Carbon Offsetting??Please show me the theory in practice.

farmerm

Member
Location
Shropshire
Can someone who knows their figures better than me come up with the amount of co2 emitted globally annually compared to the amount which can realistically be expected to be absorbed by the earths soil and trees?
My guess is that no amount of offsetting will compensate for annual emissions.
43 bn tonnes of CO2 emitted from fossil fuels... this does not include CO2 emissions from deforestation, soil degradation and methane from landfill and billions more farting humans. Forget offsetting the 43bn tonnes from underground fossil fuels, annually we are not even close to offsetting the losses of carbon to the atmosphere from surface and near surface stores!

5,000 square miles of mature Brazilian rainforest was felled last year... Wales is about 8,000 square miles so to offset Brazils deforestation for just one year we need to plant trees on every acre of Wales that is not houses, roads or rock... It is mathematically impossible to start offsetting carbon emitted from fossil fuels.
 

Pilatus

Member
Location
cotswolds
Presumably during the winter months while grass and all other crops rand trees are dormant they will take in very little Carbon meanwhile,we the human race are creating carbon as much as ever, :banghead: :banghead:
 

holwellcourtfarm

Member
Livestock Farmer
43 bn tonnes of CO2 emitted from fossil fuels... this does not include CO2 emissions from deforestation, soil degradation and methane from landfill and billions more farting humans. Forget offsetting the 43bn tonnes from underground fossil fuels, annually we are not even close to offsetting the losses of carbon to the atmosphere from surface and near surface stores!

5,000 square miles of mature Brazilian rainforest was felled last year... Wales is about 8,000 square miles so to offset Brazils deforestation for just one year we need to plant trees on every acre of Wales that is not houses, roads or rock... It is mathematically impossible to start offsetting carbon emitted from fossil fuels.
 

Pilatus

Member
Location
cotswolds
If I had a farm with some areas where coal seams were at the surface, would those areas have quite a bit of carbon in them, meaning I could claim quite a lot of carbon credits?
Would peat bogs be classed as storing more or less carbon than permanent pasture?
How about if one owns a large Scottish Highland farm/ Estate, would that type of land have a carbon stored in it as never been ploughed ?
;)
 
Last edited:

holwellcourtfarm

Member
Livestock Farmer
If I had a farm with some areas where coal seams were at the surface, would those areas have quite a bit of carbon in them, meaning I could claim quite a lot of carbon credits?
Would peat bogs be classed as storing more or less carbon than permanent pasture?
How about if one owns a large Scottish Highland farm/ Estate, would that type of land have a carbon stored in it as never been ploughed ?
;)
It shouldn't matter what you've got NOW except as a baseline. It's about what you can add, surely?
 

Dry Rot

Member
Livestock Farmer
I haven't read the whole thread as I'm convinced I am numerically dyslectic, if there is such a thing!

I learnt about something called The Carbon Cycle at school. Plants absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere using photosynthesis with sunlight to make cellulose which is what makes wood. That's why you can put a barrow load of fire wood on the fire and get only a few handfuls of ash. Put the ash on the soil and the process is repeated, with carbon dioxide and other residues going up the chimney as smoke,,,,to be reused later to make wood. That process goes around and round in a circle (or cycle) so it evens out.

But millions of years ago, forests died and were left to form oil, gas, and coal. We are now using these fossil fuels, tipping the balance. So there is an excess of carbon dioxide. The panic is now to shove all this excess CO2 back underground where it came from. That, very basically, is what it is all about.

Sorry lads, can't be done. We are dooomed! Imagining that millions of years of carbon build up in the fossil fuels that have been converted to produce energy releasing CO2 can be put back where it came from by planting a few trees is just plain stoopid.
 

Dave645

Member
Arable Farmer
Location
N Lincs
48DC0D6D-898C-4F1A-AD58-EA19739473E7.jpeg

https://theconversation.com/amp/climate-scientists-concept-of-net-zero-is-a-dangerous-trap-157368
This link was shared near the start of this thread, this picture is from it, it shows the drastic action really needed to keep global temps to below 1.5 degree from pre industrial levels the target set by the GOP
And the pictures shows the mitigation speed required to hit that from my reckoning that means in the next 9 years unless we make big cuts each year like far bigger than any made so far we have zero chance to be even close to the targets the GOP set.

I personally think that we are all responsible for climate change our personal choices, travel, buying rubbish we don’t actually need, etc etc.
I very much doubt the farming industry has any real carbon credits to sell and if it did it should not sell them, I doubt they even cover most farms extended families carbon foot prints never mind some big companies carbon emissions.
auditing farms for there carbon foot print is not a bad thing encouraging a net zero or better farm is a great result but selling credits is not.
Every industry and person should be challenged to be net zero or better and some form of incentive or penalty should exist to help push people in the right direction.
I would suggest that we all take responsibility to do our best be that fitting solar electric or heat if possible cutting down where possible on travel and air travel.
Recycling, demanding more recyclable packaging and products, that can be recycled at end of life.
It’s 7billion small changes every day that we need not finger pointing at a few and hoping that will fix it.

my challenge to the readers of this thread is to make one change in your life, towards personal net zero every day.
That can be not having something, changing the way you do something, not to drive somewhere but walk or bike, saving up for something that will help your move to net zero etc etc.
 
Last edited:

DaveGrohl

Member
Mixed Farmer
Location
Cumbria
View attachment 998823
https://theconversation.com/amp/climate-scientists-concept-of-net-zero-is-a-dangerous-trap-157368
This link was shared near the start of this thread, this picture is from it, it shows the drastic action really needed to keep global temps to below 1.5 degree from pre industrial levels the target set by the GOP
And the pictures shows the mitigation speed required to hit that from my reckoning that means in the next 9 years unless we make big cuts each year like far bigger than any made so far we have zero chance to be even close to the targets the GOP set.

I personally think that we are all responsible for climate change our personal choices, travel, buying rubbish we don’t actually need, etc etc.
I very much doubt the farming industry has any real carbon credits to sell and if it did it should not sell them, I doubt they even cover most farms extended families carbon foot prints never mind some big companies carbon emissions.
auditing farms for there carbon foot print is not a bad thing encouraging a net zero or better farm is a great result but selling credits is not.
Every industry and person should be challenged to be net zero or better and some form of incentive or penalty should exist to help push people in the right direction.
I would suggest that we all take responsibility to do our best be that fitting solar electric or heat if possible cutting down where possible on travel and air travel.
Recycling, demanding more recyclable packaging and products, that can be recycled at end of life.
It’s 7billion small changes every day that we need not finger pointing at a few and hoping that will fix it.

my challenge to the readers of this thread is to make one change in your life, towards personal net zero every day.
That can be not having something, changing the way you do something, not to drive somewhere but walk or bike, saving up for something that will help your move to net zero etc etc.
There are more and more articles coming out saying this at last. But they are a small voice when up against the worldwide big money propaganda machine. This ain't going away any time soon though as you've posted.

"Offsetting" shouldn't even exist as a term never mind one for big money to generate wealth from whilst painting themselves green and bullshotting the public. And neither should "net zero" it's an effing fantasy. Who dreamt both of those up? Big money and big politics. Cosy bed that.
 

SFI - What % were you taking out of production?

  • 0 %

    Votes: 77 43.5%
  • Up to 25%

    Votes: 62 35.0%
  • 25-50%

    Votes: 28 15.8%
  • 50-75%

    Votes: 3 1.7%
  • 75-100%

    Votes: 3 1.7%
  • 100% I’ve had enough of farming!

    Votes: 4 2.3%

Red Tractor drops launch of green farming scheme amid anger from farmers

  • 1,286
  • 1
As reported in Independent


quote: “Red Tractor has confirmed it is dropping plans to launch its green farming assurance standard in April“

read the TFF thread here: https://thefarmingforum.co.uk/index.php?threads/gfc-was-to-go-ahead-now-not-going-ahead.405234/
Top