Climate Bolloxolgy.

What I'm saying is that there is 9 tonnes of CO2 removal absent from the inventories, and the only gaseous flow attributed to agriculture are the emissions. This is a sham.

Attributing the CO2 removal to the cow, is partially correct.

If we leave ground fallow, the resulting vegetation will grow, utilising CO2, then die, rot and emit a certain amount in the form of CO2 and methane.

I can only give you grassland figures, but if we do not graze our fields, (unfertilised, unfarmed, of just remove the grass manually) we would grow between 4 and 6 tonnes of grass per hectare. When we graze cows (and we do use inputs) we grow between 14 and 16 tonnes of grass per hectare...ie..the more you graze, the more you grow..

I do attribute, this extra growth to the stock, and this extra growth does utilise extra CO2, and my figures have cows emitting 2 tonnes less CO2-EQ, than what their grass utilised to grow.

This is taking into account both120kg Methane (3360 CO2 eq) plus 3,600 kg CO2 respired.

We've been scammed....The figures is one thing, but the way it is being systematically ingrained in the general public is quiet something else.

You'd have the milk too if it's dairy.

And then the dung pats adding carbon below soil via earthworms and dung beetles.

@alps is the dung pat part of the grassland sequestering figures used in this country?

This whole carbon thing is a scam, using selective figures to get their desired result. Food production is calculated where produced, oil is calculated where it is consumed because it suits their agenda. Regulate the farmers but leave me to continue on my merry way.

I wonder how many individuals are really driving this here?obviously some politicians,a good few civil servants who want to bend over for fdi. wonder are they being incentivised corruptly? it looks like we are not calling them out enough. wonder if we need to take a firmer stand against government instead of a few token marches to cork and Dublin . we don't seem to have people who can hold it together in the media to put their point across. farm lobby weakened by splits. we need to get more professional against the zealots and we need a Congress of farm unions to agree coherent response

I didn't anyway! but I do agree . he should not have been fired

It was small mindedness and begrudgery threw him out, not common sense. If there was an issue while I was involved, expert advice would've been found and used, I don't know if that's the case now. Also fighting it out on the media is a waste of time, public opinion only gives a s...te about their own issues. Farmers should be hounding their TDs on the inequities of what's going on but they're too lazy to do anything apart from whinge, four or five in every county meeting politicians once a month isn't near enough on this issue.

And announcement eminent here of herd cuts..

Action is needed, that much is evident.

But all we get is finger pointing at others saying 'they're the ones that need to change, not me' and meanwhile the above is what is happening in the real world.

Oh look at this. I think I ranted on this thread before about how farmers would get rode when it comes to the selling of carbon credits.

First up, we have talk of using ag credits to offset carbon in other sectors like airlines for example. That boils down to prioritising flying over food. This might be a good idea if a) only excess credits are sold after using available ones in ag first, and b) the owner of the ground capturing the carbon is rightly compensated for the work done to capture it.

And now, lo and behold, aren't we talking about our grass carbon capturing being underestimated. i.e. there's actually more there than we thought so we can sell more. Woohoo.

Someone is going to cream this and the farmer will be left to do the work and then be penalised for not doing it or not doing it right. It's amazing how people can make money out of literally the air and sell things from land they don't own.

Edit to add that this ban on burning green waste is another sham. You're not allowed manage trees now if they overhang. If a tree overhangs on a road, what do you do with the limbs now? Pay a fortune to someone to chip it or mulch it? Horse it into the ditch? And hedges will be savaged if this derogation is extended for a year so they can be managed more easily from then on. I know it's what I'll do if a derogation comes in for 2022.

Someone needs to approach a lawyer and ask who owns the carbon credits. I can't see how it would legally be anyone other than the farmer. Isn't this the sort of thing a farmers federation should be doing?

Christian Holzleithner DG Climate Action EU Commission stated yesterday that the credits belong to the farmer.

Watch however how our processors will push for producers to allow these credits to be inset (as opposed to offset) within the processing system, to deliver a canbon neutral product at consumer level.

That was mentioned at a climate conference online recently in the UK.

Who the carbon credits belong to. It was mentioned that the processors will want those credits for the products on the supermarket shelves.

I agree. The trouble is if you trade them off. You're expecting some business if you don't sell direct to the consumer yourself to buy your product with no carbon rating.

All it takes is for the first farmer to give those credits away with their produce and the game is over before it even started.

Have no doubt, the farmer WILL receive something for the credits. Most likely linked to CAP. You'll get a few bob for farming in a certain way, or having a low stocking rate, or having trees sown, or hedge managing, etc. Loads of ways they'll give a few euro and it will be lapped up. Meanwhile, the carbon will be traded on your behalf by someone else and what they make vs. what you get will be miles apart.

The worst thing is the credits be sold outside of agriculture. Allowing the likes of fuel companies and airline etc to advertise galore about how they are good for the planet as they pass money between each other. All the while, the man on the ground doing the actual work gets nothing, and their industry won't ever get "clean" as the carbon work done by them will be sold off somewhere else.

TL;DR Ag will never be carbon neutral as the carbon will be traded away to other industries. Ag will then be expected to do more as we're the only industry that can, but for someone elses gain. Same as it ever was really