Re: Beyond the trough
|
Geoff Thomas
Good stuff, Michael, I can see how your reasoning would appeal to the cow cockies in australia, (small farms) beset by drought, and hardly able to make ends meet, - in a discussion I am involved in, I am advancing the argument, "If the Farmers of Australia, 2% of the workforce, would feed their cattle 330mg of charcoal/day, - which would make their cattle more healthy and productive and the soil better to retain moisture, they would be greenhouse neutral, but as the charcoal mainly stops Methane production, - a far more virulent greenhouse gas, their contribution would advance to 8%, so greenhouse positive, *4 and that charcoal, as it has then become Biochar, and buried by the dung beetles in the soil would attract more carbon and heal the soil, bringing amazing exponential benefits. - Thing is, to encourage the farmers to so do. - Carbon sequestration payment?”
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
- They would all have 200 litre drums, many could make the thing fit, most could upscale once they were sure it worked. The discussion is https://theconversation.com/climate-change-will-make-qlds-ecosystems-unrecognisable-its-up-to-us-if-we-want-to-stop-that-106679#comment_1776648 But I am talking to poor farmers, - the change can probably only happen from the bottom up, nothing more bottom than a pit with a cheap lid. Thanking You. Cheers, Geoff.
|
|
|