What happened in Borneo for two decades has made hostile deforestation not a matter of science fiction. The consequences suffered by its forests leave no room for doubt, theories, lucubrations or denialist theses. There are no doubts about its causes and causes. What happened on the third largest island on the planet, shared by Indonesia, Malaysia and Brunei, is a fait accompli, the harshest and purest evidence from the real world. Read about Kalimantan and you will have a new idea of the world.
The Borneo case has long been a benchmark in forest deforestation. The jungle of Southeast Asia is proof of the damage that irresponsibility, corruption and human power are capable of producing. It is amazing that humanity ignores the Borneo case and allows it to be repeated, as it is happening in the Amazon, the largest and most exuberant jungle on the planet, and also in other forests.
Whoever does not know about the Kalimantan case does not have the slightest idea of what awaits South America if the increase in deforestation of the great jungle is officially authorized. This is what the recently released president of Brazil has promised, a country that owns two thirds of the Amazon. If these promises are realized we could see significant advances to the effects of climate change, until now estimated by science between 40 and 60 years.
Knowing what happened in Borneo, we can expect a similar environmental catastrophe in the Amazon, but of much greater proportions, probably global in scope. The Amazon crisis would result in the bankruptcy of the water cycle and as a consequence of evaporation, the production of clouds and rain. The end of humidity in the rainforest and its areas of influence, such as the Andean mountain range and the Argentine pampa, would bring about seasons of unknown droughts.
Simultaneously with deforestation of the forest, based on the Kalimantan experience, the cleared spaces would be used mainly for planting soybeans, oil palm, deforestation for the timber industry, livestock farming and urbanization of the jungle. But before, the remnants of deforestation would be eliminated, whose most used method is the burning of plant residues due to its low cost. These supposedly controlled fires in practice often get out of control and spread over large areas. These intentional burns went on for decades in Borneo, while deforestation ended, which has not ended.
El incremento de la deforestación del Amazonas produciría incendios devastadores como los que ocurren casi todos los años en Australia, California y Chile. La superficie de la selva del Amazonas es diez veces mayor que la de la selva asiática y por ende su zona de influencia también es mucho mayor. En el escenario que se vislumbra el desastre alcanzaría a los tres subcontinentes americanos. En este caso Suramérica, Centroamérica y Norteamérica asistirían a una aguda reducción de precipitaciones, disminución del caudal de sus ríos y escasez de agua potable. Las cadenas de fuegos pudieran propagarse desde Brasil hasta la Patagonia por el sur y hasta Canadá por el norte, obviamente pasando por los países centroamericanos. En esta amplia banda, que cruza ambos hemisferios, pudieran perderse decenas de miles de vidas, viviendas y especies animales y vegetales.
The so-called lung of the world has among its functions the ability to extract large amounts of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. The combination of massive deforestation with the proliferation of smoke from fires would increase the greenhouse effect and global warming.
The Amazon has about seven million km2. It is twelve times the size of Spain. The gigantic rain forest was able to develop thanks to its wetlands and swampy areas. It has 80,000 kinds of trees, 140,000 species of plants and 20% of the other species in the world, which makes it the holder of the greatest biodiversity on Earth.
Embedded in its forests, like a great snake, the Amazon River runs from side to side the widest part of South America. It is the longest and largest torrent on the planet, with 15% to 20% of the total fresh water reserves in the world.
The area of the forest has been reduced by 20% since deforestation began in 1970. In just 50 years, a fifth of the work that nature took patiently to build over millions of years was gone. In some parts of Brazil deforestation exceeds 40%, as is the case in the Rondonia region. Between 2000 and 2013, Peru lost an average of about 110,000 hectares of forest per year, equivalent to seventeen soccer fields per hour.
Has the Amazon jungle been declared a World Heritage Site? In 2011 it was declared as one of the seven natural wonders of the world, but not as a natural asset in its entirety. However, certain areas, noted for their majesty and beauty, have been. This is the case of Angel Falls, the highest waterfall on the planet, located in Canaima National Park, Venezuela, was declared a World Heritage Site by Unesco in 1994.
However, due to its size, functioning and regulatory capacity of the planet's climate, the Amazon is in fact a world heritage site, which should prevent unilateral decisions by governments on the fate of the jungle, as nothing less would be at stake. Life on earth.
The Amazon is shared by nine countries. In order from largest to smallest area are: 1. Brazil, 2. Peru, 3. Colombia, 4. Venezuela, 5. Bolivia, 6. Ecuador, 7. Guyana, 8. Suriname, 9. French Guiana. Brazil owns about 65% of the total, Peru 11% and French Guyana just 1%.
Are these nine countries the owners of the Amazon? Of course it does, since everything that is within the territories of a country belongs to it. In the case of the Amazon rainforest, which accidentally lies within its limits, they should act responsibly and instead of allowing hostile felling of their trees, they would have to assume the role of ranger at the service of humanity and guarantee preservation. than what is in their territories.
Can one or more governments in these nine countries dispose of the future of life on Earth? It seems so, although it should not be this way, for all the aforementioned.
Can the destruction of the Amazon jungle be prevented? So far it seems not. Deforesting countries refer to national sovereignty whenever they feel that any institution, organization or other entity makes a complaint or tries to stop the destruction.
To learn more about the author visit:
Web: SGK-PLANET Sowing climate awareness
Twitter: SGK-PLANET-en and SGK-PLANET-en
Facebook and Books and Weather by Sandor Alejandro Gerendas-Kiss
LinkedIn and Instagram
