Re: Resource conservation

"Peter Huebner" <no.one@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message > In article
ask@itshall says...

I was wondering if this recognition of the finite nature of the world's
resources is becoming a world wide phenomena or if this is just something
that has followed on here from the realities brought home because of a
massive nationwide and prolonged drought.


Actually part of your political spectrum was, or is, rather late in
recognizing
that there is substance to the precictions of doom.

You must mean our wonderful PM. He hasn't got a clue on any environmental
issues and in fact he's been so late seeing the danger his govt is in that I
doubt that he'll manage to climb up even one more point in the opinion polls
before his party is spectacularly wiped out at the next election.

Awareness in NZ for
instance, and Europe is much more acute, Canada also going on what I hear
from
my Canadian friends.

I guess I will forego making comments on who does or doesn't have their
head up
their own backside.

But I will say that I am rather taken aback by some of the foolishness of
the
Kyoto protocol that is just surfacing here. Consider: New Zealand is to a
large
part covered in forests, 'carbon sinks'. Yet, apparently, that doesn't
count.
Countries only get 'carbon credits' for forests that have been planted
after
(1989?) --

1990.

I guess the question could be whether old forests sequester carbon to the
extent that new growth forests do. I don't know if they do or not and I
don't know why 1990 was picked as the date either.

so w.t.f. have I been doing for the last 25 years consigning 25% of
my farm to native bush conservation? They're going to hit me with carbon
tax
because my cattle fart methane! I guess I'll have to burn a lot of petrol
in
the chainsaw, drop all that mature bush and replant in pines so I can
claim
subsidies and carbon credits. Yupp, makes a lot of sense that Kyoto
protocol.

It doesn't. Excluding China and India and the rapid industrialisation
happening there doesn't make a lot of sense TMWOT, but then neither does the
lack of serious attention given to the issue which seems to be reflected in
the thinking of the govts of both US and Oz, which have both refused to sign
(with some justification). IIRC, both the US and Oz are major contributors
to CO2 levels. The US because it's the highest producer and Oz because per
capita it's right behind the US.

Apparently our government was rather surprised by that too, when they
found
out, yet rather than trying to bring some sense into the thing they're
going to
hit us up for money because we 4 million ppl in this large forest &
pasture are > not carbon neutral. Yeah, right.

Obviously thought up by bureaucrats and politicians :-( I am as mad as a
cut
snake, actually (and I have considered myself a conservationist for 35
years
plus). Hells Bells.

:-)) I think you have ever right to be as mad as a cut snake.


.

Relevant Pages
Loading