THERE will soon be a federal election in Australia. One of the issues that should be discussed and debated is ‘climate change’ and how the Australian Labor party, led by Kevin Rudd, versus the Conservative Coalition, led by Tony Abbott, plan to address this important issue.
Central to the Coalition’s policy is a Direction Action Plan [1] and central to this plan is the idea that farmers can and should be paid to sequest carbon in their soil.
This is how the plan is explained in the policy document:
“Soil Carbons – Once in a Century Replenishment of our Soils
The single largest opportunity for CO2 emissions reduction in Australia is through bio-sequestration in general, and in particular, the replenishment of our soil carbons. It is also the lowest cost CO2 emissions reduction available in Australia on a large scale.
Significantly improving soil carbons also helps soil quality, farm productivity and water efficiency, and should be a national goal regardless of the CO2 abatement benefits.
Through the Emissions Reduction Fund a Coalition Government will commit to a ‘once in a century’ replenishment of our national soils and farmlands.
Through the Fund we will support up to 85 million tonnes per annum of CO2 abatement through soil carbons by 2020 – and reserve the right to increase this, subject to progress and evaluation.”
In reality there is limited opportunity for total soil carbon increases. However, the distribution of carbon within the soil profile can be changed and farmers can work to maintain soil carbon including by not burning crop residue.
Finally, an academic has come out to say as much [2]. Rick Roush, Dean of the Melbourne School of Land and Environment, is explaining in this week’s The Land that most active soil scientists thought it would be “a stretch” for farmers to use the Carbon Farming Initiative:
“A University of Melbourne survey of hundreds of Australian studies going back three decades found that using the country's soils to offset a significant proportion of national greenhouse gases ‘is technically limited and economically unviable at the present time’.
Published in the journal Nature Scientific Reports, it suggests farmers would lose out through soil-carbon projects at carbon prices backed by both the government and the opposition…
At the current carbon price – $24.15 per tonne – farmers would stand to lose at least $12 per tonne for carbon farming under normal soil conditions, the researchers found.
The shortfall under the government's plan would be even greater if its decision to move to a floating carbon price from next July is implemented. At Tuesday's announcement of the plan to shift from a fixed to a floating carbon price a year earlier than scheduled, the government estimated the price would drop to as low as $6 a tonne…
Sequestering carbon would likely be restricted to the top 10 centimetres of soil, and be limited by low-nutrient levels and water scarcity. Application of fertiliser would boost the sink capacity of soils but at a rising cost to farmers, Professor Roush said.
Carbon is slow to accumulate in the soil, and the agricultural methods mostly likely to encourage it, such as no-till farming, are already widely used, he said.”
As Bob Carter writes in his new book Taxing Air pursuing expensive and futile schemes to combat the speculative, and quite possibly illusory, risks of human-induced global warming is both pointless and wealth-sapping. Instead any sensible national climate policy must primarily address the well known risks of natural climate events and change.
***
1. Direct Action Plan
http://www.greghunt.com.au/Portals/0/PDF/TheCoalitionsDirectActionPlanPolicy2010.pdf
2. Coalition’s soil carbon plan ‘unviable’, study finds. http://www.theland.com.au/news/agriculture/general/news/coalitions-soil-carbon-plan-unviable-study-finds/2664730.aspx
Doubly Oh dear, looks like an elections is looming and Getup is scraping the bottom of the barrel.
Yes,
Oh dear indeed
Not off topic much?
If Scott actually took the time to read Jen's post and most of the comments. . . he would perhaps realise his accusations are way, way, WWWWWAAAAAYYYYY off the point.
I can see they have wasted my taxes in Labor education schemes. Oh dear!
Lib's are a JOKE. they cant do anything without making taxes.
What are the Lib's going 2 do now?
The lib's just started a massive unseen tax in Australia, including trying Workchoices.
You lib supporters are blinded of what Howard did to get so much money and run a AU market to fast.
All lib's did was start a massive 10% tax on just about everything we buy. That in return saved the fed Howard gov like 100 billion dollars from not having to bail out state governments. Surplus was made from massive tax on all AU peoples money, not a smart gov. Just taxes the hell out of us.
I Also remember Lib's / Howard saying your tax on your wages will be 40% less now " GST". BS it was $20 less a week, but we paid 1,000 times more then that, for everything each week.
Lib's Gov just saved mass billion because they made the public pay for it. So all they did was tax us. yeah grate job CHEERS.
Also Howard cut mass gov / public servant jobs. The only reason jobs got made was thanks to china. Mass hi paid jobs got made because of china, not the lib's. So what are they going 2 do now in every field to what you lib's did last time?
Second. Abbott just said the lib's try help small business & blast Labor for the carbon tax, that Rudd didn't want like hers. Rudd's idea makes it much cheaper.
Abbott and the lib's are the reason all Australian "small business" are broke and have no cash to invest.
If you Lib's supporter opened up your eyes, you would know the Lib's also made another massive massive tax. That is a small business 10% profit tax, on the biggest numbers of businesses in Australia. Small biz that is all Australian owners.
You need to wake up, them even coming out saying lib's stand for helping small biz is a JOKE. That 10% profit tax had taken $10k+ away from mass small business =s Australians each year. Thanks to there 10% small biz profit tax.
Lib's have only taxed us & that's it. Its clear by that, that that's all they can do and did do, is tax us with unseen AU big taxes.
How did they save up that money?? They taxed the hell out of us, & got a massive new income? get with it.
In the end over 10 years, the lib's had things from good to things going real bad. The money they taxed us was needed & relied on to be used, & they could know longer save massive money up. "That's when the next Lib's plan will com in if they win. "bigger tax". Know wonder why Europe now pays a 75% GST tax".
As for a first home grant, they just got everyone to buy a house that could. 8 years later everyone just about did and the housing market was pumped way to fast.
Lib's just pumped the housing market so fast, it was bound to go bust in 8 years and messed up the housing market. As it did & as we seen interest rates got way out of control. The lib's could not stop the out of control interest rates, something Rudd did.
A responsible GOV would not get everyone to build a house within 8 - 9 years, but keep it at a nice steady rate. So they would let a limited amount of people build a house each year, and get the grant. There for keeping a steady & very good housing long term housing market.
You lib's supporters are blinded from the truth. Lib's just tax us with a unseen AU tax.
The only way lib's will save money up / get a surplus, it by upping a tax. No not a GST tax, as they don't bail out state governments anymore, but a tax on wages or a profit tax. They will never get surplus without just taxing us / getting AU money.
Its Australians that got us a surplus, not lib's.
Thank's to them libs taxes, the cost of living has gone up. That 10% GST tax we pay everyday thing, & 10% small biz tax, is money that would let all Australian pay bills easier, & have a better life without the stress.
Open up ya eyes, They can only tax us, then its f us over with things like workchoices.