Into the hands of the money-changers??

By trying to protect buyers of carbon offsets from sharks and spivs, it looks like the Government has delivered farmers bound hand and foot into the hands of the money market middlemen by giving them control of the carbon offsets market. By declaring Australian Carbon Credit Units (ACCUs) to be “financial products”, the Government has decided that only those with an Australian Financial Services Licence can sell offsets or give farmers advice about the offsets they earn. These licences are difficult and expensive to get and require that the holder have significant financial resources to operate.
This decision means a farmer can’t sell their units except through a licence-holder. So all those organizations looking for an income stream from aggregating or pooling units into parcels of suitable size to be traded – the Landcare groups, the farmers groups, those thinking of forming into cooperatives, consultancies with large client bases – will find there is a snout in the trough when they get there. Not only will the return to the farmer be reduced by extra costs, but compliance costs will include time spent training and auditing everyone involved in the process.
This decision also adds a fourth layer of bureaucracy to this market mechanism, the others being the Domestic Offsets Integrity Committee, the Carbon Credits Administrator, and the Land Sector Carbon and Biodiversity Advisory Board. As well regional NRM bodies are being given a ‘guidance’ role with farmers wanting to get involved.
Does the decision to treat an offset unit as a financial product instead of as a commodity guarantee that there will be derivative markets formed in which traders will make more money out of them than the farmers who created them? (This is a common fear expressed by farmers.)
Among the laws that were changed to protect buyers included those against money laundering by the Mafia or terrorists. Where are the laws to protect farmers against those they fear more than terrorists or gangsters: the market sharks?

Find out at the Carbon Farming Conference, 28-29 September, 2011.

Eat more beef, says Conservationist

"Personally I think an answer to the climate crisis is to eat more meat—from a carbon ranch," says American conservationist Courtney White in an interview with The Land’s Matthew Cawood.

‘Mr White's concept of the "carbon ranch" is an opportunity to unite a range of solutions to various challenges, including climate change, farm productivity and regional economic decline.

‘Currently, Mr White said, "the carbon landscape is broken into pieces, and we often pit each carbon use against each other".

‘Mr White will tell Australian audiences that carbon can be managed and exploited in ways that unite these uses into a single theme of regeneration of landscapes, communities and economies.’ He will be talking about the Coalition and the carbon ranch at the Carbon Farming Conference, to be held in Dubbo, NSW, on 27-29 September.

Mr White has developed a 'carbon map' to show that rather than a series of separate issues, carbon is common factor across all landscapes and endeavours, from wilderness to city and everywhere in between, writes Matthew Cawood.

Who Will Be The Carbon Farmers?

Not every farmer will want to get involved in trading farm carbon offsets. In fact, at least 25% have already decided not to, according to a recent survey by the Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation (RIRDC). The study, called Decisions Made By Farmers That Relate To Climate Change, found there are three types of response to the need to change practices: ignore it (26%), want to do something but can’t afford it (19%), want to do something but need support (55%). This last group – called ‘Cash-poor long-term adaptors’ - tend to believe Climate Change is real and man-made and that we have a responsibility to do something about it. They are information seekers and intend to farm more sustainably if they can get support. They tend to have larger farms (average 5000 ha) than the other groups (1600 ha and 2700 ha), and they rely less on off-farm income. They average 55 years of age, their health is good and they feel up to handling change. So, the majority of farmers (74%) want to change to meet the challenge of Climate Change, but need financial support to do so. That is what farm carbon offsets from the Carbon Farming Initiative and the $1.8bn in adjustment funding from the Carbon Tax are designed to deliver to farmers. Now that’s something you won’t hear from rural politicians or regional press outlets. Get the full story at the Carbon Farming Conference, 28-29 September, 2011 at Dubbo NSW. www.carbonfarmingconference.com.au

How the market works (for Indian farmers)

It is hoped that next year it will be Australian farmers, but Carbon offsets paid to farmers in India are being used to offset the emissions generated by this year’s Carbon Farming Conference. The land-based offset credits will be derived from sugar cane used to generate energy. Ben Stuart, Director of Carbon Trading Exchange said “We wanted to demonstrate to farmers what it could mean for them by stepping in to this market. Through the simple offsetting of an event we can show how land-based projects can make money. Businesses will be able to buy CFI credits in Australia to offset their own carbon footprint and count towards their overall emissions reductions and the money will be generated back in to the Australian farming community.” Ben will explain at the Conference how these offsets were created and traded- from go to whoa. The entire event will be offset for the full three days, this will include the electricity for the event, as well as the on-site event set up and bump out. (All delegates and sponsors will be responsible for their own carbon footprint.)

www.carbonfarmingconference.com.au

Free Barista Bar Coffee! Carbon Conference bonus...

There will be a special networking lounge area with complimentary ‘real’ coffee from a Barista Bar. This coffee service is sponsored by the Environmental Registry and the lounge area is furnished by Harvey Norman Dubbo.

www.carbonfarmingconference.com.au

BREAKING NEWS: KEYNOTE SPEAKER ANNOUNCEMENT

Land management’s quiet American revolution

Keynote speaker at this year’s Carbon Farming Conference, Courtney White of the Quivira Coalition, is leading a revolution in land management in America. The former environmental activist abandoned confrontation with ranchers to forge a new community model for creating healthy ‘working landscapes’ by building bridges between ranchers, conservationists, public land managers, scientists and others. In 1997, with two farmers, he co-founded the Quivira Coalition in New Mexico which uses education and collaboration to promote progressive public and private land stewardship. More recently he has been focussed on ‘carbon ranching’ and the new agrarian movement (healthy soil, healthy food, healthy people) in the USA. Mr White is visiting Australia to meet ‘carbon farmers’ and healthy soils activists. Australia is the first country in the world to legislate a carbon offset scheme for farming projects, at a national level.

Courtney will address the topic: “The Carbon Puzzle: Reassembling Land and Livelihoods” at the Carbon Farming Conference (28-29 September, 2011, in Dubbo NSW) www.carbonfarmingconference.com.au He will share his experiences at the forefront of change with the Quivira Coalition. During the Spanish Colonial era in the South Western states, mapmakers used the word 'Quivira' to designate unknown territory beyond the frontier; it was also a term for an elusive golden dream.

Mr White’s writing has appeared in numerous publications, including Farming, Acres Magazine, Rangelands, and the Natural Resources Journal. His essay “The Working Wilderness: a Call for a Land Health Movement” was published by Wendell Berry in 2005 in his collection of essays titled "The Way of Ignorance." In 2008, Island Press published Courtney’s book Revolution on the Range: the Rise of a New Ranch in the American West. He co-edited, with Dr. Rick Knight, Conservation for a New Generation, also published by Island Press in 2008.

China watching Australia's carbon tax

China has started working towards putting a price on carbon and is watching Australia closely, says Dr Jiang Kejun, head of energy and environmental policy analysis at the Energy Research Institute of the National Development and Reform Commission (China’s macroeconomic planning agency). He was in Australia this week. “China wants to do emissions trading but so far we don’t know which emissions trading scheme we should do. That’s the reason why we are setting up six pilots trading schemes in provinces: Guangdong, Shanghai, Hebei, Chongqing, Beijing, Tianjin. So I think this will affect more than 250 million people. We look at what’s happening in Europe, what happened in the US and what happened in Australia. And also Japan has proposed to do some emission trading. So we look at everything together to see what’s good and bad and then we will have a review to see what China can do. Maybe by 2013 we will start the pilot and by 2015 we can do a nationwide scheme. It depends on the pilot.” (From The Conversation and Climate Spectator)

How will a price on carbon affect Australia farmers? Find out at the Carbon Farming Conference. 28-29 September, 2011 http://www.carbonfarmingconference.com.au

Fear is a four-letter word

True or False: This is no time to put a price on carbon when the economy is stuffed and people are doing it tough. False. It’s hard to believe, but the Australian economy is not stuffed, people aren’t doing it as tough as some politicians and the media claim, and things look promising.. “The national accounts for the June quarter provide a salutary lesson on how far popular perceptions can drift from reality,” says Ross Gittins, the economics editor of the Sydney Morning Herald. “Three months ago we were told real gross domestic product contracted by 1.2 per cent in the March quarter. This week we're told the contraction was a quarter less than that: 0.9 per cent. That contraction was fully explained by the temporary effect of floods and cyclones. This week the temporary nature of that setback was confirmed - the economy rebounded to grow by 1.2 per cent in the June quarter.” Retailers and manufacturers are doing it tough and housing activity is weak - but those three sectors account for less than 20 per cent of the economy. Real consumer spending grew by a healthy 1 per cent in the quarter and a bang-on-trend 3.2 per cent over the year.’ Household income is up. Consumer sentiment is down. Why? Because we are a bunch of fraidy cats, easily spooked. EG. We allowed ourselves to be spooked by the industry's threat to withdraw their capital into backing down on charging a super profits tax so the current boom leaves us with something more than a hole in the ground after the miners take the money and run*. As a nation we lack confidence - the Convoy of No Confidence was well named. The pathology of fear explains so much of what we see around us. Denialism is a response to fear. So is Alarmism. Leadership that exploits people's fears is weak leadership. It's easy to lead a lynch mob. It is harder to give people hope and courage.

*The mining industry pays less than 14% tax, makes $50bn profit last report, 83% of it going overseas. It employs only 1.9% of the Australian workforce and doesn’t shop locally for steel, which explains the redundancies announced by BlueScope Steel.

There'll be no money in it, but someone will make lot of money out of it

When we say 'Soil carbon credits for farmers' at ag shows, we get a lot of free advice. 'There'll be no money in it,' say some. Others mutter darkly, "Someone is going to make a lot of money out of it." Still others prove to me conclusively that we can't do it. So many people are confident they can predict the future based on the past. But someone once said, "The future ain't what it used to be." Someone else said: "There are two types of people: those who create the future and those who live in a future created by others. It's a matter of choice." Farmers have created carbon farming methods that work 10 times faster than any official estimate. And price? There are price takers and price makers. There are many things about the future we can't know, but one thing we can be sure of is that the future doesn't look like the past. And it is malleable. It helps if you have a vision of it.

Science pursued by the Lord's lynch mob

Last night’s ABCTV Catalyst program said Australian CLIMATE SCIENTISTS are receiving death threats in emails from strangers. They accuse the scientists of being communists and- in the vilest terms – declare that they will die a gruesome death. Fringe loonies? It’s a big fringe. The Catalyst program showed Lord Christopher Monckton telling a howling crowd: “To the bogus scientists who have used the bogus science that invented this bogus scare, I say, we are coming after you, we are going to prosecute you, and we are going to lock you up.” Science is bewildered by the loss of trust in science among ordinary Australians. While the mob is baying for their blood, the scientific community has launched a campaign called “Respect the Science” which involves explaining to people how peer-review works. This is the mechanism by which the scientific community decides what is true and what is false. Scientists assume the role of gatekeepers of knowledge because of it. But it doesn't always work. The editor-in-chief of a climate science journal has resigned because of the failure of the peer review process. A ‘fundamentally flawed’ paper by prominent sceptic Fred Spencer was published in the journal Remote Sensing after it was peer-reviewed by three scientists who shared Spenser’s sceptical views and who overlooked the fact that Spencer’s arguments had already been refuted in comparable studies. The peer-review editorial staff "unintentionally" handed the job to three of Spenser's fellow sceptics. How did that happen? Peer review has many weaknesses (See below), too many to sustain the air of infallibility some scientists assume. The erosion of faith in climate science will infect other politically-sensitive fields. Suddenly Science feels the need to explain itself. But it's too late to try to turn the tide with explanations of scientific method. The horse has bolted. AS one of the protesters on the Catalyst program said, "It's not science, its religion." What we are seeing is the scientific equivalent of the Protestant Reformation. Everyman can be his own climate scientist. Science is following the failed strategy of the Catholic Church - appealing to its Infallibility. It's a classic 'wicked problem'.

Peer review reviewed

“It has been suggested that peer review is an inherently conservative process, that encourages the emergence of self-serving cliques of reviewers, who are more likely to review each others’ grant proposals and publications favourably than those submitted by researchers from outside the group. This could have a number of consequences. For instance, it may result in the funding/publication of ‘safe’ research that fits neatly into the conventional wisdom and work against innovative, ‘risky’ or unconventional ideas.” )” - Harvey, L., 2004–9, Analytic Quality Glossary, Quality Research International,http://www.qualityresearchinternational.com/glossary/peerreview.htmv

“So we have little evidence on the effectiveness of peer review, but we have considerable evidence on its defects. In addition to being poor at detecting gross defects and almost useless for detecting fraud it is slow, expensive, profligate of academic time, highly subjective, something of a lottery, prone to bias, and easily abused.” - Richard Smith, Peer review: a flawed process at the heart of science and journals, J R Soc Med. 2006 April; 99(4): 178–182

Richard Horton, editor of the British medical journal The Lancet, has said that “The mistake, of course, is to have thought that peer review was any more than a crude means of discovering the acceptability — not the validity — of a new finding. Editors and scientists alike insist on the pivotal importance of peer review. We portray peer review to the public as a quasi-sacred process that helps to make science our most objective truth teller. But we know that the system of peer review is biased, unjust, unaccountable, incomplete, easily fixed, often insulting, usually ignorant, occasionally foolish, and frequently wrong.” - Horton, Richard (2000). "Genetically modified food: consternation, confusion, and crack-up". MJA 172 (4): http://www.mja.com.au/public/issues/172_04_210200/horton/horton.html

Falling off the edge of the Earth?

Farming carbon - it's here

So reads the headline on MATTHEW CAWOOD's article in the Land online. "Amid the wreckage of other greenhouse gas abatement plans, the Carbon Farming Initiative (CFI) has passed through Parliament and looks secure as any legislation can. With bipartisan support - the Coalition has said that should it gain power, it will make modifications to the scheme, but not throw it out - the CFI is a platform with the potential to deliver a new source of income to landholders," he writes.

"The real Hallelulja moment for those who believe farmers should be paid to restore the nation's soils to health will come when a methodology is approved for soil carbon," said Michael Kiely of Carbon Farmers of Australia. "That should be soon. Carbon Farmers of Australia is 'sponsoring' a soil carbon methodology which will be submitted in a matter of days. Then we will see if those scientists cautioning farmers not to expect to increase their soil carbon levels much are right or are they like the experts who predicted that Columbus would sail off the end of the Earth because it was flat. They could only say that because they hadn't been there."

comments

Date: Newest first | Oldest first

Michael & Louisa Kiely need to be congratulated on the wonderful lobbyng work they have done to help create an opportunity for farmers to be rewarded for sequestering carbon into their soils.

There are so many beneifts to the farmers themselves through better soils not to mention the planet saving benefits of the potential to draw down legacy CO2.

Posted by David Cusack, 7/09/2011 7:29:42 AM

Thanks David!Thank you, David. We thank the true believers who backed our campaign when it was considered disreputable to be promoting the rights of farmers to prosper in a carbon economy. For farmers looking for information they can rely on, the Carbon Farming Conference is on 28-29 September, 2011 in Dubbo - www.carbonfarmingconference.com.au. There is a half-day workshop for those needing to come up to speed beforehand. Our 6-year campaign has been mainly funded out of our savings and we rely on this event for support. This is the 5th annual conference. Thank you to all our supporters.

Posted by Michael Kiely, 7/09/2011 10:12:11 AM

Farmers are fracking alarmists?

Try reading this without laughing: “Coal seam gas (CSG) companies including Shell, Origin Energy and PetroChina have backed a public-relations campaign to dispel "alarmist" claims about the sector. The sector on Sunday launched a "We want CSG" campaign, saying it would show how CSG was providing much-needed opportunities for regional communities throughout NSW and Queensland at a time of economic insecurity. The campaign is backed by some of Australia's largest energy companies including AGL and Santos, and major foreign investors such as British Gas and ConocoPhillips, the Australian Petroleum Production and Exploration Association (APPEA) said in a statement."Our strong community feedback is that people want CSG," APPEA chief operating officer for eastern Australia Rick Wilkinson said. "They're increasingly frustrated that until now, the loudest voices in Australia's energy debate have largely been alarmist and their claims unsubstantiated. "This campaign marks the re-emergence of a fact-based energy security debate in Australia and gives voice to the many Australians who want new jobs, cleaner energy, and the revitalisation of regional communities that comes with the gas industry's expansion."

(Thank you, CLimate Spectator)

COMMENT: Is "people want CSG" one of the facts in the "fact-based energy security debate"?IT appears that only the farmers getting fracked don't like it. So proximity determines attitude. Given the widespread ambitions the frackers have for democratising the experience, at some stage people wont want CSG. Everyone will have been fracked. Let the debate begin.

Do we have to frack the farm for prosperity?

On 'the revitalisation of regional communities that comes with the gas industry's expansion', there is an alternative to laying waste to the landscape and poisoning the water in the name of energy security: carbon farming. Restoring soils, regenerating farm landscapes, and revitalising regional communities while reducing emissions and reducing the CO2 overload. Trading farm-based offsets starts officially in November. That's why the central theme of this year's Carbon Farming Conference (28-29 September, Dubbo NSW) is 'preparing farmers to trade'. See www.carbonfarmingconference.com.au

Farmers are fracking alarmists?

Try reading this without laughing: “Coal seam gas (CSG) companies including Shell, Origin Energy and PetroChina have backed a public-relations campaign to dispel "alarmist" claims about the sector. The sector on Sunday launched a "We want CSG" campaign, saying it would show how CSG was providing much-needed opportunities for regional communities throughout NSW and Queensland at a time of economic insecurity. The campaign is backed by some of Australia's largest energy companies including AGL and Santos, and major foreign investors such as British Gas and ConocoPhillips, the Australian Petroleum Production and Exploration Association (APPEA) said in a statement."Our strong community feedback is that people want CSG," APPEA chief operating officer for eastern Australia Rick Wilkinson said. "They're increasingly frustrated that until now, the loudest voices in Australia's energy debate have largely been alarmist and their claims unsubstantiated. "This campaign marks the re-emergence of a fact-based energy security debate in Australia and gives voice to the many Australians who want new jobs, cleaner energy, and the revitalisation of regional communities that comes with the gas industry's expansion."

COMMENT: Is "people want CSG" one of the facts in the "fact-based energy security debate"?IT appears that only the farmers getting fracked don't like it. So proximity determines attitude. Given the widespread ambitions the frackers have for democratising the experience, at some stage people wont want CSG. Everyone will have been fracked. Let the debate begin.

Do we have to frack the farm for prosperity?

On 'the revitalisation of regional communities that comes with the gas industry's expansion', there is an alternative to laying waste to the landscape and poisoning the water in the name of energy security: carbon farming. Restoring soils, regenerating farm landscapes, and revitalising regional communities while reducing emissions and reducing the CO2 overload. Trading farm-based offsets starts officially in November. That's why the central theme of this year's Carbon Farming Conference (28-29 September, Dubbo NSW) is 'preparing farmers to trade'. See www.carbonfarmingconference.com.au

"CFI will survive a change of government"

"It may be that the CFI becomes the only surviving outcome of the Gillard government’s efforts to reduce carbon dioxide emissions," according to Business Spectator. "If the government’s carbon tax legislation gets through parliament, the Opposition has committed to repeal or substantially modify it if it wins the next election, as appears very likely. On the other hand the Carbon Farming Initiative, which is already through, will probably survive... Rather than repeal the legislation, [the Opposition] has indicated it will try to improve it. The concept also has support in farming circles, including the National Farmers’ Federation."

Livestock better food security in dry areas

"Livestock provides more food security than growing crops in many arid and semi-arid areas," said Lloyd Le Page, CEO of the Consortium of International Agricultural Research Centres (Cgiar), as aid organisations agreed on the importance of livestock in the current crisis in East Africa. Jeff Hill, director for policy at USAid, the US development arm, said underinvestment in pastoralist communities in Somalia, Ethiopia and Kenya have contributed to the extreme levels of food insecurity in the Horn of Africa's dry lands. "It is not drought, but vulnerability to drought that is eroding food security in these areas," Hill told agricultural experts at a meeting in Nairobi of the International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI)., "and this vulnerability is a result of chronic under-investment. This is particularly true for the livestock-based systems which are and will be a dominant part of the arid and semi-arid lands." The ILRI, based in Nairobi, is a proponent of pastoralism and asserts that herding in dry areas makes better economic sense than irrigation.

EXtreme CArbon FArming SYstem revealed at Conference

When people ask Jeremy Bradley about his stocking rate, he says that he likes to keep it at around 5 to 10 trillion to the gram. This, he says, is the optimum rate for accelerated soil building and biological carbon sequestration. Jeremy has been passionately involved with the carbon-farming movement since its inception and is building his 'extreme carbon-farming system' based on a blend of techniques such as those promoted by PA Yeomans, William Albrecht, Elaine Ingham and Christine Jones. He has a fascination with natural farming systems and their ability to regenerate soil fertility. This year he received an award from the Northern Rivers CMA for Innovations in Sustainable Agriculture for his work on increasing microbial biodiversity by introducing biological liquids into equipment used in normal horticulture and pasture systems. With his trusty microscope and microbe brewer Jeremy is exploring the carbon-farming frontier and discovering how far and how fast it is possible to build carbon in a variety of farming systems. Working with minerals, air, water, biology and management, he is developing methodologies that will rebuild soil without investing in expensive equipment or inputs. See Jeremy at the Carbon Farming Conference, 28-29 September, 2011, at Dubbo NSW.

Alanna Moore (Stone Age Agriculture) at Carbon Farming Conference

Geomancer Alanna Moore reveals how to harness invisible forces such as magnetism and energy lines to stimulate soil microbes, enhance plant growth and restore damaged land at the Carbon Farming Conference (28-29 September, 2011, Dubbo NSW). Well-known for her work with paramagnetic rock dust and “towers”, she also studies links between Permaculture, plant and animal well-being and Spirit of Landscape. Paramagnetism is based on sound scientific principles and has potential to increase soil carbon. Dowsing is commonly used for detecting subterranean water flows, but Alanna also uses it as the window on the spiritual dimension of the land. Her books include Stone Age Farming, The Wisdom of Water, Sensitive Permaculture, and Divining Earth Spirit.