<
https://theconversation.com/3-reasons-why-removing-grazing-animals-from-australias-arid-lands-for-carbon-credits-is-a-bad-idea-218129>
"If you run a large polluting facility and can’t work out how to actually cut
emissions, you might buy carbon credits to offset your emissions from the
Australian Carbon Credit Unit Scheme. These credits are meant to represent
carbon taken back out of the atmosphere and stored in growing trees or in the
soil.
The problem is, these credit schemes can be rubbery in the extreme. One area we
must scrutinise forensically are human-induced regeneration projects. These are
the backbone of the offset scheme, accounting for 30% of credits issued
to-date. Over the coming years, they could be responsible for almost 50% of
annual issuances. These projects claim to regenerate native forests across vast
areas – not by replanting trees in cleared areas, as you might think, but by
reducing grazing pressure from livestock and feral animals.
This is fundamentally flawed. Almost all projects are in arid or semi-arid
rangeland grazed by livestock and kangaroos and only partly cleared. But cattle
and sheep mostly eat grasses and herbs, not woody material. So how can we
possibly claim reducing grazing pressure leads to more trees and shrubs?"
Cheers,
*** Xanni ***
--
mailto:xanni@xanadu.net Andrew Pam
http://xanadu.com.au/ Chief Scientist, Xanadu
https://glasswings.com.au/ Partner, Glass Wings
https://sericyb.com.au/ Manager, Serious Cybernetics
