Planting a tree gains a car buyer carbon offsets in the USA.
Does it follow that car companies might buy-up plantations as investments to counter-act their polluting ways? (Not that it actually decreases pollution, of course!)
If John Howard can envisage this scenario, why can't he envisage Australia's farmers getting in on the Carbon-trading act? Farmers are responsible for vegetation management on a scale that can only be dreamt of in cities and towns. Farm vegetation has the added and no less important effects of protecting and improving soil quality, salinity control, pasture improvement and livestock production. This would suggest that perhaps farm vegetation should be worth more to the environment than island-like plantations resulting in desert wastelands at the end of their time.
Three questions must be asked:
1. Would the large plantation groups be less valuable to this argument if farmers were included in Carbon credit schemes. i.e. Is there silent lobbying of the PM from this area?
2. Are the vegetation management efforts of Australian farmers important to Australians?
3. Are Australian farmers becoming less relevant to Conservative governments because of their diminished voting capacities?
What do you think? (Click 'comments' below to leave your thoughts)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Is Carbon trading going to actually do anything for the environment? I mean, will swapping pieces of paper around between people growing trees and polluters actually decrease pollution. Or is it just going to make Malcolm Turnbull and P Costello's rich stock-broking mates even richer?@!
How do we get Carbon credits for our farm?
I can't do much about his stuff. Let's just concentrate on input costs and looking after prices. and with this is mind, how about someone looks at rorts/fraud in the works grid system.
Post a Comment