Mining Is Responsible for 10 Percent of Deforestation in the Amazon

    An industrial mining operation in Brazil - Photo: Norsk Hydro ASA

    Nearly ten percent of all the deforestation occurring in the Brazilian Amazon between 2005 and 2015 came from mining activities, say researchers in a new study — a stunning statistic far higher than the 1 to 2 percent noted in previous global assessments.

    The reason for the difference is that past research only looked at the mines themselves, and not at the ancillary development that accompanies and surrounds the mines.

    Using satellite data, the researchers found that deforestation from mining encompassed 11,670 square kilometers (roughly 4,500 square miles) between 2005 and 2015, an area twice the size of the state of Delaware.

    The startling level of Amazon deforestation, they say, demands immediate action on the part of mining companies and government — especially because Brazil’s Temer administration seems intent on opening vast swathes of the country to mining in the near future.

    The international group of researchers, organized around the University of Vermont, published their findings in the journal Nature Communications.

    The research used satellite monitoring to study the fifty largest mining sites in the Amazon region, and analyzed the rates of deforestation in and around those sites between 2005 and 2015.

    Strikingly, the study found that deforestation outside of and surrounding the mining-lease areas removes twelve times as many trees as within the lease boundaries.

    Further, this loss extends to as much as 70 kilometers (approximately 43 miles) from the lease areas as infrastructure such as roads, staff housing, and airports cut into the forest.

    “Our findings show that Amazon deforestation associated with mining extends remarkable distances from the point of mineral extraction,” said Gillian Galford, a study co-author with the Gund Institute and Rubenstein School of Environment and Natural Resources at the University of Vermont (UVM).

    Meanwhile, a preliminary study from Brazil’s space agency, INPE, found that deforestation in Brazil decreased 16 percent between August 2016 and July 2017.

    Laura Sonter, a co-author of the UVM study and also with the Gund Institute and Rubenstein School, warned that the INPE finding doesn’t mean things are fine: “The problem is that deforestation rates are still up over the last 3 years compared to years before that, and a drop in deforestation still means that 6,624 square kilometers [some 2,557 square miles] of Amazon forest was cleared [from August 2016 to July 2017].

    Additionally, deforestation rates are expected to increase again next year, due to the current drought and expected rural fires.” Amazon wildfires are at record levels this year, with most of them caused by people.

    Sonter told Mongabay that the UVM research is significant because of the way it reassesses the impact mining has on deforestation. “Mining is typically thought to cause about 1 percent of tropical deforestation worldwide, but our results suggest impacts are almost 10 times greater than this.

    “We found most deforestation occurred outside mining leases and we were also surprised to find these off-lease impacts to extend 70 kilometers from the site of operation. Previous estimates suggest indirect effects occur only up to 10 kilometers.”

    “The threats and potential consequences of mining on deforestation in the Amazon are significant,” Sonter added.

    These findings come as Brazil’s government considers a series of measures to ease restrictions on mining in the Amazon region. In August, an international outcry spurred the country’s judiciary to block President Temer’s plans to open up the RENCA reserve to mining.

    The reserve covers 4.6 million hectares (17,800 square miles), an area roughly equal to Denmark. RENCA holds minerals such as gold, nickel and manganese, but it is also rich in biodiversity with large tracts of rainforest and numerous protected conservation units. The area is also home to two indigenous reserves, which experts say would be put at serious risk if mining operations began nearby.

    Pará state deputy Eduardo Costa said that he suspects that the areas affected by deforestation due to mining “are much greater than the figure the study presents.”

    He explained that although pig-iron smelters are not as active in the Amazon region as they once were, the remaining facilities still use charcoal obtained from wood. “Maybe 90 percent of the wood that was used in these ovens that process pig-iron came from illegal sources, and this created a big impact on deforestation.”

    A 2012 report in Carta Capital pointed to criminal activities in the pig-iron production chain, including illegal charcoal operations, bribes and slave labor.

    In August, the Brazilian forest research institute IMAZON noted that a Temer administration decree to reduce protections for the Jamanxim National Forest would also benefit mining companies.

    Although the measure ordering this reduction was vetoed, the president has since re-submitted the rollback in the conserved area’s size under a bill to congress, and experts believe it is likely to be approved.

    Brazil’s Ministry of Mines and Energy said that it was unprepared to comment on the study presented in Nature Communications or on measures the government is taking to prevent deforestation. A representative of the country’s mining agency did not respond to calls or an email request for comment.

    Nilo D’Avila manages Greenpeace’s campaigns in Brazil. He said that Greenpeace wasn’t surprised by the study findings. “The government uses [the Carajás mine] as an example of mining and [forest] preservation. But when we look around the Carajás mine, we find deforestation that is much higher than average.”

    Carajás is an open-pit mine operated by the Vale Mining Company in the Amazonian state of Pará. It is the world’s largest iron mine. Located within the Carajás National Forest, it is estimated to contain 7.2 billion tons of iron.

    The Carajás mine serves as an example of the economic potential of mining and of mining’s environmental impact in the Amazon region. Iron ore is Brazil’s largest mineral export and accounts for 10 percent of the country’s total exports. However, satellite time-lapse photography from the UVM study shows how the mine has contributed to deforestation.

    D’Avila said that the government is considering easing mining restrictions in a vast area along Brazil’s northern and western borders — a mostly wild region 300 times the size of RENCA, covering 1.7 million square kilometers of the Amazon biome.

    These are “areas that are still not designated [as protected], with few conservation areas. Brazil has few relationships, especially in the Amazon region, with its neighbors. So, the Brazilian government sees a way of having business relationships with these countries through mining, road construction, through ‘progress.'”

    The findings of the UVM study clearly demonstrate that opening such a large area of native forest to mining and its accompanying infrastructure would result in significant deforestation.

    Also, just as clearly, mining companies are eager to enlarge their Amazonian footprint: “Throughout Brazil, mining leases, concessions, and exploration permits cover 1.65 million square kilometers [637,068 square miles] of land, of which 60 percent is located in the Amazon forest,” notes the UVM study.

    A closer look at the Carajás mine shows what could lie ahead environmentally for the Amazon and other parts of Brazil if these many leases, concessions and exploration permits are allowed to advance. A railway carries the iron from the Carajás mine to foundries in Bacarena and São Luís.

    Both the mine and the railway were funded by the World Bank in the 1980s. Residents have been fighting to stop the company from doubling the rail line for years. One reason for the battle, Brazil’s G1 news outlet reported earlier this year, is the number of people who are killed or maimed by the freight trains.

    Also, the Indigenous Missionary Council (CIMI) and other human rights groups say that the doubling of the railway was approved before an environmental impact assessment was completed and without consulting the indigenous communities affected, a violation of Brazil’s international agreements.

    Prof. Philip Fearnside, who studies hydroelectric dams in the Amazon region, spoke about the Carajás mine. “Aside from the hole in the ground, the big impact is the charcoal [used to process the ore]. What limits that is these pig-iron smelters, not the amount of ore that is dug out.”

    In May of this year, Brazil’s environmental agency, IBAMA, destroyed 66 illegal ovens for producing charcoal in northeastern Pará. Between 1998 and 2014, deforestation in Pará outpaced all other states in the Amazon region, and mining contributed to that impact.

    The Carajás mine is largely powered by hydroelectricity from the Tucuruí dam, which brings up another major concern. Environmental impact assessments for proposed mines in Brazil don’t cover the massive energy requirements for processing ore, energy which in the Amazon generally comes from hydroelectric dams.

    Hydropower has its own suite of environmental hazards, including deforestation, major greenhouse gas releases from reservoirs, and disrupted aquatic and terrestrial ecosystem. Dams, like mines, also bring ancillary development, as laborers arrive in a region to build infrastructure, and then settle locally.

    Dams also bring new roads and transmission lines. They often do substantial social harm as well, disrupting and displacing indigenous and traditional riverine settlements.

    Mining, experts agree, is both a boon and bane to modern civilization: it provides critical materials for everyday items ranging from cell phones and computers to cars and home appliances. But without regulation it can cause major deforestation and pollute rivers and aquifers.

    Iron tailings dam collapse that killed 19 people and contaminated 500 miles of the Rio Doce all the way to the Atlantic Ocean — Brazil’s worst environmental disaster — is a warning to the nation and the world of what can happen when mining profits trump environmental protection and public safety, say experts.

    Sonter suggested one important step Brazil could take to minimize mining-related deforestation: require an assessment not only of the immediate on-site impacts of mines, but also of off-lease impacts prior to approving projects.

    “With this information, action can then be taken to avoid, reduce and mitigate [impacts]. Avoidance measures could involve siting new roads in areas of degraded and cleared [land], rather than through intact pristine forest.

    Mitigation efforts may involve establishment and management of new protected areas in the surrounding landscape to prevent further deforestation.” Likewise, assessments should review whether new Amazon mines will require new hydroelectric dams to power the ore’s processing.

    Considering the threat that mining poses to Amazonian forests, and the crucial importance of the region’s forests to carbon storage and to curbing climate change, controlling mining impacts could be crucial to the future of both Brazil and the planet.

    Galford is hopeful that the UVM study’s findings will lead to positive action: “Many of these [mining] corporations may take this as an opportunity to step up and take responsibility for off-site deforestation. In fact, the world may demand it.”

    Citation:

    Sonter, L. J., Herrera, D., Barrett, D. J., Galford, G. L., Moran, C. J., Soares-Filho, B. S.: (2017) Mining drives extensive deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon. Nature Communications; DOI: 10.1038/s41467-017-00557-w

    This article appeared originally in Mongabay – https://news.mongabay.com

    Tags:

    • Show Comments (0)

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

    comment *

    • name *

    • email *

    • website *

    This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

    Ads

    You May Also Like

    It seems the future never arrives in Brazil What Lies Ahead in Brazil? Brazil Has No Exemplary Past or Present. But What Lies Ahead for the Country? Europeans, US, developed country, developing country. Bolsonaro, future B. Michael Rubin For years, experts have debated what separates a developing country from a developed one. The GDP (Gross Domestic Product) of a country is one simple way to measure its economic development. Another way to measure a country's progress is the extent of public education, e.g. how many citizens complete high school. A country's health may be measured by the effectiveness of its healthcare system, for example, life expectancy and infant mortality. With these measurement tools, it's easier to gauge the difference between a country like Brazil and one like the U.S. What's not easy to gauge is how these two countries developed so differently when they were both "discovered" at the same time. In 1492 and 1500 respectively, the U.S. and Brazil fell under the spell of white Europeans for the first time. While the British and Portuguese had the same modus operandi, namely, to exploit their discoveries for whatever they had to offer, not to mention extinguishing the native Americans already living there if they got in the way, the end result turned out significantly different in the U.S. than in Brazil. There are several theories on how/why the U.S. developed at a faster pace than Brazil. The theories originate via contrasting perspectives – from psychology to economics to geography. One of the most popular theories suggests the divergence between the two countries is linked to politics, i.e. the U.S. established a democratic government in 1776, while Brazil's democracy it could be said began only in earnest in the 1980s. This theory states that the Portuguese monarchy, as well as the 19th and 20th century oligarchies that followed it, had no motivation to invest in industrial development or education of the masses. Rather, Brazil was prized for its cheap and plentiful labor to mine the rich soil of its vast land. There is another theory based on collective psychology that says the first U.S. colonizers from England were workaholic Puritans, who avoided dancing and music in place of work and religious devotion. They labored six days a week then spent all of Sunday in church. Meanwhile, the white settlers in Brazil were unambitious criminals who had been freed from prison in Portugal in exchange for settling in Brazil. The Marxist interpretation of why Brazil lags behind the U.S. was best summarized by Eduardo Galeano, the Uruguayan writer, in 1970. Galeano said five hundred years ago the U.S. had the good fortune of bad fortune. What he meant was the natural riches of Brazil – gold, silver, and diamonds – made it ripe for exploitation by western Europe. Whereas in the U.S., lacking such riches, the thirteen colonies were economically insignificant to the British. Instead, U.S. industrialization had official encouragement from England, resulting in early diversification of its exports and rapid development of manufacturing. II Leaving this debate to the historians, let us turn our focus to the future. According to global projections by several economic strategists, what lies ahead for Brazil, the U.S., and the rest of the world is startling. Projections forecast that based on GDP growth, in 2050 the world's largest economy will be China, not the U.S. In third place will be India, and in fourth – Brazil. With the ascendency of three-fourths of the BRIC countries over the next decades, it will be important to reevaluate the terms developed and developing. In thirty years, it may no longer be necessary to accept the label characterized by Nelson Rodrigues's famous phrase "complexo de vira-lata," for Brazil's national inferiority complex. For Brazilians, this future scenario presents glistening hope. A country with stronger economic power would mean the government has greater wealth to expend on infrastructure, crime control, education, healthcare, etc. What many Brazilians are not cognizant of are the pitfalls of economic prosperity. While Brazilians today may be envious of their wealthier northern neighbors, there are some aspects of a developed country's profile that are not worth envying. For example, the U.S. today far exceeds Brazil in the number of suicides, prescription drug overdoses, and mass shootings. GDP growth and economic projections depend on multiple variables, chief among them the global economic situation and worldwide political stability. A war in the Middle East, for example, can affect oil production and have global ramifications. Political stability within a country is also essential to its economic health. Elected presidents play a crucial role in a country's progress, especially as presidents may differ radically in their worldview. The political paths of the U.S. and Brazil are parallel today. In both countries, we've seen a left-wing regime (Obama/PT) followed by a far-right populist one (Trump/Bolsonaro), surprising many outside observers, and in the U.S. contradicting every political pollster, all of whom predicted a Trump loss to Hillary Clinton in 2016. In Brazil, although Bolsonaro was elected by a clear majority, his triumph has created a powerful emotional polarization in the country similar to what is happening in the U.S. Families, friends, and colleagues have split in a love/hate relationship toward the current presidents in the U.S. and Brazil, leaving broken friendships and family ties. Both presidents face enormous challenges to keep their campaign promises. In Brazil, a sluggish economy just recovering from a recession shows no signs of robust GDP growth for at least the next two years. High unemployment continues to devastate the consumer confidence index in Brazil, and Bolsonaro is suffering under his campaign boasts that his Economy Minister, Paulo Guedes, has all the answers to fix Brazil's slump. Additionally, there is no end to the destruction caused by corruption in Brazil. Some experts believe corruption to be the main reason why Brazil has one of the world's largest wealth inequality gaps. Political corruption robs government coffers of desperately needed funds for education and infrastructure, in addition to creating an atmosphere that encourages everyday citizens to underreport income and engage in the shadow economy, thereby sidestepping tax collectors and regulators. "Why should I be honest about reporting my income when nobody else is? The politicians are only going to steal the tax money anyway," one Brazilian doctor told me. While Bolsonaro has promised a housecleaning of corrupt officials, this is a cry Brazilians have heard from every previous administration. In only the first half-year of his presidency, he has made several missteps, such as nominating one of his sons to be the new ambassador to the U.S., despite the congressman's lack of diplomatic credentials. A June poll found that 51 percent of Brazilians now lack confidence in Bolsonaro's leadership. Just this week, Brazil issued regulations that open a fast-track to deport foreigners who are dangerous or have violated the constitution. The rules published on July 26 by Justice Minister Sérgio Moro define a dangerous person as anyone associated with terrorism or organized crime, in addition to football fans with a violent history. Journalists noted that this new regulation had coincidental timing for an American journalist who has come under fire from Moro for publishing private communications of Moro's. Nevertheless, despite overselling his leadership skills, Bolsonaro has made some economic progress. With the help of congressional leader Rodrigo Maia, a bill is moving forward in congress for the restructuring of Brazil's generous pension system. Most Brazilians recognize the long-term value of such a change, which can save the government billions of dollars over the next decade. At merely the possibility of pension reform, outside investors have responded positively, and the São Paulo stock exchange has performed brilliantly, reaching an all-time high earlier this month. In efforts to boost the economy, Bolsonaro and Paulo Guedes have taken the short-term approach advocated by the Chicago school of economics championed by Milton Friedman, who claimed the key to boosting a slugging economy was to cut government spending. Unfortunately many economists, such as Nobel Prize winner Paul Krugman, disagree with this approach. They believe the most effective way to revive a slow economy is exactly the opposite, to spend more money not less. They say the government should be investing money in education and infrastructure projects, which can help put people back to work. Bolsonaro/Guedes have also talked about reducing business bureaucracy and revising the absurdly complex Brazilian tax system, which inhibits foreign and domestic business investment. It remains to be seen whether Bolsonaro has the political acumen to tackle this Godzilla-sized issue. Should Bolsonaro find a way to reform the tax system, the pension system, and curb the most egregious villains of political bribery and kickbacks – a tall order – his efforts could indeed show strong economic results in time for the next election in 2022. Meanwhile, some prominent leaders have already lost faith in Bolsonaro's efforts. The veteran of political/economic affairs, Joaquim Levy, has parted company with the president after being appointed head of the government's powerful development bank, BNDES. Levy and Bolsonaro butted heads over an appointment Levy made of a former employee of Lula's. When neither man refused to back down, Levy resigned his position at BNDES. Many observers believe Bolsonaro's biggest misstep has been his short-term approach to fixing the economy by loosening the laws protecting the Amazon rainforest. He and Guedes believe that by opening up more of the Amazon to logging, mining, and farming, we will see immediate economic stimulation. On July 28, the lead article of The New York Times detailed the vastly increased deforestation in the Amazon taking place under Bolsonaro's leadership. Environmental experts argue that the economic benefits of increased logging and mining in the Amazon are microscopic compared to the long-term damage to the environment. After pressure from European leaders at the recent G-20 meeting to do more to protect the world's largest rainforest, Bolsonaro echoed a patriotic response demanding that no one has the right to an opinion about the Amazon except Brazilians. In retaliation to worldwide criticism, Bolsonaro threatened to follow Trump's example and pull out of the Paris climate accord; however, Bolsonaro was persuaded by cooler heads to retract his threat. To prove who was in control of Brazil's Amazon region, he appointed a federal police officer with strong ties to agribusiness as head of FUNAI, the country's indigenous agency. In a further insult to the world's environmental leaders, not to mention common sense, Paulo Guedes held a news conference on July 25 in Manaus, the largest city in the rainforest, where he declared that since the Amazon forest is known for being the "lungs" of the world, Brazil should charge other countries for all the oxygen the forest produces. Bolsonaro/Guedes also have promised to finish paving BR-319, a controversial highway that cuts through the Amazon forest, linking Manaus to the state of Rondônia and the rest of the country. Inaugurated in 1976, BR-319 was abandoned by federal governments in the 1980s and again in the 1990s as far too costly and risky. Environmentalists believe the highway's completion will seal a death knoll on many indigenous populations by vastly facilitating the growth of the logging and mining industries. Several dozen heavily armed miners dressed in military fatigues invaded a Wajãpi village recently in the state of Amapá near the border of French Guiana and fatally stabbed one of the community's leaders. While Brazil's environmental protection policies are desperately lacking these days, not all the news here was bad. On the opening day of the 2019 Pan America Games in Lima, Peru, Brazilian Luisa Baptista, swam, biked, and ran her way to the gold medal in the women's triathlon. The silver medal went to Vittoria Lopes, another Brazilian. B. Michael Rubin is an American writer living in Brazil.

    Brazil Has No Exemplary Past or Present. But What Lies Ahead for the Country?

    For years, experts have debated what separates a developing country from a developed one. ...

    zzz

    World Crisis Won’t Stunt Brazil’s Growth, Says President Lula

    The president of Brazil, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, underscored the good indicators of ...

    Black Panther Galvanizes Afro-Brazilians to Take on Segregation

    ‘Black Panther’ Inspires Afro-Brazilians to Feel Proud of Themselves

    Disney-Marvel’s “Black Panther” movie, which has gained traction for its empowering notes on Black ...

    Older people will suffer with the new budget amendment - Marcos Santos/USP Imagens

    The Temer Administration Wants to Put Brazil in a Straitjacket for 20 Years

    Brazilian President Michel Temer has been trying to take drastic steps to address the ...

    Brazilian currency, the real - Marcos Santos/USP Imagens

    IMF Is Bullish on Brazil Again

    The International Monetary Fund (IMF) is projecting that Brazil will surpass Italy next year ...

    Eike Batista talks in the Brazilian senate about corruption at BNDES - Wilson Dias/ABr

    Once World’s Eighth Richest Man, Brazilian Gets 30 Years in Jail for Corruption

    A Brazilian businessman famous for amassing and then losing a multi-billion-dollar fortune has been ...

    Defying Loggers, Brazil’s Amazon People Create Exemplary Green Communities

    Established 18 years ago in a location that stretches over the municipalities of Santarém ...