4 ms·

Americans’ Appetite for Leather in Luxury SUVs Worsens Amazon Deforestation

33 points by ishikawa 5y ago

OldHand2018 5y ago
A very similar problem as in the organic fraud article last week. A network of organizations trying to do the right thing but stymied by the fact that product entry into the system can and is gamed, with little they can do about it. However, leather use in cars will likely diminish. It's already starting at the high end.
- njarboe 5y ago
  Tesla quietly went leather free some years ago.
- perl4ever 5y ago
  I didn't see why they are focusing on leather rather than beef in this article. "Raoni Rajão, who studies Amazon supply chains at the Federal University of Minas Gerais, said that because the leather industry makes ranching more profitable, it shares responsibility for any deforestation. “Leather can have high added value,” he said." Did you see where the quantitative information is?
  - ishikawa 5y ago
    this is always what I think too. There is a large meat industry and the leather can't simply be trashed.
    - riedel 5y ago
      We did a data analytics project for a upper class furniture manufacturer and I was really surprised to hear that they typically cannot afford buying A grade leather because the car industry actually stocks everything. Due to their processing requirements car manufacturers can hardly work around natural defects. The absurdity they said is that the leather in cars is coated below so many layers of plastic coating that it hardly had any properties of real leather anymore. Large hides of high quality leather seem to be actually a serious business rather than a waste product from what I heard.
grammarnazzzi 5y ago
TLDR: Irresponsible criminals in a forgein country are committing crimes to produce a marketable item. Irresponsible law enforcement in this country chooses not to punish or prevent these crimes. New York Times conclusion: * The criminals are not to blame. * The country not enforcing it's laws is not to blame. * The rest of the world is not to blame. * Only Americans' and their gluttony is to blame. My conclusion: * Fuck you, NYTimes
- dr_dshiv 5y ago
  You seem really angry at The NYTimes. I don’t think car buyers would otherwise know that their leather car seats are linked to deforestation of the rain forest. Isn’t that important journalism, so people can make informed choices?
  - coolso 5y ago
    Perhaps GP supports informative journalism, just not one with an “Americans are bad and should be ashamed for being richer than other countries” narrative?
    - dr_dshiv 5y ago
      Not ashamed for being richer—ashamed for mindlessly buying products that directly destroy the rainforest. Most wealthy people don’t want their leather from the rain forest, they’d rather get it from Italy. I found it super informative because I had no idea.
  - grammarnazzzi 5y ago
    It's the manipulative, click-bait title that I have issue with. NYT chose to misrepresent the purpetrators in it's article. That's not journalism. NYT's conclusion of who is to blame could have gone either way: 1) be manipulative by support americans and their interests regardless of the truth 2) be objective, report the facts, identify contributing factors without overtly blaming 3) be manipulative by damning americans, encouraging americans to hate each other and their country, feed into everybody's victim mentality I much, much would 2. But if I can't have 2, I'd prefer 1 over 3. My kids futures will be better off if they are encouraged to appreciate what's good in their country rather than always looking for reasons to hate it

33 points by ishikawa 5y ago

OldHand2018 5y ago

A very similar problem as in the organic fraud article last week. A network of organizations trying to do the right thing but stymied by the fact that product entry into the system can and is gamed, with little they can do about it. However, leather use in cars will likely diminish. It's already starting at the high end.

njarboe 5y ago
Tesla quietly went leather free some years ago.
perl4ever 5y ago
I didn't see why they are focusing on leather rather than beef in this article. "Raoni Rajão, who studies Amazon supply chains at the Federal University of Minas Gerais, said that because the leather industry makes ranching more profitable, it shares responsibility for any deforestation. “Leather can have high added value,” he said." Did you see where the quantitative information is?
- ishikawa 5y ago
  this is always what I think too. There is a large meat industry and the leather can't simply be trashed.
  - riedel 5y ago
    We did a data analytics project for a upper class furniture manufacturer and I was really surprised to hear that they typically cannot afford buying A grade leather because the car industry actually stocks everything. Due to their processing requirements car manufacturers can hardly work around natural defects. The absurdity they said is that the leather in cars is coated below so many layers of plastic coating that it hardly had any properties of real leather anymore. Large hides of high quality leather seem to be actually a serious business rather than a waste product from what I heard.

grammarnazzzi 5y ago

TLDR: Irresponsible criminals in a forgein country are committing crimes to produce a marketable item. Irresponsible law enforcement in this country chooses not to punish or prevent these crimes. New York Times conclusion: * The criminals are not to blame. * The country not enforcing it's laws is not to blame. * The rest of the world is not to blame. * Only Americans' and their gluttony is to blame. My conclusion: * Fuck you, NYTimes

dr_dshiv 5y ago
You seem really angry at The NYTimes. I don’t think car buyers would otherwise know that their leather car seats are linked to deforestation of the rain forest. Isn’t that important journalism, so people can make informed choices?
- coolso 5y ago
  Perhaps GP supports informative journalism, just not one with an “Americans are bad and should be ashamed for being richer than other countries” narrative?
  - dr_dshiv 5y ago
    Not ashamed for being richer—ashamed for mindlessly buying products that directly destroy the rainforest. Most wealthy people don’t want their leather from the rain forest, they’d rather get it from Italy. I found it super informative because I had no idea.
- grammarnazzzi 5y ago
  It's the manipulative, click-bait title that I have issue with. NYT chose to misrepresent the purpetrators in it's article. That's not journalism. NYT's conclusion of who is to blame could have gone either way: 1) be manipulative by support americans and their interests regardless of the truth 2) be objective, report the facts, identify contributing factors without overtly blaming 3) be manipulative by damning americans, encouraging americans to hate each other and their country, feed into everybody's victim mentality I much, much would 2. But if I can't have 2, I'd prefer 1 over 3. My kids futures will be better off if they are encouraged to appreciate what's good in their country rather than always looking for reasons to hate it