News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:European bird populations decrease by a quarter, farming ... by CalRobert on Tuesday May 16, 2023 @05:24AM (#35959419)
Well, it's not just Brazil. A lot of meat in Europe is grown on burned or cut-down forest, it just happens to be the case it was done centuries ago.
Re:European bird populations decrease by a quarter, farming ... by ClumsyPilot on Tuesday May 16, 2023 @06:44AM (#35959953)
Yes, the entire talk of destruction of rain forests comes across as a little hypocritical when it's coming from countries with like 6% forest cover.

I was up in scottish highlands recently and many hills are bold like someone just shaved them. Looks weired.

The only solution O see is to habe a global forestly fund, so developing countries can get paid but dont have to destroy forests.

Re:European bird populations decrease by a quarter, farming ... by CalRobert on Tuesday May 16, 2023 @06:57AM (#35960047)
The bizarre thing is that Scottish (and Irish) people largely see barren moonscape as "natural". I never encountered such hatred for trees before I moved to Ireland. I drove through the Sperrins on Sunday and while the rolling hills are pretty they would be a lot prettier with native broadleaf forest...
Re:European bird populations decrease by a quarter, farming ... by mschuster91 on Tuesday May 16, 2023 @07:23AM (#35960256)
> The only solution O see is to habe a global forestly fund, so developing countries can get paid but dont have to destroy forests.

That just incentivizes scammers and fraud, just like many of the "CO2 offset certificates" based on paying people not destroying forests they wouldn't have destroyed anyway [1].

[1] https://www.zeit.de/wirtschaft/2023-01/co2-certificates-frau...

Re:European bird populations decrease by a quarter, farming ... by ClumsyPilot on Tuesday May 16, 2023 @08:16AM (#35960778)
I am aware of CO2 market being a scam, this is very diffetent to what I propposed.

CO2 market depends on assertations of intent, and on efficacy, both of which are easy to forge and hard to prove.

Forestry found is much simpler. Everyone put money into a pot, say. we hVe 100 billion dollars.

The. yoy get data from satellite, and calculate square miles of forest.

Then you divide the pot by square miles of forest.

Then countries det paid based on how many square miles are in their borders.

There is not potential for fraud - the calculation is sinple and idiotproof. You might debate if some marginal land is forest or not, but for 90% of it you can clearly see what it is from space.

You can also have debate about how muhch should be put into the pot, and by whom.

Re:European bird populations decrease by a quarter, farming ... by mschuster91 on Tuesday May 16, 2023 @09:16AM (#35961460)
The problem: illegal farming and logging will always be more profitable than whatever the West can manage to pay countries like Brazil - not to mention it isn't sure how much the West can reasonably hand out in payments given the multiple crises straining our budgets, or how much isolationist politicians like Trump want to pay out / if they are even interested in climate and nature protection.

And on top of that come the corruption issues. Large amounts of foreign money flowing into poor(er) countries has historically always invited either said money being grifted away or redirected to other political budgets that have nothing to do with the purpose the money was originally earmarked for.