[Aditya]

A New York Times investigation into Brazil’s rapidly expanding slaughterhouse industry — a business that sells not only beef to the world, but tons of leather annually to major companies in the United States and elsewhere — has identified loopholes in its monitoring systems that allow hides from cattle kept on illegally deforested Amazon land to flow undetected through Brazil’s tanneries and on to buyers worldwide.

And transactions like his are the linchpins of a complex global trade that links Amazon deforestation to a growing appetite in the United States for luxurious leather seats in pickup trucks, SUVs and other vehicles sold by some of the world’s largest automakers, among them General Motors, Ford and Volkswagen.

A luxury vehicle can require a dozen or more hides, and suppliers in the United States increasingly buy their leather from Brazil. While the Amazon region is one of the world’s major providers of beef, increasingly to Asian nations, the global appetite for affordable leather also means that the hides of these millions of cattle supply a lucrative international leather market valued in the hundreds of billions of dollars annually.

International trade data showed companies that own tanneries supplied with the hides had then shipped leather to factories in Mexico run by Lear, a major seat maker that supplies auto assembly plants across the United States. Lear said in 2018 that it was then sourcing about 70 percent of its raw hides from Brazil. Brazil’s hides also go to other countries including Italy, Vietnam and China for use in the automotive, fashion and furniture industries, the trade data showed.

Government data analyzed by The Times shows the appetite for land in the area. According to the numbers, between January 2018 and June 2021 ranches operating in Jaci-Paraná on illegally deforested land sold at least 17,700 cattle to intermediate ranches. The buyers were suppliers to the three big meatpackers, JBS, Marfrig and Minerva, according to both government and corporate data.

The supply chain, from the ranch to the auto showroom, is complex. Hides from Minerva and JBS slaughterhouses go to JBS-owned tanneries, while Marfrig’s hides are mainly processed by Vancouros and Viposa, according to corporate data and interviews. Trade data compiled by Panjiva, the supply-chain research unit at S&P Global Market Intelligence, shows that the seat manufacturer Lear, which is based in Southfield, Mich., is the largest American buyer of hides from JBS, Vancouros and Viposa.

Neither Lear nor G.M. labels where the leather for its car seats comes from. Lear’s imports of Brazilian leather have surged over the past decade, driven by a jump in leather sourced from JBS, according to data from Panjiva, the supply-chain data company. Last year, Lear was the largest American importer of leather and hides from Brazil, importing about 6,000 tons, the bulk of that from JBS, according to Panjiva data.

Full-size trucks and large SUVs are a growing force behind the demand for leather trimmings in the auto industry. To many buyers, leather “screams luxury and usually adds significant resale value,” said Drew Winter, a senior analyst at Wards Intelligence, an automotive research firm.

Source: The New York Times

[saikarthik]

This can be avoided by a couple of actions,

Customers: Choose to go for other upholstery options, but depends on the awareness and will.

OEMs: Have strict policy on sourcing of tier 2/3 aligning to their organization's sustainability goals.

Govt.: Enforce stricter measures and offer incentives to companies that take up and achieve sustainable practices in leather industry. Slowly steer them to diversification. But if, people like Bolsonaro are against sustainable efforts and logic, it's difficult. I read somewhere that the indigenous tribes are policing and preserving their nearby areas from these illegal deforesters and poachers. But how much can they do if their own "G" is against it?

[Kosfactor]

Almost all leather is a byproduct of meat \ dairy industry (I`m sure some genius would want to stop that as well).

Leather is good way to utilize what would otherwise be a waste product. Its like throwing the cattle bones away rather than making gelatin out of it.

[WorkingGuru]

We as auto enthusiasts, need to educate civil society that using leather seats in tropical countries makes absolutely NO sense.

We, as educated people, need to realise that A1 milk from genetically bred cows is actually unhealthy in many ways.

This is the first step! People, for their own selfish interest must desist from these products.

[ariendj]

Why not move to Vegan Leather?
Its made of polyurethane (PU) and polyvinyl chloride (PVC) and sometimes made from natural resources, including pineapple leaves, cork, apple peels, and recycled plastic.

Already Toyota, BMW, Tesla, Nissan and Range Rover, Mercedes and VW use in some of their models.

[digitalnirvana]

This is not a leather problem alone. Its a political problem - not a product problem. And by the way, I abhor leather. Not for conscience reasons but for the environmental effects of the dairy industry. But I'll not debate that here because it will detail the thread.

Bolsonaro is marginalising and actively repressing the Amazonian tribes and taking away their livelihoods by exporting cattle industry into the previously forested areas. When / if he leaves, Brazil will be 30 years behind and the planet will be severely injured. There's only one Amazon rainforest. And there's only one Amazon rainforest ecosystem. The Anthropocentric world view means we don't care that every day over a thousand species go extinct. Most directly as a result of logging and deforestation.

You cannot ever rebuild that. Not even in a hundred years. Dairy and palm oil aren't worth that much. Ignorance is not an excuse.

[quattroa4]

What a thread ! Very valuable and educational information shared over here , thanks a ton Aditya !
Never ever went in to details of leather industry and how it is destroying the Amazon rain forests which I am so passionate about . Never ever I will ask for leather in my cars again in future purchases . Thanks a lot !

[jkrishnakj]

Is it leather seats that’s a problem or the global demand for beef that’s causing it?

Asking because, if the real problem lies elsewhere, it’s a bit easier to point elsewhere.

If the demand for the meat comes down, I don’t think they get slaughtered just for the hides for making leather.

[Celes]

As a part of the Indian buffalo meat industry, I can vouch without any bias that this report does not makes any sense as far as automotive industry is concerned. Just to give an idea in Indian context, the hide of a buffalo is less than 4% of the purchase cost of the animal. And on top of that, the local ex factory prices of Indian buffalo hides is higher than the equivalent cow hide ex factory price from any Brazilian or Argentinean plant, although the quality of cow hide is superior to buffalo hide.

As rightly pointed above that leather is a by-product of the slaughterhouse industry, there is no way that the demand for leather impacts the environment dynamics. Rather the demand for cheap meat from India & Brazil drives the slaughterhouse industry as the prices of Australian, European meat is way higher than Brazilian or Indian meat.

[dragracer567]

The problem is really the clearing of the Amazon rather than the demand for leather. As many other members pointed out, the increase in cattle production is driven by the demand for meat rather than leather.

Brazilian ranchers in particular are the culprit, driven by the policies of Bolsonaro. However, cutting down on meat consumption isn't a solution either as Brazil is a major producer of other plant products like soy as well which are cultivated in deforested land.

[MadinMumbai]

Classic force fitting of vegetarian/vegan politics to ride piggyback on any social/environmental issue. As has already been pointed out - Leather is a byproduct of another industry. Once the byproduct exists should it be thrown away? How will that impact the environment? Same holds true for meat. It's also a byproduct, albeit not on the same scale as leather, of the milk industry.

On a different note (without getting into an ethical debate) -Those against the animal husbandry industry seem to be making a 180 degree argument. But it is just half the circle. Agriculture, the industry that feeds 7 billion humans, has evolved as a 360 degree industry. Where every bit serves the next link in the chain. Eventually working as a circle of life in a sense.

It's very easy to say switch to alternate products without fully understanding the replacement economics and its environmental impact. Consider this small example- 90 to 95% of the wheat plant (straw etc,.) is used as fodder for cattle. If there is no cattle to consume this straw, what will billions of tonnes of byproducts from the wheat farming industry be used for? And if we decide not to use it how will it be disposed off? We have seen how burning of rice straw has messed up the environment in the north of India. Also, while it might be fashionable to drink Almond milk it is hardly sustainable. Ever consider how much forest land has to be cleared to plant enough almond trees? Soy, the cheaper replacement for milk as a protein source will need a disposal system for its stalk and byproducts if its farming were to be scaled up to replace all milk products.

[Exhuberance]

Let me wade head first in this debate.

Starting with meat consumption, specially beef, there are numerous studies now to clearly say that this is the largest contributor to greenhouse gas emissions. Maybe read this
https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidrv...h=2f379eca5206

Or maybe the members can go through any of the Environmental documentaries on Netflix - Gamechangers, Kiss the ground, Cowspiracy, etc.

Saying that Leather is just a by-product is a good way to shrug off responsibility - let me drive my 9 Kmpl SUV with leather seats - the Government should mitigate Climate Change, after all we voted for them, we paid taxes - let me enjoy my life, YOLO, et al.

Unfortunately, the issue is too big to leave it to Governments - we all know how efficient they are. We as consumers need to make our voices heard. If we start saying no to leather seats - at least it’s a starting point for a dialogue for ethical sourcing, options for other eco friendly material, etc.

[lordrayden]

I think the use of real leather in car seats IS coming down over the past few years. A lot of cars sold in India today have leatherette seat covers. In fact, some companies that claim "leather" seats in the brochure/specifications actually have a small asterisk next to that word and in the fine print, it will say *leatherette

[MadinMumbai]

Originally Posted by Exhuberance

Saying that Leather is just a by-product is a good way to shrug off responsibility - let me drive my 9 Kmpl SUV with leather seats - the Government should mitigate Climate Change, after all we voted for them, we paid taxes - let me enjoy my life, YOLO, et al.

Responsibility for what exactly?

Animal husbandry is an industry. Are you suggesting shutting down a whole industry? What about the food chain that exists? Where will billions of people get their food from? If you suggest plant foods then I have a simple question - how will the plant waste (waste from human consumption point of view) be disposed off? Currently it is used to feed the animal husbandry industry. Options are - Plough it back into the soil? How long will that take to decompose? Burn it? What's the environmental impact of burning? Use chemicals to break it down? What are the challenges there?

These are not ethical questions. These are economic and environmental issues. How will the world deal with decomposing cattle - bones, meat and hide - if it were to switch to an alternate protein source? And what are the environmental costs of switching to alternative materials? Leather substitutes are largely derived from petroleum refining. It's not like that's without environmental impact. Same applies to natural fibres like cotton. There is an environmental cost associated with growing cotton.

Fact is 7 billion people on this world need to be fed. Any disruption has to be planned and worked over decades. This "Ethical" debate is an easy way to absolve responsibility.

[Exhuberance]

Originally Posted by MadinMumbai

Responsibility for what exactly?

Responsibility for everyone's own individual carbon footprint !
Yes, it will take decades to bring down greenhouse emissions - in both ecologically and 'economically' sustainable manner. That is well understood by at least the conscious policy-makers and environmental advocates (maybe not the radical environmentalists/ ultra-vegans).

Let me talk in economic terms. There is a hidden environmental cost that is not factored in the price of many commodities - one such thing is beef, there are many others as well. One example I have often heard by leading academia is of growing sugarcane/ cash crops in areas of Maharashtra on canal-fed free water and power - which has lead to long-term soil salinization/ erosion.

There is a hidden cost to this sugarcane (or other non-environmentally sustainable industries) - that is not reflected in the price of the sugar in this case (and other commodities like beef)

Exactly why there is globally so much talk of a Carbon Tax - to factor in economically, what is the real cost that all of us collectively bear - and are differing for our future generations to bear. An ethical debate is better than having no debate at all - because we all can very well see the environmental consequences happening today.