The spiking events should be much more sparse and therefore probably easier to interpret.

I also don't like what they seem to be doing, thank you for the link! Hopefully the international courts fully investigate the issues.

But I also think their help is extremely significant, they should not be discouraged of helping even if their home companies are contributing to deforestation. In reality deforestation is an enormous issue distributed across many states and vast lands, involving many industries including wood and cattle ranchers, as well as mining as in this case (which beyond deforestation also poisons communities, illegal gold mining has been a huge source of mercury contamination). I believe in this case we should treat the issues separately, and not criticize them for their donation, but investigate the mining issues very seriously (they seem very grave, including widespread lead contamination).

Hopefully we can get this fixed according to better standards, and also resume foreign contribution to the Amazon that is much welcome and needed!

I am a little confused by this comment.

Norway is paying (along with Germany) for the Amazon fund, which I believe was a fairly independent organization with input from Brazilian government as well as donors from other countries.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/aug/16/norway-halts-amazon-fund-donation-dispute-brazil-deforestation-jair-bolsonaro

In 2019 with a sudden increase in deforestation, they decided to cease funding, which is definitely not " just some meal vouchers and whatnot" -- it was about $1.2b in total over a decade from Norway.

Now independently of this, there is a single norwegian company called Norsk-Hydro that has been accused of releasing waste into a river in the amazon. It has not gone to trial yet as far as I know.