MercoPress, en Español

Montevideo, June 14th 2024 - 02:52 UTC

 

 

Rousseff announces veto of several Forest Code controversial amendments

Friday, May 25th 2012 - 22:54 UTC
Full article 20 comments

Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff announced Friday that she is vetoing some of the controversial amendments to the country’s Forest Code that would have substantially weakened the country’s forest protection and climate mitigation actions. Read full article

Comments

Disclaimer & comment rules
  • Sullivan

    Still win for the farmers who played by rule. Good job Dilma. Foreign NGO are crying.. kkkkkkkk:D

    May 26th, 2012 - 01:57 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • skåre

    @1 Sullivan

    You really can't read if you think that is a victory for the farmers.

    May 26th, 2012 - 05:52 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Guzz

    Good job, Dilma. People's greed is killing our planet

    May 26th, 2012 - 07:03 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Max

    Before the Rio/24 UN Development Conference ,the radical wording of this agenda already put the Government in an uncomfortable position.

    At the end ,Teixeira/Salvatti team has made done what they want.

    May 26th, 2012 - 09:02 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Fido Dido

    skare it is. sullivan is right. there will be no amensty for the illegal loggers, but that doesn't matter for the big farmers who played by the rules. They have more choices with their land like keep the trees for more tax incentatives or continue to grow. that's what's all about. The NGO's can't stand that, they want total veto.

    May 26th, 2012 - 03:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • skåre

    Oh what a surprise! Fido Dido agreeing with one of his other online identities. What a cretin.

    May 26th, 2012 - 06:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • MistyThink

    ( 5 )
    You did mean ?-- NGO working group on UN-NGO relations founded in 2009 which has roles between open partnership in between UN and NGOs.

    May 26th, 2012 - 06:40 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • GeoffWard2

    ^%% reduction from a ridiculously high rate of deforestation is STILL a ridiculously high rate of deforestation.

    The main problem is the RECENT resurgence in logging and forest clearances.

    Many, many rich people need long spells in COMMON prisons for their flagrant deforestation practices and the string of murders that accompany these practices.

    Join AVAARZ and become part of a worldwide pressure-group that continues to guide the sensible thinking of the Presidenta.

    May 26th, 2012 - 09:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Think

    (8) GeoffWard

    Moral is good...
    Double moral seems to be twice as good.......

    I remember you criticizing the Chileans that vehemently oppose the destruction of the most pristine sites of Patagonia with the construction of unnecessary dams and high tension lines.... so the middle class in Santiago can run their air conditioning machines………….

    May 26th, 2012 - 09:25 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • GeoffWard2

    Hi, Think.
    Yes, I am picky and choosy wrt energy issues.

    Carbon sinks are important to me - especially the forests and the seas.

    Renewable energy provided by gravity acting on water to produce electricity also presses my buttons.
    The costs attached to this constant source of energy is my trade-off - aesthetics of powerlines, wind-farms, etc., permanent loss of land to reservoirs (eg Xingo), and people relocations.
    I inform myself and then weigh off the balance of costs and benefits.

    For instance, I have long preached for the English/Welsh Severn estuary barrage scheme (etc) for turbine electrical energy from twice-daily tidal movements. I know this will change the internationally famous wildfowl reserve at Slimbridge.

    I have been accused of NIMBYism wrt the proposed windfarm near my English home. It might appear so, buy I was part of the conservation management team (HMTNC) that designated the area as of Scientific Interest and High Landscape Value some 40 years ago. The recent (poorly argued) profit interests of local farmers diversifying into energy provision do not weigh heavily against my original protections on the area.

    May 27th, 2012 - 11:30 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Think

    (10) GeoffWard2

    No, you are not ”Picky and Choosy” wrt energy issues…….

    If you were ”Picky and Choosy”, you would know that nowhere in Europe or the USA are they allowing those monstrous High Tension lines and towers anymore……………
    All new projects are subterraneous, and the old lines are also being dig down…..

    If you were ”Picky and Choosy”, you would know that they are much better alternatives for hydroelectric energy production than damming a river………….
    http://www.businessweek.com/globalbiz/content/dec2009/gb2009127_163138.htm

    The only ”picky and choosyness” I can spot in your approach for Chile is the picking and choosing of the oldest, most destructive and profit maximizing technology available…..

    You know where to stick it...................

    May 27th, 2012 - 02:38 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Forgetit87

    Get him, Think!

    May 27th, 2012 - 07:18 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Fido Dido

    “Oh what a surprise! Fido Dido agreeing with one of his other online identities. What a cretin.”

    Uhuh, just as your mother who's suprised with your online trolling here. Seriously, go hug more trees what they enjoy doing there in Norway.

    May 27th, 2012 - 08:06 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • GeoffWard2

    Hi Forgetit!
    Long time no talk.

    Any thoughts on Dilma's action. For it? Against it?

    May 27th, 2012 - 08:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Forgetit87

    What about you, skare? What other account do you secretly use on this website? My guess would be sticky.

    I'm not buying this recent wave of pro-Brit non-British users. Seems like the Brits want to beef up their perceived international support by...setting up fake accounts to spout their talking points. One of the problems, however, is that their attempts are a bit too forced. They always create accounts that instantly give away their supposed national origin, when most other users never do that.

    May 27th, 2012 - 08:54 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Forgetit86

    Geoff, I haven't kept up with the news -- I'm actually avoiding them. So many stuff that I dislike, specially in the economics department -- I'd rather save myself the trouble of reading about them. As to the piece's subject, I'm frankly indifferent to it. I'm certainly no treehugger, and like Sullivan, I dislike how foreign NGOs, based in countries with barely a trace of their original eco-systems, feel entitled to order us around concerning our natural resources. But regarding the Code it's really “tanto faz” for me.

    May 27th, 2012 - 09:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Sullivan

    skåre, I am Brasilian and not Dutch like Fido dido, but looks like he knows more than you about my country. He called you troll, I post picture for you again. Norway is famous for trolls: http://www.skjoldlodge.com/trolls.html

    May 28th, 2012 - 12:19 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Dave204

    “nowhere in Europe or the USA are they allowing those monstrous High Tension lines and towers anymore……………
    All new projects are subterraneous, and the old lines are also being dig down…..”

    I'm afraid this isn't quite true. I can't speak to Europe, but in North America above ground transmission lines are still used when power has to be conveyed long distances from a generating station to an urban substation. Most hydroelectric stations are located in rugged, rocky areas where digging in power lines is not possible. You are correct in saying that new residential power lines and some existing ones are being located below ground.

    May 28th, 2012 - 01:26 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • GeoffWard2

    True, Dave.
    I even found somewhere in Brasil - a couple of roads - where urban/residential powerlines are being buried along the road rather than blighting the whole urban landscape with a total tangle of poles, wires and 'cats'/gatos.

    This is the way developed countries go, but it it is so very, very slow.

    One big advantage is that burying the urban utilities in concrete conduits allows for street pavements to be rebuilt with continuity, avoiding the crippling walks along pavements where every house/shop frontage has a different injury-inducing 'pavement'.

    May 28th, 2012 - 09:14 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • British_Kirchnerist

    Viva Dilma =)

    May 31st, 2012 - 08:45 am - Link - Report abuse 0

Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!