[Barrabundy]

.

 

[HAWKEYE3]

Con,

I can't add to the argument you presented. But I have a few questions as follows;

The use of mill mud on your farm would be a carbon offset I would think.

Also the cogeneration of electricity using the waste bagasse and leaf etc, and the burning of trash resulting in returning carbon to the soil, where do these sit with carbon credits.

There was an article/news item recently (in the past 2 weeks) where a group of first Australians up in NT have sold their carbon credits because of their controlled burning activities regenerating growth in native vegetation. It amounted to megabucks up front and annually. If I come across this article again I will post it.

Regards

Ian

 

[dru]

I seem to remember stories from the States after WW2 where farms were paid to leave fields fallow. I presume over-supply but that doesnt make sense in that era does it?

Anyway Con, I suspect that the parties who purchased carbon credits will be OK. They cant have bought them surely if they weren't registered or some such. In the mean time the party who made representations that carbon would be saved by de-stocking, well they could be chased legally. But of course the company is defunct. Short of chasing the directors...

The whole carbon trade has problems all over the place. To be fair, many of these sort of things the best we can hope for is that it is the best tool we have, even if it is compromised.

Push the logic though. Can Ford now claim carbon credits for ceasing manufacture in Aus?