Climate Change & Brazil’s Amazon Rainforest
Keerat Sidhu
Introduction
Rich in biodiversity, the Amazon rainforest is crucial in controlling the global carbon budget and dictating the course of the climate. Nonetheless, there are signs that the effects of climate change could be particularly detrimental to the Amazon rainforest. One of the world’s largest carbon sinks, the Amazon rainforest contains between 150 and 200 Pg C in its soils and live biomass (Feitosa et al., 2023). The Amazon efficiently collects CO2 through photosynthesis, contributing around 10% of the world’s net primary productivity and carbon stocks in terrestrial ecosystems. Nevertheless, continuous deforestation in the Amazon region has increased greenhouse gas emissions and interfered with carbon storage capacity to efficiently sequester carbon.
Deforestation in the Amazon Rainforest
Alarming levels of fragmentation and significant changes in carbon stocks have resulted from surging deforestation rates (Silva et al., 2021). Approximately 52% of Brazil’s emissions (e.g., 1.1 billion out of 2.2 billion of CO2e in 2020) are caused by fires and the conversion of forests and natural pastures (de Vasconcelos et al., 2013). Additionally, the conversion of forests and natural pastures amounts to 35% of the country’s total carbon storage in tropical forests (Barros & Fearnside, 2016). According to estimations, deforestation accounts for over 47% of the total emissions accumulated since the 18th century, making it a significant contributor to greenhouse gas emissions even today (Lapola et al., 2023). Deforestation rates in the Brazilian Amazon exceeded 20,000 km2 in 2004, despite the Amazon rainforest’s critical role in delivering a variety of ecosystem services (Urzedo et al., 2020). As global fossil-fuel burning has risen, the Amazon has absorbed CO2 from the atmosphere, helping to moderate the global climate.
Contributors to Deforestation
Unauthorized entry into protected territory has been made easier by ineffective law enforcement and unlawful activity, which is mainly driven by the growth of cattle ranching and illegal mining (Van Solinge, 2020). Deforestation rates have increased because of this (Climate Action Tracker, 2023). Emissions are predicted to increase steadily in the absence of policy changes, severely impeding Brazil’s progress toward its climate targets. Early research points to previously unheard-of levels of deforestation in the Amazon region by the middle of 2022 (Climate Action Tracker, 2023). Table 1 summarises the valuation of loss from forest area decline due to deforestation from 1990 to 2020.
With its present policy, Brazil’s emissions, excluding those from its land sector, have largely plateaued, and no rise is anticipated for the balance of the decade. However, to meet its 2030 targets and adhere to the 1.5°C warming goal, Brazil will need to significantly reduce its emissions within this decade (Climate Action Tracker, 2023). The present course of Brazil’s policy emissions is not meeting the 1.5°C target, which might result in a 3°C to 4°C increase in world temperature if other countries were to follow suit. According to what it said in its 2023 Nationally Determined Contributions (NDC) proposal, Brazil hopes to achieve “climate neutrality” by 2050. However, Brazil has not yet provided the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) with a long-term plan (Climate Action Tracker, 2023).
Table 1: Valuation of Loss From Forest Area Decline Due to Deforestation, 1990–2020
| Skip Table 1 |
|||
| Period | Forest Area (% decline in km2) | Deforestation (in millions of ha) | Valuation of Loss (in millions of ha) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1990–2000 | – 6.4% | 37.8 | 7,673 |
| 2000–2010 | -7.2% | 39.5 | 8,019 |
| 2010–2020 | -2.9% | 15.0 | 3,045 |
| 1990–2020 | -16.5% | 92.3 | 18,737 |
Note. Annual growth rates of forest area were computed from World Bank (n.d.)
SCC of Deforestation
The social cost of carbon (SCC) can be used to assess 150 to 200 billion of carbon. The SCC is calculated with a discount rate as the present value of the future consumption reductions brought about by the extra ton of emissions (Pindyck, 2019). This calculation is in line with the basic idea of an SCC, which is the economic harm resulting from each additional ton of CO2 released, independent of the economic and climatic factors that create the harm. Economists price carbon at USD 173.7 and climate scientists at 316.3 per ton of CO2. Hence, let the carbon stored be 175 billion tonnes of carbon or 642 CO2 (175*3.67). Then, according to climate scientists, the value of stored carbon is USD 203 trillion (Pindyck, 2019).
Canada’s forest area is approximately 362 million ha, whereas the total land area is 998.5 million ha (Natural Resources Canada, 2024). Canada’s deforestation rates are stable, with less than half of 1% deforested since 1990. In comparison to the size of Canada, the loss of forest in Brazil is equivalent to 26% of Canada’s land and 33.5% of Canada’s forests.
Conclusion
The Amazon rainforest is vulnerable to the damage caused by deforestation. With Brazil’s lack of a current long-term plan to mitigate the amounts of deforestation, the increasing greenhouse gas emissions negatively affect carbon storage capacity (Feitosa et al., 2023). Ultimately, it will increase the amount of forest loss in Brazil.
Media Attribution
Figure 1: “Juma River Igapó” by Dr. Alexey Yakovlev (2010), via Flickr, is used under a CC BY-SA 2.0 license.
References
Amazon Aid. (n.d.). Climate change. Retrieved March 1, 2024, from https://amazonaid.org/threats-to-the-amazon/climate-change/.
Barros, H. S., & Fearnside, P. M. (2016). Soil carbon stock changes due to edge effects in central Amazon forest fragments. Forest Ecology and Management, 379, 30-36.
Boehm, S., L. Jeffery, J. Hecke, C. Schumer, J. Jaeger, C. Fyson, K. Levin, A. Nilsson, S. Naimoli, E. Daly, J. Thwaites, K. Lebling, R., Waite, J. Collis, M. Sims, N. Singh, E. Grier, W., Lamb, S. Castellanos, A. Lee, M. Geffray, R. Santo, M. Balehegn, M. Petroni, & M. Masterson. (2023). State of Climate Action 2023. Systems Change Lab. https://doi.org/10.46830/wrirpt.23.00010.
Feitosa, T. B., Fernandes, M. M., Santos, C. A. G., da Silva, R. M., Garcia, J. R., de Araujo Filho, R. N. de Maura Fernandes, M. R., & da Cunha, E. R. (2023). Assessing economic and ecological impacts of carbon stock and land use changes in Brazil’s Amazon Forest: A 2050 projection. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 41, 64–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2023.07.009.
Ferreira, A. C. S., Pinheiro, É. F. M., Costa, E. M., & Ceddia, M. B. (2023). Predicting soil carbon stock in remote areas of the Central Amazon region using machine learning techniques. Geoderma Regional, 32, Article e00614. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geodrs.2023.e00614.
Heinrich, V. H. A., Dalagnol, R., Cassol, H. L. G., Rosan, T. M., de Almeida, C. T., Silva, C. H. L., Junior, Campanharo, W. A., House, J. I., Sitch, S., Hales, T. C., Adami, M., Anderson, L. O., & Aragão, L. E. O. C. (2021). Large carbon sink potential of secondary forests in the Brazilian Amazon to mitigate climate change. Nature Communications, 12, Article 1785. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-22050-1.
Lapola, D. M., Pinho, P., Barlow, J., Aragão, L. E., Berenguer, E., Carmenta, R., Liddy, H. M., Seizas, H., Silva, C. V. J., Silva-Junior, C. H. L., Alencar, A. A. C., Anderson, L. O., Armenteras, D., Brovkin, V., Calders, K. Chambers, J., Chini, L., Costa, M. H., Faria, B. L., … & Walker, W.S. (2023). The drivers and impacts of Amazon forest degradation. Science, 379(6630), Article eabp8622. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abp8622.
Natural Resources Canada. (2024, March 22). How much forest does Canada have? Government of Canada. Retrieved March 18, 2024, from https://natural-resources.canada.ca/our-natural-resources/forests/state-canadas-forests-report/how-much-forest-does-canada-have/17601.
Pindyck, R. S. (2019). The social cost of carbon revisited. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 94, 140-160.
Silva, C. H. L., Jr., Carvalho, N. S., Pessôa, A. C. M., Reis, J. B. C., Pontes-Lopes, A., Doblas, J., Heinrich, V., Campanharo, W., Alencar, A., Silva, C., Lapola, D. M., Armenteras, D., Matricardi, E. A. T., Berenguer, E., Cassol, H., Numata, I., House, J., Ferreira, J., Barlow, J., … Aragão, L. E. O. C. (2021). Amazonian forest degradation must be incorporated into the COP26 agenda. Nature Geoscience, 14, 634–635. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-021-00823-z.
Urzedo, D. I., Neilson, J., Fisher, R., & Junqueira, R. G. P. (2020). A global production network for ecosystem services: The emergent governance of landscape restoration in the Brazilian Amazon. Global Environmental Change, 61, Article 102059. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2020.102059.
van Solige, T. B. (2020). The Amazon rainforest. In N. South, A. Brisman, & N. South (Eds.), Routledge international handbook of green criminology (2nd ed.). Routledge.
de Vasconcelos, S. S., Fearnside, P. M., de Alencastro Graça, P. M. L., Nogueira, E. M., de Oliveira, L. C., & Figueiredo, E. O. (2013). Forest fires in southwestern Brazilian Amazonia: Estimates of area and potential carbon emissions. Forest Ecology and Management, 291, 199–208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2012.11.044.
World Bank. (n.d.). Forest area (% of land area) – Brazil [Graph and Table]. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/AG.LND.FRST.ZS?locations=BR.
Yakovlev, A. (2010). Juma river igapó [Image]. Flickr. https://www.flickr.com/photos/botalex/44946942262/.
