Cambridge study says carbon offsets are not nearly as effective as they claim to be.

  • @RegularGoose
    link
    English
    1
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    If you really want to to some good with that land, although it won’t make you any money, turn it back into a native natural habitat, or at least sell it to someone who will agree to do the same. The world is never going to improve without landowners who are willing to restore their developed land back to its natural state.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      810 months ago

      It already is! We’re proud to maintain our pastures in their native state and we grazed them rotationally with long rest to emulate the way the buffalo used to graze them long ago. They’re a mix of grass, brush, trees and slough. Even though my stock is gone we plan to background some steers or heifers occasionally just for the sake of the land as it needs grazing. However this will allow us to plan grazing around the grass instead of being forced to put our own animals out for need of feed.

      That was part of the reason I initially thought I could get some carbon offset credits simply for maintaining them in that state, because we are supposed to be encouraging people to maintain wild prairie, and the land does soak up significant carbon every year just by doing its natural thing.

      However as mentioned the system is a fraud. The only way to get carbon credits is to break it up and then rewild it after the damage has been done. They told me I could easily generate credits this way by destroying my native habitat and then replanting it… Which is absolutely a crime against nature.

      Carbon credits are a racket, tell your friends

      • @RegularGoose
        link
        English
        210 months ago

        That sounds pretty cool. Too many people would just decide “this land isn’t profitable enough anymore, time to sell it to a developer.”