Want to see more of this in California? Unless you're a logging company I didn't think so.
California is even more insane than I thought in my previous post. We now have one of those truth is stranger than fiction things going courtesy of the nutbags in Sacramento. It now seems that the California cap & trade law, AB32, may actually encourage logging companies to clear-cut the forests in the state.
So, we have companies running around charging people to plant trees to sequester CO2, right? Trees are good, right? The hippies have even lived in old growth redwoods to prevent them from being cut down. Everybody is bitching about deforestation in the Amazon Basin and elsewhere, right? The prevailing theory of the warmer crowd has been that trees are good and we need more trees planted and less trees/deforestation going on if we’re not going to cook the planet, right? All those animals that live in the forest also need them, right?
Well I guess everyplace but California who now, in yet another fit of CO2 Insanity, astoundingly want loggers to cut down trees! Why? Because they’ll earn carbon credits to plant new trees if you can believe that one!
From the California Watch website we get this information about it.
California timber firms could emerge as big winners in the state’s fight against global warming, earning millions of dollars through the sale of carbon credits if a new set of rules are approved by the Air Resources Board this week.
The state board has responsibility for implementing AB 32, California’s landmark effort to limit greenhouse gas emissions.
A significant portion of those credits, or offsets, are expected to come from the carbon-storing capacity of forests.
Yes you read right they want to cut down those Co2 sequestering trees! Must be good in California and not in the Amazon I guess.
One of the most controversial provisions would enable timber companies to obtain credits by replanting trees in clear-cut areas of the forest.
So, where did this ‘brilliant’ idea come from? Oh, the logging companies, who else? Lets’ go back to that old follow the money thing. Below are some bullets with shortened quotes from the article.
- “The biggest timber company and landowner in California, Sierra Pacific Industries paid $37,500 to California Strategies, a major Sacramento lobbying firm, to present its case.”
- “The company also nurtured a relationship with Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. Sierra Pacific has donated $29,600 to the governor’s campaign committees, and its billionaire owner, Archie Aldis “Red” Emmerson, hosted a $250-a-plate fundraising lunch for the governor’s reelection campaign at his estate outside of Redding.”
- “The company has donated about $890,000 to political candidates and ballot measures in California in the past five years.”
- “The California Forestry Association also reported spending $245,000 lobbying state agencies in 2007 and 2008.”
OK, nothing wrong here, move on now, nothing to see, Arnold helped with AB32 out of the goodness of his heart as did our elected representatives and state agencies. Please ignore the fact that real money was used to perhaps “sway” things contained in AB32 in a certain direction favorable to the logging industry. Nothing wrong with that or clear-cutting for dollars, just looks like a bad haircut was given to the forest, that’s all.
So what’s the problem other than all that money being spread around to get a law so the loggers can cut down all those oxygen producing big trees so they can plant pee wee trees that produce less oxygen? How about……
Critics, like former legislator Sher, say that the new protocol violates some of the basic principles of forest conservation. What the timber industry calls “even-age management” Sher calls “tree plantations.”
“The forest companies are interested in being able to harvest their trees, and replant, and then produce a new asset that they can sell,” Sher said. “It undermines the biodiversity of the forest. You end up with tree plantations that are much more vulnerable to fire and disease.”
You can read the whole article. What it appears to me is that the number one problem is that everyone’s so worried about carbon that they forget trees sequester CO2 and emit oxygen, which we….ummmm….breath folks. Problem number 2 is they literally can’t see the forest for the trees because they’re blinded by all the wrong kind of ‘green’ that’s been spread around Sacramento. The kind of ‘green’ that causes people to make stupid decisions.
Sorry, I’m very anti AB32 and anti cap & trade, but in my opinion its pure CO2 Insanity to encourage clear cutting trees to reduce carbon. I don’t normally agree with the Sierra Club or the Center for Biological Diversity, but in this case I think they’re perfectly justified in protesting this with the CARB. It’s another nutcase ides from an agency that hires faux PhD’s and inflates diesel emissions by 340% so they can con their way into getting us to do their greentard bidding.
We’ll have to see what happens in this meeting about cap & trade, but I’m not going to hold my breath because money talks and CO2 walks. I encourage you to visit the link below and read the whole article and the letter to CARB from the Sierra Club et al.
Source: California Watch