farms. Cattle produce methane gas. So... the storer of CO2 was being destroyed at 20,000 kilometres per year, turning it from the storer of CO2 to a producer of CO2 in order to produce methane gas! That's a triple effect (x2) right there!!!
4. Then... the cattle compact the soil, which prevents CO2 from being absorbed back into the soil to be stored. So... after the triple effect (x2) of destroying the lungs in order to produce CO2 emissions in order to produce methane, the cattle ranchers then made sure that no more CO2 could be absorbed back into their lands. This is a 4-fold (x2) effect!!!
5. Because the ground was being stripped of vegetation, there were no roots to hold the ground together to prevent erosion. So... erosion started to become out of control, which meant that the nutrients needed to regrow the forest was being washed away! 5th fold (x2)!!!
6. With the destruction of the forest came not only the destruction of diversity but the destruction and risk of extinction of key species that pollinated the forest. This is a 6-fold effect (x2)!!!
7 (a). The ranchers were violent and unaccountable: Back then the people and governments of south America said, 'How dare' the rest of the world tell south Americans that they don't have the right to economic survival when every other country on earth does?! So... not only was the 6-fold (x2) effect happening, and not only was there a lack of willingness to change, but the destroyers of the forest also ARGUED... in favour of destroying the forest to produce cattle! This is the 7th fold x 2!!!
7 (b). There was a famous rubber tapper and Union leader and environmentalist named Chico Mendes. He taught the locals how to sustainability tap rubber from the forest to create a sustainable income for South America... he was murdered by a cattle rancher in 1988!!!
Adam... when you say there can be an economic boon for South America through sustaining the Amazon, you are really grasping for the 'rainbows and butterflies' straws!!!
In the 1960s, there was a real and decisive and 'COLLECTIVE WILL' from America to strive to put an American on the moon! This 'COLLECTIVE WILL' came from an entire country having the same dream! And, the reason that the entire country had that dream and that 'collective will' in the first place was out of fear of nuclear war!!! America was losing the 'space race' to Russia! Russia had the better rockets!!!
When speaking about a 'rainbows and butterfies' solution; it's not about feasibility nor viability... it's about who has the power!!! It's about convincing the murderous megalomaniac leopards in power to change their spots and give up the only power they know!!! That ain't happening without a war to overthrow them by a country that cares! The same FEAR that struck America during the space race needs to hit South America in order for there to be a 'COLLECTIVE WILL' to change!!! What's that going to take? What... is that... going to take???
Basically... I think that, in a world run by psychopaths, the entire human species is doomed to extinction!!!
EU ACABEI DE ENTREGAR TEU IP PARA AS FORCAS ARMADAS DO BRASIL AGORA. VOCÊ ESTÁ SENDO RASTREADO PELO GOVERNO DO BRASIL AGORA. VOCÊ TEM QUE LER DOUTOR DALRON ELERY VIRÃO BARROSO W87 WIKILEAKS E VOCÊ TEM QUE LER UMA MAYERIA DE 8 DE ABRIL DE 2023 E TAMBÉM DE 14 DE ABRIL DE 2024, MINISTRO DA RÚSSIA TRAZ 20 TONELADAS DE BOMBAS ATOMICAS EM AVIÃO DE CARGA MISTERIOSAS PARA O BRASIL.
LEIA DOUTOR ÁLVARO ALBERTO MOTA E SILVA 2) REX NAZARETH ALVES E SILVA E 3) DOUTOR OTHON LUÍS PINHEIRO DA SILVA.
I wonder what the character of Brazil’s new leadership is, how it compares to their old leadership, and how the difference between those characters relates to the larger climate-politics sphere 🤔🤔🤔
It's not about the "new leadership": Brazil is a parliamentarian democracy. And in both chambers climate deniers have a vast majority. And they have the power to destroy Amazon.
Very informative video - great work as usual Adam!
It has been showed too that around 2 out of 7 water cycles have been taken out. Amazon rain forest creates its own rain 7 times before the rain hits Andies and/or runs through Amazon river to the sea. And for worse the taken out rain zones are from the beginning of the cycle (Atlantic side is most deforested area). This is driving rapid scale droughts that will dry up the trees and make them vulnerable for fire. Rain forest itself does not burn, but after being dried up, it will burn and worsen situation rapidly.
But yes, there is still lots that can be done. Firstly deforestation has to be stopped. If I were in power in Brasil all cleared areas since year 2000 should be given to government and reforested (satellite images). This would mean that any further deforestation would not give new land for large farms. And large scale new forest area too. Also at the same time all illegal activities should be put under strict control with army corps. All illegal profits that can be taken by legal means should be given to those who fight against this corruption and destruction. We are fighting against dying planet and the cause of most of us. Stop destroying our planet.
There is one factor that we just started to realize. Amazon rainforest has been full of civilizations before (see drone mappings and the removal of the forest cover). And those ruins has been covered by rain forests. This may show a path how rain forests are resilient for at least town scale destruction. They have recovered before. But now the timescale is more dense and the climate is warming creating yet another threat layer. All of the current threats are manmade, so we have to act before it is too late.
EU ACABEI DE ENTREGAR TEU IP PARA AS FORCAS ARMADAS DO BRASIL AGORA. VOCÊ ESTÁ SENDO RASTREADO PELO GOVERNO DO BRASIL AGORA.
Very informative video on the Amazon rainforest
👍 Whole food plant based for the environment and health; vegan for the victims!
This video didn't mention that under the previous administration, animal agriculture was the chief cause of deforestation between raising cows for beef, and growing soy for farm animal feed. Less than 10% of that soy was used for direct human consumption. Humans consume only 7% of the soy grown world wide. Brazil has been one of the top exporters of beef and soy. Lula is better, but the video said that only 34% of deforestation stopped under his administration at 6 months. What can each of us do to fight this source of deforestation and greenhouse gasses? Plant based diet!
@@someguy2135👍 🖖
Right on! 🕊️💕🌱🌞
Have you seen all the LIDAR images of the Amazon rain forest? The immense cities etc hidden by the rain forest? Before the Spnish turned up there about 500 years ago, there was nowhere near as much rain forest. Vast amounts of it was populated and it would appear that many of the trees in the Amazon are actually cultivated. As in they were put there by man for various reasons from food to materials such as timber. What would be really interesting is if someone works out how much more rain forest we have in the Amazon today, than they had for thousands of years before the Europeans arrived and all but killed everyone off who was living there. Allowing much of the rainforest one can see today, to grow to its current acreage.
"The immense cities" - you are exaggerating the size of the early cities in the Amazon. That they were as large as they were did come as a surprise, but they were still quite small compared to cities today.
@@TheDanEdwards I was comparing them to European cities of the time. Not those of today. Very good point tho Dan.
Thank You on reviewing the Amazon, but how about presenting the second largest & still +/- intact rainforest? It's in the Congo DRC. Worth mentioning the 'black' continent's ecological benefits in research papers too before they disappear.
As for working towards a Green Revolution, why not mentioning China's state-led socialist model? It first enabled 1.4bn people to prosper, but China's recent solar/wind/plantation projects are truly astonishing!
Unlike UK's protectionist capitalistic model, which makes the majority poorer & profits the elites ... by criminalising environmental activists & expanding gas & oil explorations at a time of Climate Warming.
PORQUE VOCÊ NÃO FALA DA FLORESTA RUSSA DE NOME TAIGA, QUE ES 2 VEZES MAIOR QUE A FLORESTA AMAZÔNICA DO BRASIL .?
@@ValerioCordeirodosSantos. The Artic is in very bad shape: burning Taiga & melting Permafrost ... releasing massive amounts of CO2 & Methan. Just look up the recent Ural floods in Kazakhstan, etc.
Antarctica is also melting at unprecedented speed.
So, let's unite & protect forests worldwide, plant trees, invest in electrifying transport & industry NOW.
Stop Ecocides & Genocides, urgently!
Thank you for this presentation Adam 🙏🏽
REJOICE! THE EARTHBALL CRASHING MEME IS BACK
i really needed this thanks
The worst part of all this is that 90% of people are completely apathetic. I guess we deserve this but, the rest of the creatures don't.
Thousands of years ago, was the Sahara desert similar to the Amazon of today? They seem to be linked now.
Adam makes me feel at home
Your videos get mildlycoptimistic. Thanks for that!
Good grief - plenty of time to keep below 1.5 degrees over pre,industrial levels?
Except we have broken through 1.5 already. Ok, mot the 10 year average, but if you think there is going to be a reduction in the temperature over the next decade, then you have no understanding of the time lag involved in greenhouse gases. 1.5 is baked in. The real question is whether holding to 2 degrees is possible.
It is great to be optimistic, but this channel is tilted towards a kind of fantasy which completely ignores massive social changes required to make the changes necessary.
Actually a 20-year average, apparently:
"Back in 2015 in Paris, nearly 200 countries agreed to try to keep the rise in warming under 1.5C, to help avoid some of the worst climate impacts. That threshold in the Paris agreement is generally accepted to mean a 20-year average" -- BBC, "More climate records fall in world's warmest February"
@@UCCLdIk6R5ECGtaGm7oqO-TQ "Generally accepted" or playing with numbers t let the profits from fossil fuels and industrial mono-culture keep on flowing? I remember Paris and I don't remember any talk of a 20-year average.
@@AlanBolshevik Me either. I was surprised to read it.
@@UCCLdIk6R5ECGtaGm7oqO-TQ do ypu follow Paul Beckwith? He has some interesting things to say about this and also the changing of the baseline for "pre-industrial"
@@AlanBolshevik Yeah I've listened to a fair few of Paul's over recent months. There just seem to be a lot of differing views on how things should be calculated.
sneaky monty python reference there :p
Lula getting elected restores some hope in humanity.
Hopeful
I live here in Amazonis since 9 years. My son is born here and the RDS Rio Negro is his home. I would be very glad, if your video is true. But I´m in deep concerne, especially about tje part with World Ressurces Institut Brasil. The paper is full of mistakes, and you adopt the errors in your video.
Green, sustainable economic growth in the Amazon? Including mining, agriculture, infrastructure, etc.? How do you envision that?
1. the obviously simplest point: mining. Take the supposedly most environmentally friendly type of mining - the planned potassium mine in Autazes. 10,000 tons a day are to be washed out in a few hundred meters. Nothing happens on the surface. But the 10,000 tons a day have to be removed - from a flood plain! Building roads and a port without destroying the environment? - And we're not even talking about land for drying, sewage, groundwater, etc.!
2. agriculture: Even if ecologically sustainable, the products have to be transported for commercial cultivation. This also requires the construction of roads. The asphalting of the BR-319 alone will destroy 50 km of virgin forest for every kilometer of road. And of the destroyed forest area, up to 100 km of virgin forest will be heated.
3. And we still can save the Amazon, but not with electo-capitalism and greenwashing!
SOLAR FTFW a single 50 watt panel in my WINDOW PANE with a switch and charge controller is enough to charge a 12 volt battery and run an inverter for LESS THAN $400. people are so brainwashed solar must be expensive and on their roof, nope you can start cheap and small and scale up. stop making excuses NOT to try solar!
Adam, can you explain what exactly power review is and how it might relate to the paper by ralph ellis.
Dust, not co2 is driving climate.... or at least I think that is what he's saying.
11:48 THIS
Capitalism - root problem. Real democracy can be created when people get right to decide online about anything. Then they can heal from this addiction for more, which rules our minds world wide.
People been trying for a few thousand years for real democracy. Ain't gonna happen.
Agree. Online information gathering from multiple independent sources, free of advertisements, would give People unaltered Freedom of Choice when voting.
There's a need for Sovereign Identity checks though, with this AI technology introduced online.
Problem: online platforms like Google, RUclips & other Cloud Capitalists are not interested in Democracy, but in Maximising Profit.
and now you tube is running prager u ads before your content
ugh ffs
1:55 was that a live of Brian reference?
maaaaaybe..!
"Brazil: Amazon deforestation drops 34% in first six months under Lula." (On screen text at the 11' 12" mark)
I think most people assumed that it would have stopped completely when he took power!
it takes a longer time than you'd hope to shift momentum!
@@ClimateAdam No doubt! Boycotting animal products allows each of us to speed the process. Brazil is a top exporter of beef and soy used almost exclusively for farm animal feed, which was a primary reason for the deforestation under the previous ruler.
@@someguy2135 It's exported by Cargill, the world's largest private corporation, and Cargill exports the soy mainly to China (for hogs) and Europe (for chickens).
@@voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang885 This is a global problem, and we need to think of ourselves as citizens of the planet and not of individual countries.
@@someguy2135 Yes in the U.S. a corporate is a legal person protected by the Bill of Rights. Cargill is a tool of U.S. imperialism so Cargill operates in over 100 countries at any one time, just as the U.S. has over 700 military bases in over 100 other countries. I had an op-ed expose published on Cargill in the University newspaper where Cargill is headquartered. Then I had a follow up article published in a local newspaper. Stop Cargill’s destruction of the Amazon
By Drew Hempel () | June 29, 2006
Print Email
On May 22, Greenpeace, my former employer, took direct action against Cargill, shutting down their illegal soybean facility in the heart of the Amazon rainforest. As Greenpeace reports: “Our activists unfurled a banner on the conveyor belts at Cargill’s facility, but angry Cargill employees nearby blasted the sign down with high-powered hoses. Police arrived on the scene and arrested 16 of our activists. The Arctic Sunrise itself blockaded the Cargill port, preventing exports of soy from leaving the facility. In the nearby city of Santarém, a group of Cargill’s supporters surrounded the police station holding our activists, but were dispersed by military police.”
Greenpeace activists were mobbed and attacked with pepperspray, but the action itself was based on two years of solid research tracking and exposing how the soybeans support KFC and McDonald’s chicken production.
As Greenpeace reports: “Cargill, based in the United States, is the largest soy producer and exporter in the Amazon, operating 13 silos in the heart of the Amazon rainforest.”
“Soy is now a leading cause of rainforest destruction in the Brazilian Amazon. In total, an estimated 12,000 square miles of what was once rainforest has already been destroyed, mostly illegally, to grow soybeans. Cargill makes no secret of helping establish soy farms in the Amazon, some of which are complicit in other illegal activities such as land grabbing and slavery.”
I worked for Greenpeace in the Minneapolis office back in 1996 but Germany Greenpeace shut down all the U.S. Greenpeace canvass offices because in Germany only volunteer-based activism is emphasized.
Considering the huge disinformation about Cargill in its headquarters, the Twin Cities, I think there should definitely be more paid research, supported by grassroots donations, to expose and stop Cargill’s destruction of the Amazon rainforest. The “Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy”, works on global trade agreements and they are located just off Nicollet and Franklin in Minneapolis. Supporting their work would be a great first step in helping solve this real catastrophe in global food policy.
In 2000 I had an op-ed published in the Minnesota Daily while working there as a part-time staff writer. The op-ed gave a general expose on the structural crisis that Cargill is part off - how Cargill depends on a huge amount of tax subsidies, only to undermine family farmers, worldwide, creating massive starvation and dependence on the U.S. This is called the “Food for Peace” plan, set up by Hubert H. Humphrey for the Cold War politics. For example, Cargill dumped grain in Somalia at one-ninth the local farmer’s price, thereby greatly destroying the traditional subsistence economy of Somalia.
Well, now Cargill is helping to cause global climate destabilization. The Amazon, through its unfathomable ecological complexity, creates 25 percent of the world’s oxygen and about the same of the world’s freshwater. Soybeans do not take in as much CO2 as the Amazon rainforest. I have a certificate on conservation biology and sustainable development from the School for Field Studies in Costa Rica after a semester of studying rainforest development issues in Fall of 1992. The rainforest crisis is the product of the U.S.-controlled International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, the CIA and large private corporations dependent on huge public tax infusions, like Cargill.
Both my exposes of Cargill are still available to read freely online as “Cargill: Our taxes, global destruction” (, 2000) and “Cargill, Soybeans and the Destruction of the Amazon” (Pulse of the Twin Cities , 2004)
To create radical policy change requires focused effort and my previous successes in environmental and social justice policy changes have come with a certain amount of backlash by the powers that be: sabotage of my email account, phone-tapping, threats of censorship and censorship, psychological warfare attacks and assault.
Recently I had the pleasure of meeting a relative of the V.P. of Public Relations of Cargill whose job it is to “keep Cargill under the public radar,” as he described. So any action that citizens can take definitely makes a difference!
I hope readers can join in the peaceful effort to change the current inertia about radical ecological sustainability. It will make our future much more peaceful.
Trees make rain and rain feeds trees well kinda and trees hold onto soil and provide homes for wild life.
People its a tree what does it do other then sit there and grow.
Trees we can talk too.
People nonsense.
Trees hear me.
People yep just a tree.
Tree 😭😭😭😭 just hear me humans.
We have no chance to avert this disaster.
doomers gonna doom. oops i should go check in on my $350 SOLAR SYSTEM producing watts of clean energy that would've come from the oily wall outlet otherwise.
@fuddster Even if we had the technology our society doesn't have the cohesion or long term planning ability to implement it. But keep telling yourself that. We all have to cope some way.
@fuddster Hillarious. Truly.
@fuddster denial》anger》bargaining》depression》acceptance (me)
Appreciate your arguments (used to believe it myself) but it's too late. We've set off the tipping points. 3+ °C is already baked in and we're on track to hit 8.5 C (global extinction) before this is all over. Best case scenario is 3 billion people find a way to live on this earth with your magical technology that doesn't exist yet. If you consider that a win, then sure - wE cAn TuRn iT ArOuNd!
@fuddster You obviously do not keep up with climate science. Please do.
Thank you Adam. We make our choice each time we vote with our purchases; gasoline vehicles to happy happy retirement investments (we never investigate) increases. Those earning under $43k a year only impact the climate by 7%. The top earning 1% of the world population impact the climate at a 50% rate. That means a majority of people earning above $43k have far, far, far more impact on the future of this planet than they believe. A sizeable number of people believe the fate of the planet is beyond their impact. Its almost a cult like belief we can't do enough or anything. People in cults never believe they can do anything different and hope lies in the tiers above them. That is false.
when Pol Pot went mental and forced the cities to empty, the forests took over them
so no, the forest will always win in the end
Half the Amazon surviving until 2050 seems overly optimistic.
Where's that "is climate change accelerating? video, friend-o?
Almost down-thumbed for keeping your background books out of focus. 😉
A lot of them aren't mine, so there's (for example) a disproportionate amount of German psychology tomes!
"Bloomberg" The US Is Losing the Race With Brazil for Soybean Dominance. In 2023, when Brazil's soybean exports reached record levels, 73% of shipments went to China. Sorry but globalization makes us spoiled children. As comedian Louis CK said even small disruption of wi-fi on plane makes us mad and complain, even internet on plane itself is big breakthrough. In my country people made complains why no bananas, if you think from Ecuador it makes immense journey to shop shelves.
Isn't it a bit _colonial_ for some Brit to tell the Brazilians (and Peruvians and Colombians and Venezuelans) what to do, or not do, with their own forest?
Isn't it a bit colonial for Brazilian white agrobusiness to decide they want to clear the rainforest to produce more animal feed for the world market, without any consideration for the indigenous peoples, the fauna and flora, or the rest of the world?
If at least he was talking about the research of brazilian institutes... oh wait, that's what he's doing 😅
I believe it's really rude and counterproductive that you are complaining about an ally rising visibility to an important matter. Like people were guilty for being born in certain places, even though they use their privileges to try and pop the bubble. Hold people accountable for what they have the power to change. From a brazilian woman.
Plus, it's not our forest. We don't own it because it is a living "thing". We exist within it and pur ways of living are supported by it. If anything, we belong to it, as we'll die as it dies. And yeah, if it does need a brit to talk about this so the world listens a little more, let the brit talk, for god's sake.
@@louiseradtke1059ESTÁ floresta ES totalmente e somente pertencente ao BRASIL, porque DO contrário, todo o solo em que se localiza todas a CIDADES DOS ESTADOS UNIDOS ainda são meio ambiente, SÃO coisas vivas e assim TEM QUE SER internacionslizadas e pretendidas a todos da humanidade. Então tudo que está localizado em cima deste solo TEM QUE SER destruídos d dados a humanidade, yewlowstone e big onde não farão isso.
We're there. By 2030 the Amazon forests will be 50+ percent savanna, and by 2040 it will be gone entirely.
Maybe, it all depends on what we chose to do over this decade.
If we go as we have so far, you'll be proven right.
If we change course, well, then the future is up for grabs.
That's what we scientists refuse to acknowledge, right? The fact that we're incapable of abandoning capitalism. We are in direct competition for our next meal, the drugs I need to stay alive, the roof over my head. There's no way to stop. Solar engineering (clouding our skies globally) is what humanity will of course try. The next silly question, whether we will do so soon or wait until after we'll need to blacken them entirely, is what we're looking at now. But again, that doesn't matter. Not when the basic method we use to live on this planet is destruction.
Only 1 way to save Amazon rain forest: stop eatig meat!
Do you wanna talk about *saving* the Amazon in English? Might as well just be talking about the company...
1:03 dude, go to Peru find the grandma with the expensive wool she doesn’t get paid for - teach those people your fancy oxford climate science… somebody has mucho dinero over there! Or the company making $30k each coats with her wool! Maybe Merlin sheldrake can tell you? Or Gabor Mate?
What?
Thank you Adam, after your unnecessary stupid field trip to ´reaction videos´ against someone who should be an ally instead, this is a very well done and important report again. I hope you have a lot of brasilian listeners here, would be interesting to read their opinion in the comments.
- We live in the same climate as it was 5 million years ago -
I have an explanation regarding the cause of the climate change, it is the travel of the universe to the deep past since May 10, 2010.
Each day starting May 10, 2010 takes us one thousand years to the past of the universe.
Today March 31, 2024 the state of our universe is the same as it was 5,074 million years ago.
On january 20, 2050 the state of our universe will be at the point 14 million and 500 thousand years in the past.
On september 15, 2100 the state of our universe will be at the point 33 million years in the past.
Mohamed BOUHAMIDA.
Could it collapse? yes, it will.
Can we save it? nope, not a chance.
it isnt happening, the amazon is doomed
I have been hearing this same nonsense for the last 60 years. All of us little people can not change a big climate that has a life of it's own. The earth has went through many climate changes since earth was formed. If you believe in the ice age then you know the earth has gone through many climate changes.
Keep telling yourself that as things get increasingly worse
This even more ignorant than thinking we can save it. We need you people to move on.
Yea, we can save it....
...as an NFT 😜😜
Phd in cluelessnes. How can someone learn so much and know so little. In the last 60 years global vegetation cover has increased by at least 20% due to increased CO2 fertilization. In the last 40 years alone global total forest cover increased by 2.24 million square kilometers despite deforestation still happening. CO2 is nothing but good news for nature and humanity too. 40% of todays agricultural output is due to the increase from 280 ppm to 400 ppm of atmospheric CO2 and its fertilization effect. Without this increased level of CO2, 3 billion people wouldn't have food to eat causing mass extinction of dozens of nations, hundreds of cultures, thousands of ethnic groups and languages. Environmentalists and greenies hate humanity because they work to cause death and suffering to everyone.
Are you going to cite a source, or...?
@@Optimistprime. Talking about cluelessnes. physdotorg article states: "researchers found that new tree cover had offset tree cover loss by approximately 2.24 million square kilometers (1982-2016)". Another article on NASA and physdotorg: title: CO2 fertilization greening the Earth. "The greening over the past 33 years reported in this study is equivalent to adding a green continent about two-times the size of mainland USA (18 million km2) (1981-2015)." Break out of your information bubble. Get alternative sources of news or you will remain in the dark. Did you know, that plants use some 30% less water now than 60 years ago, entirely due to increased CO2 levels? That is why the Sahara is shrinking.
What a boring old nonsense!
@@Thomas-gk42 What part of CO2 fertilization is old nonsense? Do you think NASA, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Department of Earth and Environment at Boston University, Peking University China, Laboratory of Climate and Environmental Sciences, Gif-suv-Yvette France and Boston University are unreliable sources? Because the above study I quoted from, comes from their joint effort.