Always great reading your stuff, Hannah. But please add a cumulative plot near tge top of yhis article to remind us all that we are still going in the wrong direction, even though we are slowing down.
Cumulative would be interesting, for sure. I'm still glad there is progress though. I have often thought that the world should pay Brazil to keep the "planet's lungs" alive and this payment would be based on forested acre checked by satellite imagery.
Haha I should proof read my stuff before hitting 'post' but yeah the type of graph matters. Hannah's writing is always great and nuanced. I thought in this case the comment she made in the outro deserved more (graphic) emphasis.
Personally, I always appreciate it when people correct my stuff, but it almost never happens, when it almost always should. I always have loads of errors and it may even get worse when I edit since I am dyslexic. I do not know why people aren't more helpful and simply point errors out, as you have done. Mistakes are not a disgrace, we are human after all and some of us are simply far more error prone (meaning me). From where I sit, someone correcting my mistakes is simply a kindness, like helping an old lady across the street, and yes I am an old lady, as well.
Good news (relatively speaking). I’m also curious about the flip side of this equation, i.e., how much of the Amazon has been reforested. That’s a tricky one, I’m sure, because of the qualitative difference between secondary forest and old growth but it would be good to see some reliable numbers about it. If you know a good source, please pass it along.
Yes, I am curious too. I watched some news show that said the growth rate there per year is off the charts, and that was comforting if it is actually allowed to reforest itself and people stop assaulting it.
So, I do not know if this is "net" when they talk about deforestation or just new clearing. One wonders about the impact of the fires, as well. Still, less direct intentional human cause is always good news, as well.
I read that it was largely cattle and beef that was driving deforestation. If this is true, if you are still a meat eater, check beef sources. If I am wrong, let me know. I am fine with being wrong and want to learn more. If clearing for cattle is a main cause, perhaps the impact of beef tariffs are not such a bad thing, as much as I despise Trump, but then they may just sell more to other nations as I result, I don't know.
I would be interested in deforestation outside the Amazon area, e.g. in the Cerrado, Pantanal regions, and a short assesment of the relative climate / biodiversity importance of those.
Celebrating a decrease in the rate of deforestation feels a bit like being in an enclosed tank that is filling up with water and celebrating because the rate at which it is filling has slowed down. You are still going to drown!
Is this only in the Brazilian Amazon? It would be interesting to see what is happening in other countries that share the Amazon Rainforest. I know Ecuador has recently made good conservation progress.
Super interesting, as always, and fully agree we need to get to zero. Do you also have data on reforestration? We neeed to stop deforestation, but we also need to restore forest at scale (in my humble opinion). What is your thinking on reforestation ?
RE: "There are reports of parts of the Amazon being cleared to make space for new roads
ahead of the event. The local government maintains that these infrastructure plans predate the announcement of the climate summit, but hosting the summit has likely accelerated them."
Imagine that : The "peasants" want roads and access to their own forest ! How dare they !!!
Regardless, the irony of this is not lost on me. While the area cleared for this is probably small relative to the total amount lost this year, the optics for people who don’t take climate change — and these events — seriously are not great, to say the least."
On the contrary , IT IS TAKEN SERIOUSLY and acknowledged ......'climate change' is REAL. But it is also natural , cyclical and beneficial ! The only "catastrophic part of it" is the MEDIA HEADLINES , the actions of the moronic protesters , and the depressing effects it has had on children and young adults who have had this 'doom and gloom' scenario hammered into them by an education system that is BADLY BROKEN , has almost zero educational value and is now 95% indoctrination of dubious and divisive and deleterious political agendas ! It's stultifying !
Now THAT is a catastrophe ! But you won't find "St Greta of Gaza Flotilla" protesting about the poor education systems....partly because she seriously and stupidly neglected her own education !
"But forest degradation, which is a thinning of the forest or a reduction in its quality, can happen for a variety of reasons. This degradation has been high over the last few years — particularly in 2024 — due to large wildfires."
AND PARTICULARLY where forest-logging has been hindered or curtailed , forestry management has been discontinued , forestry tracks and trails have been allowed to deteriorate and access has been impeded or completely ended ! Years of "Smokey the bear" Policy [ stamp out the fire....don't let it burn ] has allowed a huge build-up of fuel so that forest fires are now incredibly fierce , dangerous , uncontrollable , inaccessible and common ! THAT has almost nothing to do with the slight temperature increase of "global warming" apart from the increased GROWTH of all plants due to the slightly increased humidity , carbon dioxide and rainfall. It has everything to do with
restrictions on 'controlled burning' , forest-thinning and trail maintenance by a responsible forestry authority ! Human stupidity made manifest by stupid ideology vs pragmatic reality !
NOW is the time to adopt the Will Shackel [ Nuclear ] and Bjorn Lomborg [ sensible priorities]
policies of ADAPTION and alternative and BETTER SPENDING OF RESOURCES than the 'leftist' panic-stricken policies DESIGNED SOLELY to ATTRACT VOTES rather than provide solutions !
.
PERHAPS now that Bill Gates " has opened up the flood gates" more will follow AND "common sense" will once again become common ! God knows it has been bloody rare lately !
This comment is an example of how far "common sense" has fled from the scene !
"why u getting so vexed"
I find THIS utterly pointless and an illustration of HOW BAD the education system is and HOW POOR the erudition , comprehension and inarticulation has become !
You touch on the different impacts of deforestation versus degradation. You note as well that the latter has been high in the last few years, especially in 2024. But I'm curious to get your take on this Bloomberg piece by David Fickling arguing that forest loss throughout Brazil last year (not just in the Amazon) rose to "the third-largest annual figure this century, and comfortably more than in any year under Lula’s predecessor Jair Bolsonaro, who reveled in the nickname Captain Chainsaw.' https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2025-10-28/lula-is-clearing-forests-faster-than-captain-chainsaw
Perhaps that is why the author did not include damage from wildfires.
I do not know if this is the cause for the differences.
This article above seems to be about intentional human clearing and distinguishes between the two, perhaps for that reason. Not sure.
From above:
"Deforestation — which is specifically the clearing of forests for alternative land use — has been declining over the last few years.
But forest degradation, which is a thinning of the forest or a reduction in its quality, can happen for a variety of reasons. This degradation has been high over the last few years — particularly in 2024 — due to large wildfires.
While this isn’t the same as the permanent conversion of forested land, these fires do fracture the density and resilience of the Amazon, which is already under threat from continued deforestation."
I read (or more likely saw on PBS NewsHour or something) that climate change, as well as impacts from the clearing that has already occurred, has caused fires to now be a larger issue and far more of a danger, as well. If I am wong, let me know.
Thus, in reality, there may not be contradictions between articles and research - only that some are looking at "total loss" including wildfires and others are looking at what is described as human "chainsaw" causes of loss or "deforestation" for alternate use.
If one is not clear abut their stats, it can be misleading.
I think you should read David Fickling's further article that " Forests are doing BETTER than we thought" ! But I like your "Motley Crew" moniker ! [ although : "motley crew," which means a diverse and poorly organized group. ! ] Perhaps I should go with "Motley Crue" instead ..........they sold 100 million records apparently..........the band has a great sound but it's better WITHOUT THE VOCALS .......IMO !
Always great reading your stuff, Hannah. But please add a cumulative plot near tge top of yhis article to remind us all that we are still going in the wrong direction, even though we are slowing down.
Cumulative would be interesting, for sure. I'm still glad there is progress though. I have often thought that the world should pay Brazil to keep the "planet's lungs" alive and this payment would be based on forested acre checked by satellite imagery.
Yeah Nick ! ...as you say.......or should that be .......tried to say :
"add a cumulative plot near tge top of yhis article...."
Would that really help ???
Haha I should proof read my stuff before hitting 'post' but yeah the type of graph matters. Hannah's writing is always great and nuanced. I thought in this case the comment she made in the outro deserved more (graphic) emphasis.
Thank God you have a sense of humour Nick !
I had some misgivings and experienced regret as soon as I pushed the "reply" button !!
Fortunately , it caused you no everlasting mental anguish and/or trauma !!
Regards , Trevor.
Personally, I always appreciate it when people correct my stuff, but it almost never happens, when it almost always should. I always have loads of errors and it may even get worse when I edit since I am dyslexic. I do not know why people aren't more helpful and simply point errors out, as you have done. Mistakes are not a disgrace, we are human after all and some of us are simply far more error prone (meaning me). From where I sit, someone correcting my mistakes is simply a kindness, like helping an old lady across the street, and yes I am an old lady, as well.
Good news (relatively speaking). I’m also curious about the flip side of this equation, i.e., how much of the Amazon has been reforested. That’s a tricky one, I’m sure, because of the qualitative difference between secondary forest and old growth but it would be good to see some reliable numbers about it. If you know a good source, please pass it along.
Yes, I am curious too. I watched some news show that said the growth rate there per year is off the charts, and that was comforting if it is actually allowed to reforest itself and people stop assaulting it.
So, I do not know if this is "net" when they talk about deforestation or just new clearing. One wonders about the impact of the fires, as well. Still, less direct intentional human cause is always good news, as well.
I read that it was largely cattle and beef that was driving deforestation. If this is true, if you are still a meat eater, check beef sources. If I am wrong, let me know. I am fine with being wrong and want to learn more. If clearing for cattle is a main cause, perhaps the impact of beef tariffs are not such a bad thing, as much as I despise Trump, but then they may just sell more to other nations as I result, I don't know.
Thx for this clear account.
I would be interested in deforestation outside the Amazon area, e.g. in the Cerrado, Pantanal regions, and a short assesment of the relative climate / biodiversity importance of those.
Just a thought.
Celebrating a decrease in the rate of deforestation feels a bit like being in an enclosed tank that is filling up with water and celebrating because the rate at which it is filling has slowed down. You are still going to drown!
Is this only in the Brazilian Amazon? It would be interesting to see what is happening in other countries that share the Amazon Rainforest. I know Ecuador has recently made good conservation progress.
Super interesting, as always, and fully agree we need to get to zero. Do you also have data on reforestration? We neeed to stop deforestation, but we also need to restore forest at scale (in my humble opinion). What is your thinking on reforestation ?
RE: "There are reports of parts of the Amazon being cleared to make space for new roads
ahead of the event. The local government maintains that these infrastructure plans predate the announcement of the climate summit, but hosting the summit has likely accelerated them."
Imagine that : The "peasants" want roads and access to their own forest ! How dare they !!!
Regardless, the irony of this is not lost on me. While the area cleared for this is probably small relative to the total amount lost this year, the optics for people who don’t take climate change — and these events — seriously are not great, to say the least."
On the contrary , IT IS TAKEN SERIOUSLY and acknowledged ......'climate change' is REAL. But it is also natural , cyclical and beneficial ! The only "catastrophic part of it" is the MEDIA HEADLINES , the actions of the moronic protesters , and the depressing effects it has had on children and young adults who have had this 'doom and gloom' scenario hammered into them by an education system that is BADLY BROKEN , has almost zero educational value and is now 95% indoctrination of dubious and divisive and deleterious political agendas ! It's stultifying !
Now THAT is a catastrophe ! But you won't find "St Greta of Gaza Flotilla" protesting about the poor education systems....partly because she seriously and stupidly neglected her own education !
"But forest degradation, which is a thinning of the forest or a reduction in its quality, can happen for a variety of reasons. This degradation has been high over the last few years — particularly in 2024 — due to large wildfires."
AND PARTICULARLY where forest-logging has been hindered or curtailed , forestry management has been discontinued , forestry tracks and trails have been allowed to deteriorate and access has been impeded or completely ended ! Years of "Smokey the bear" Policy [ stamp out the fire....don't let it burn ] has allowed a huge build-up of fuel so that forest fires are now incredibly fierce , dangerous , uncontrollable , inaccessible and common ! THAT has almost nothing to do with the slight temperature increase of "global warming" apart from the increased GROWTH of all plants due to the slightly increased humidity , carbon dioxide and rainfall. It has everything to do with
restrictions on 'controlled burning' , forest-thinning and trail maintenance by a responsible forestry authority ! Human stupidity made manifest by stupid ideology vs pragmatic reality !
AT LONG LAST...SOME COMMON SENSE HAS EMERGED !
https://www.google.com/search?q=Bill+Gates+has+changed+his+narrative&rlz=1C1VDKB_en-GBAU1181AU1184&oq=Bill+Gates+has+changed+his+narrative+&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyBggAEEUYOTIHCAEQIRigATIHCAIQIRiPAtIBCjE3MDcwajBqMTWoAgiwAgHxBZ_u4bcspKjn&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:8a6eafd4,vid:KVrV8oAYokk,st:0
.
NOW is the time to adopt the Will Shackel [ Nuclear ] and Bjorn Lomborg [ sensible priorities]
policies of ADAPTION and alternative and BETTER SPENDING OF RESOURCES than the 'leftist' panic-stricken policies DESIGNED SOLELY to ATTRACT VOTES rather than provide solutions !
.
PERHAPS now that Bill Gates " has opened up the flood gates" more will follow AND "common sense" will once again become common ! God knows it has been bloody rare lately !
why u getting so vexed
This comment is an example of how far "common sense" has fled from the scene !
"why u getting so vexed"
I find THIS utterly pointless and an illustration of HOW BAD the education system is and HOW POOR the erudition , comprehension and inarticulation has become !
correction: How poor the ARTICULATION has become [ currently it is inarticulate]
You touch on the different impacts of deforestation versus degradation. You note as well that the latter has been high in the last few years, especially in 2024. But I'm curious to get your take on this Bloomberg piece by David Fickling arguing that forest loss throughout Brazil last year (not just in the Amazon) rose to "the third-largest annual figure this century, and comfortably more than in any year under Lula’s predecessor Jair Bolsonaro, who reveled in the nickname Captain Chainsaw.' https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2025-10-28/lula-is-clearing-forests-faster-than-captain-chainsaw
Perhaps that is why the author did not include damage from wildfires.
I do not know if this is the cause for the differences.
This article above seems to be about intentional human clearing and distinguishes between the two, perhaps for that reason. Not sure.
From above:
"Deforestation — which is specifically the clearing of forests for alternative land use — has been declining over the last few years.
But forest degradation, which is a thinning of the forest or a reduction in its quality, can happen for a variety of reasons. This degradation has been high over the last few years — particularly in 2024 — due to large wildfires.
While this isn’t the same as the permanent conversion of forested land, these fires do fracture the density and resilience of the Amazon, which is already under threat from continued deforestation."
I read (or more likely saw on PBS NewsHour or something) that climate change, as well as impacts from the clearing that has already occurred, has caused fires to now be a larger issue and far more of a danger, as well. If I am wong, let me know.
Thus, in reality, there may not be contradictions between articles and research - only that some are looking at "total loss" including wildfires and others are looking at what is described as human "chainsaw" causes of loss or "deforestation" for alternate use.
If one is not clear abut their stats, it can be misleading.
Someone "in the know" fill me in please.
I think you should read David Fickling's further article that " Forests are doing BETTER than we thought" ! But I like your "Motley Crew" moniker ! [ although : "motley crew," which means a diverse and poorly organized group. ! ] Perhaps I should go with "Motley Crue" instead ..........they sold 100 million records apparently..........the band has a great sound but it's better WITHOUT THE VOCALS .......IMO !