this post was submitted on 22 May 2025
27 points (100.0% liked)
Tree Huggers
755 readers
60 users here now
A community to discuss, appreciate, and advocate for trees and forests. Please follow the SLRPNK instance rules, found here.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
This will probably be less destructive than a road or a mining project, but if this increases trade with China, then it increases the profit incentive for production of all of those deforestation-linked commodities that are produced in the Amazon and Cerrado biomes, and possibly in the Atlantic Forest as well. The main problem is therefore not the destruction caused by the railway itself but by the production of the things that it transports.
Another (potential) problem with this railway is that it creates a new profit incentive for deforestation. If speculators buy land in key locations along the railway and deforest it in anticipation of the demand for a settlement or trading hub, the damage is done, even if nothing is ever built there. Better than the semi-permanent destruction of having a town or road or mining project or cow pasture there, and maybe it won't happen at all, but it still isn't exactly good news. If the railway were replacing a road network which would be closed off and allowed to reforest itself, then that would be progress.
Oh i agree with you, though i must say that trade with China will increase as long as the State of China keep buying commodities because the agribusiness sector has captured the Brazilian State and has been able to get massive funding for their activities. They have the majority of the congress. Like 2/3 of all politicians in Brasília are linked to agribusiness industry.