100 years after Navarro de Andrade started industrial scale Eucalyptus cultivation in Brazil, we bring you today a look at the largest and most advanced Eucalyptus timber based single-cellulosic pulp mill line in the world and its cultivated Eucalyptus forests ... at bird's sight!
Veracel Airlines
Video courtesy Edson Vargens
Are you worried about the ecological footprint of intensive tree farming? Have you heard of tree monocultures taking over the world? There are surely problems to solve, but there are also some unsustainable myths ...
Simple Math for People Worried About "Evil" Eucalyptus Propaganda
Veracel = 164,600 hectares = 1,150,000 tons of pulp per year
- Eucalyptus plantations = 78,100 hectares
- Environmental recovery & preservation = 79,000 hectares
State of Bahía = 56,469,200 hectares
Veracel Eucalyptus plantations = 0.14% of Bahía; 0.019% of Brazil
Veracel Eucalyptus plantations = 0.14% of Bahía; 0.019% of Brazil
Brazil = 851,487,700 hectares
- Soybean= 22,949,000 ha ( 2.69% of Brazil)
- Corn = 11,559,000 ha ( 1.36% of Brazil)
- Sugar Cane = 6,172,000 ha (0.72% of Brazil)
- Rice = 3,916,000 ha (0.46% of Brazil)
- Wheat = 2,361,000 ha (0.28% of Brazil)
Combined major agricultural crops = 46,957,000 ha (5.5% of Brazil)
Eucalyptus plantations = circa 4,000,000 hectares
(0.5% of Brazil, LESS THAN 1%!)
(0.5% of Brazil, LESS THAN 1%!)
Do You Still Believe "the evil " Eucalyptus monocultures are taking over the world??
GIT's Eucalyptology Topics
Subscribe to receive EUCALYPTOLOGICS via e-mail
GIT's Eucalyptology Topics
Subscribe to receive EUCALYPTOLOGICS via e-mail
This film shows vast monoculture of eucalyptus.
ReplyDeleteThey should be substituted by native trees.
Eucalyptus aren't part of the ecosystem.
It's basic law of physics that if you take from the soil you are impoverishing them.
Shame on Veracel for destroying the natural ecosystems of Brazil's Atlantic forest.
Hello Andre, and thanks for your comments.
ReplyDeleteThis film shows pieces of a landscape mosaic in which roughly 50% is a timber crop, and the other 50% is not. If you want to think it shows a vast monoculture of eucalypts, you are free to do so. But even if we do not discuss the concept of "monoculture" now, which is an almost empty of meaning word if not referred to a spatio-temporal frame, or the concept of "vast", which is almost always subjective, what would be depicted in the film is "roughly half a vast monoculture of eucalypts".Would you admit that as a more accurate reformulation of your first statement?
About your second point, I would like to know if you suggest as alternative "a vast monoculture of native trees"? In such a case, assuming it was viable, what would the difference be to the current situation?
About your third point, and leaving at one side that eucalypts are part of countless ecosystems in Australasia, does that imply that any other land use different to natural vegetation subject to zero human impact is not a part of the ecosystem?
About your fourth point, does that imply that a natural forest in that same location, also taking nutrients from the soil to build biomass, is impoverishing it?
And on your last point, do you have any idea of the % of natural ecosystems of Brazil's Atlantic Forest impacted by Veracel over the total?
Excuse us for replying to your comments with further questions, it is simply to try go beyond simple slogans driven by opinion, which besides being fully respectable, in many cases are empty of meaning beyond ideology... to facts.
In addition, we would be happy to hear your opinion about how much the % of total acreage affected by the activities of Veracel over the total acreage of Bahia or Brasil relates to the concept of "eucalypt monocultures taking over the world". In particular, if you think that less than 1% of Brazil's acreage being planted with Eucalyptus means or not that "eucalypt monocultures are taking over Brazil".