What ELMS is really for ……….

[warksfarmer]

BPS is removed.

ELMS arrives and some farms sign up to it in desperation.

You are tied into a one sided legal document where the rules can be changed by Defra/Gov.

The Gov then say any farmers in ELMS cannot trade carbon because the ELMS agreement won’t allow you. Basically you’ve entered into a contract where by you give your carbon credits to the Gov in return for the ELMS money.

The Gov then trade your carbon on the world market so they can shout out loud that the U.K. is carbon neutral, whilst the food we eat is imported and the import trail carbon issue is the suppliers problem I.e. another countries problem.

Convince me I’m wrong …………

 

[Goweresque]

That doesn't fly IMO. The timescales are all wrong. SFI is fairly short term, 2-3 years we're told. LNR will probably be similar to CSS, 5-10 year schemes. If HMG pull a stunt like that a) it'll put loads of others off joining, and b) when the scheme finishes they'd have no more hold over the landowner's carbon credits, and everyone won't sign up again.

If the State wanted to expropriate all of UK land's carbon credits they'd have to do it in one fell swoop, legislate for it and make it universal, and permanent. Trying to hang such an asset grab on the back of voluntary sign-ups for a new environmental scheme just doesn't make any sense. I'm not saying they wouldn't try to grab UK farmer's CCs but doing on the back of ELMS seems a very cack-handed way of attempting to do it, and one that would be largely doomed to fail.

 

[warksfarmer]

That doesn't fly IMO. The timescales are all wrong. SFI is fairly short term, 2-3 years we're told. LNR will probably be similar to CSS, 5-10 year schemes. If HMG pull a stunt like that a) it'll put loads of others off joining, and b) when the scheme finishes they'd have no more hold over the landowner's carbon credits, and everyone won't sign up again.

If the State wanted to expropriate all of UK land's carbon credits they'd have to do it in one fell swoop, legislate for it and make it universal, and permanent. Trying to hang such an asset grab on the back of voluntary sign-ups for a new environmental scheme just doesn't make any sense. I'm not saying they wouldn't try to grab UK farmer's CCs but doing on the back of ELMS seems a very cack-handed way of attempting to do it, and one that would be largely doomed to fail.

Your point B - if you sign up the scheme won’t ever finish as they’ll change the rules so you can’t. This is why it’s a one sided legal doc.

 

[Goweresque]

Your point B - if you sign up the scheme won’t ever finish as they’ll change the rules so you can’t. This is why it’s a one sided legal doc.

They can't make a scheme you sign up for X years permanent unilaterally after you've signed it. The courts wouldn't allow it. For one thing it would be contrary to Human Rights legislation - the right to enjoy your property and assets. And it would be expropriation without compensation. There is absolutely no way the courts would uphold such an underhand asset grab.

Like I said, if you want to expropriate carbon credits doing it this way is ludicrously inefficient. You only get one shot at changing the agreements, once you've done it to the first batch no-one else signs up, ever. After that you've poisoned the well, no-one is going to touch anything you offer with a bargepole.

We know the State is quite capable of unilaterally legislating to deprive people of their rights, they did it when AHA tenancies were introduced. Equally they did it to deprive landowners of their rights to coal, oil and gas deposits, so if carbon credits are what they want they could easily legislate to nationalise them. But they'd have to pay compensation for sure.

 

[Hindsight]

Your point B - if you sign up the scheme won’t ever finish as they’ll change the rules so you can’t. This is why it’s a one sided legal doc.

Worry more about Tesco and Sainsburys

 

[yellow belly]

BPS is removed.

ELMS arrives and some farms sign up to it in desperation.

You are tied into a one sided legal document where the rules can be changed by Defra/Gov.

The Gov then say any farmers in ELMS cannot trade carbon because the ELMS agreement won’t allow you. Basically you’ve entered into a contract where by you give your carbon credits to the Gov in return for the ELMS money.

The Gov then trade your carbon on the world market so they can shout out loud that the U.K. is carbon neutral, whilst the food we eat is imported and the import trail carbon issue is the suppliers problem I.e. another countries problem.

Convince me I’m wrong …………

It has been stated that you can remove fields from elms any time on an annual basis

 

[warksfarmer]

It has been stated that you can remove fields from elms any time on an annual basis

Until they change the rules mid agreement.

 

[ollie989898]

Anyone getting involved in carbon credits or offsets in my view is a charlatan of the highest order. Convince me money solves climate change.

 

[warksfarmer]

Anyone getting involved in carbon credits or offsets in my view is a charlatan of the highest order. Convince me money solves climate change.

Selling carbon is our future I’m afraid. As I’ve said for years this country will be organic and everything else will be imported. Selling carbon is an extra income.

 

[topground]

Selling carbon is our future I’m afraid. As I’ve said for years this country will be organic and everything else will be imported. Selling carbon is an extra income.

Sorry but you are just the customer the carbon conmen are seeking to take advantage of. The next customer for the reincarnation of derivatives, crypto currency and sub prime mortgages bundled together.
It’s the emporers new clothes syndrome, no one understands what they are getting into but everyone else is doing it so it must be a good thing.
Good luck! ( best read with a German accent)

 

[warksfarmer]

Sorry but you are just the customer the carbon conmen are seeking to take advantage of. The next customer for the reincarnation of derivatives, crypto currency and sub prime mortgages bundled together.
It’s the emporers new clothes syndrome, no one understands what they are getting into but everyone else is doing it so it must be a good thing.
Good luck! ( best read with a German accent)

Already been approached by a supermarket direct. There’s no carbon conmen involved. It’s real and it’s coming fast. The secret will be when to get into it!

 

[Swarfmonkey]

As I’ve said for years this country will be organic and everything else will be imported

I can't see that happening, particularly considering what happened in Sri Lanka recently.

 

[Dave645]

Already been approached by a supermarket direct. There’s no carbon conmen involved. It’s real and it’s coming fast. The secret will be when to get into it!

While the money may be real, carbon trading in all the forms I have seen, is for the most part a con.
I say the most part because if by a miracle you and your family and farm are actually carbon negative and do actually have credits to sell then great have at it, the rub is that’s very unlikely to be true unless you have an EV have lots of solar electric and don’t fly or travel much only eat home grown food and heat your home with electric heating powered by that solar electric.

the chances of that all being true, when you include all your family, are actually next to zero, hence the con, and it’s just green washing where companies buy the appearance of being carbon neutral, while happily writing the expensive off against tax and carrying on as normal, where what they should be doing is actually cutting their carbon emissions or buying land and planting trees on it.
Despite long term goals to cut Co2 emissions the reality is they are still going up no amount of carbon trading will help things in fact they will only make things worse. As it helps Companies avoid doing what they should be doing.

 

[Jackov Altraids]

They can't make a scheme you sign up for X years permanent unilaterally after you've signed it. The courts wouldn't allow it. For one thing it would be contrary to Human Rights legislation - the right to enjoy your property and assets. And it would be expropriation without compensation. There is absolutely no way the courts would uphold such an underhand asset grab.

They don't have to make the scheme permanent, just the category of the land.

Anyone that has submitted an application for mid/ higher tier has basically presented them with all the evidence they require to make it a protected landscape. It is easy to imagine that any survey conducted to assess adherence to scheme rules will only compound this.

It has happened;

Natural England knows best?

Could you please post a picture of the letter of the 'regulation 30 authorisation', as the previous letter certainly insinuated that they had not applied for such an authorisation.

thefarmingforum.co.uk

The manner in which Defra is setting up ELMS to create landscapes and protected areas rather than enable sustainable farming as was it's remit, rings some alarm bells with me.

 

[Jackov Altraids]

Selling carbon is our future I’m afraid. As I’ve said for years this country will be organic and everything else will be imported. Selling carbon is an extra income.

From The National Food Strategy;

" Under the NFU’s plan, farming itself would just about reach net zero – a huge turnaround, not to be sniffed at – but without providing enough carbon sequestration to offset remaining land emissions and mop up any of the pollution produced by other sectors"

The plan isn't for you to sell your carbon credits, it's to put you out of business or committed to a contract [ environmental or supermarket] and steal them.

 

[warksfarmer]

From The National Food Strategy;

" Under the NFU’s plan, farming itself would just about reach net zero – a huge turnaround, not to be sniffed at – but without providing enough carbon sequestration to offset remaining land emissions and mop up any of the pollution produced by other sectors"

The plan isn't for you to sell your carbon credits, it's to put you out of business or committed to a contract [ environmental or supermarket] and steal them.

Read my opening post on this thread.

 

[topground]

Already been approached by a supermarket direct. There’s no carbon conmen involved. It’s real and it’s coming fast. The secret will be when to get into it!

Count your fingers after you have shaken hands with the cartel.

 

[warksfarmer]

Count your fingers after you have shaken hands with the cartel.

Sad thing is it’s probably safer to do a deal with a supermarket than it is to enter into ELMS with the government.

 

[Laggard]

Very disappointed that the government could change our stewardship agreement even though it had been signed and agreed, they blamed the EU. As a young man I thought a deal was a deal, unfortunately that is no longer true. No wonder the likes of BT can put the price up “mid deal”.

 

[warksfarmer]

Very disappointed that the government could change our stewardship agreement even though it had been signed and agreed, they blamed the EU. As a young man I thought a deal was a deal, unfortunately that is no longer true. No wonder the likes of BT can put the price up “mid deal”.

Yep and why anybody signing into the SFI must be mental. It’s a one sided contract that can be altered