How to Create Carbon Credits – Kill a Camel.
By Viv Forbes
The people who brought us pink-bats and cash-for-clunkers have a new scheme – we can earn carbon credits by shooting wild camels, humanely of course.
Surely it would be far easier to shoot tame cattle? There are big mobs near all of our northern ports, going nowhere.
And if greens have their way and stop all live exports, we can earn heaps more by shooting millions of sheep and goats, humanely of course.
What about those mobs of kangaroos? They burn carbon fuel and emit dreaded carbon dioxide. Why should they be spared when the future of the planet is at stake?
One small problem – what do we do with all those carcasses? Left alone they will release all the carbon sequestered within their bodies within a couple of weeks, thus incurring massive carbon debits.
And who counts the dead camels? To prevent carbon cull fraud the economy will boom with jobs for regulators, inspectors, auditors and prosecutors.
And of course, we must not burn diesel, av-gas or gun powder to do the slaughter, so the hunting must be done from horses using bows and arrows.
And if killing camels earns carbon credits, why can’t cattle, sheep and goat abattoirs also earn them?
(Just think of the ball the camel killers could have among the 200 million sacred cows in India.)
First they came for camels, and I did nothing.
Then they came for cattle, and I did nothing.
Then they came for me.
Further Comment:
Wild camels are a valuable resource for those with eyes not blinded by the smog of global warming dogma. Here is a comment we made two years ago when this silly suggestion first surfaced:
http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/camel-cull.pdf
And here is a comment by Paddy McHugh who actually knows something about camels:
http://www.paddymchugh.com/pdfs/Camel%20Cull%20a%20Blind%20Mans%20solution…pdf
Does anyone believe that riflemen in helicopters will kill every camel cleanly and painlessly? Yet our whole live export industry is threatened for a few misdeeds. Here is the most likely final product from the carbon credit harvesters:
Here is the final product from the live camel harvesters:
Think this is all a hoax? Then check this out:
Yep, our bureaucrats have put together a 62 page proposal to issue carbon credits for killing feral camels. They note that there is not much use in killing an old camel so the cullers will be required to declare the age of each camel killed, so that that the Government auditors can determine how much pollution will be saved. To help this complex calculation the government is researching the average life expectancy for feral camels.
The document is full of endless dribble, including how the cullers discount the credits they will get by the amount of pollution that is created by the culling.
Here is a sample:
“There are two options for measuring fuel consumption for EVc,j,y as detailed below. Option 1 is preferred.
Option 1) Recording of all fuel purchased or pumped for use in these vehicles during the management activities.
Option 2) Recording of all ground vehicle and fuel types and odometer readings before and after management activities.
For Option 2 the amount of fuel consumed is calculated by taking the fuel consumption rating of the vehicle as a litres per kilometre figure and multiplying this by the kilometres of travel undertaken as part of the management activity, then divided by 1000 to convert to kiloLitres, as per the equation below:
Where:
| GDgv,c,j,y | = | Ground distance travelled by vehicle gv using fuel type j in undertaking the management activities c in year y |
| LPKgv,j | = | Litres of fuel type j combusted per kilometre for vehicle gv” |
(Thanks to Helen Dyer for this explanation of the calculations.)
A print-ready copy of this issue of “Carbon Sense” with all pictures can be downloaded from:
http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/camel-cull-credits.pdf
By the same logic, hot air blowers like Gore etal would be perfect candidates for voluntary euthanasia to save the world.
Wonder if they’ll bite?
Dr. Dave says: June 12, 2011 at 1:49 pm
Perhaps you could test your lead hypothesis with the proponent of the camel cull from Uni of Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia.
2009 “To be shot from a helicopter is actually quite humane, even though that sounds brutal,” he told the Associated Press. “If I was a camel, I’d prefer to just get it in the head.” (Animal rights groups are upset about the proposal, but Tony Peacock of the University of Canberra’s Invasive Animals Cooperative Research Center brushed off their concerns.)
source: http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/post.cfm?id=camel-burgers-australia-plans-to-sh-2009-08-11
Wonder what happened to the $16 million the government ‘ponied up’ in 2009?
That’d be on top of the $19 million or so taken to change fuel in all petrol stations in the Australian centre from petrol (lead) to AVGAS/COMGAS/OPAL (?more lead) because Aboriginal kids were sniffing the petrol(used for cars). Though these was never a clear number on this or the use of other substances inhaled.
I guess the aviation gas will be useful in situ for the helicoptors.
Shooting Camels for Carbon Credits. There can be little doubt that we are well along the slippery slope now. Whether you like animals or not, one should be very worried about the thought process involved here. On one hand there is playing God, deciding what is fit to live and how can we freeze our evolving planet into this particular time-frame.
On the other hand there is the illogical actions by bureaucrats that would kill camels but leave the deadly snakes alone. The former MIGHT kill someone in some far-off future from farts over-heating the planet and causing a snowstorm :-), the latter is likely to ACTUALLY kill someone today. We have them reducing deer hunting permits which lead to automobile carnage and deer starvation. We have them NOT spraying for mosquitoes or ticks, resulting in Malaria or West Nile virus and a Lyme disease epidemic. There is a sizable list of such examples here in the USA and I shudder to think what it is worldwide.
The non-native or non-indigenous species is a little troubling to me. It is arrogantly unscientific and has an air of something ugly to it. I remember the first time I went to Hawaii watching the people check our luggage for non-indigenous plants and stuff when we arrived there. Wow they are careful. And then later it dawns on you that nothing is indigenous to a volcanic rock, every single thing on those islands was brought there. Were those first plants and seeds carried by birds thousands of years ago indigenous? Were those first birds indigenous? How about the first Polynesian ‘invaders’? They’re now native Hawaiians? American Indians were either indigenous *or* crossed a land-bridge but not both. Perhaps it is a continental affair. Attention all animals: any species that crossed over to Australia the last time it was smooshed up against the other continents gets the ‘indigenous’ label, all others beware of helicopters. Yikes, and what about the Middle East 😉
ROTFLMAO!
Thanks for these. I have been using many such photos to affect the squeamish liberals I am in proximity to. I suggest everyone do the same. You can make a difference by picking off a few eco-nut liberals this way, it adds up. BTW, has anyone else noticed how such windmill Bird-Chipper stories and photos tend to fly under the radar?
See the strategic similarity with the USA liberal Congress 2007 + liberal White House 2009. The plan was the same, ram through everything (knowing they would likely lose the Congress) including that dead-of-night Christmastime ‘Obamacare’ by the slimmest majority of Congress *but* against the wishes of the vast majority of the people. Make it so tangled that Houdini couldn’t unravel it and hope most of it survives into the future. This is their plan going forward.
The Communists used to move two steps forward, one step back, but the modern green Socialist Neo-Communist has learned to move ten steps forward, maybe a few steps back. The only logical and effective response is a worldwide war on socialism, ridicule them, and beat them senseless. Unfortunately there are still those among us that are easily triangulated (e.g., in the AGW fight, they will often say ‘this is *not* about politics or socialism, it is about science, blah blah‘). In reality this is a worldwide struggle for freedom, and its spans many fields. So when the green socialists makes these brazen initiatives as described in the quoted comment, no-one should be surprised. Expect these same tactics, everywhere. Communists are international Socialists. The question is, do we yet have the courage to call them by their true names.
Exactly. And I say we should exploit it and ram it down their throats. I know there may be purists among us that decry such tactics (‘we mustn’t stoop to their level … play dirty … blah blah’), but enough is enough. Everyone should be able to see where this is going. Like the bird-chipper windmills, these types of stories are ripe for picking. They make good email fodder to your lists of family, friends and associates. Only the most hard-core leftists are immune to it’s appeal.
Really good point. Remember the thrust of that horror was not the poor buffalo, but the American Indians who were portrayed as good shepherds of the environment and killed just what they needed to survive, and consequently suffered from this action (as if liberals really give a crap about human beings and their plight). Who knew that the crazy cowboys on horseback and other western invaders firing at buffalo from trains were actually the good guys protecting the atmosphere!
Yes! That claim is ludicrous and anyone who has fired from a moving platform knows it. It reeks of ‘sanitized for the squeamish public’ post-op propaganda. Perhaps with some future multi-million dollar super-duper computer-tracking optical-auto-targeting laser range-finding sniper-system this would be true, however, economically and environmentally, the weight of the platform (chopper!) and it’s fuel for the engine and electricity for the computers, plus it’s exhaust has to dwarf any gain from whacking the camels.
OK, I can explain this.
Four years ago, there was no voter under the age of 30 who had ever seen anything but sensible government under the conservatives. They had paid off all government debt, were running fical surpluses and the economy was going gangbusters, unemployment was low and things were going fine. So this they thought had to be the normal state of affairs. The conservatives, they thought, was uncool, and they were tired of Prime Minister Howard.
So they voted for the soft-left socialists, not caring to notice that they were and remain barking mad loons who molest goats and bay at the moon.
They are starting to notice this now that the economy is in the toilet, they have run up $200 billion in debt, run $55 Bn deficits, electricity prices are soaring and people are losing their jobs. And yes, have a government that intends to save the world by taxing CO2 and shooting camels so they no longer fart.
MarkL of Canberra
Brisbane
AGW jumping the shark and shooting the camel?
I remember watching a Discovery Channel programme some years ago in which the main theme was the Aussie camels n the outback being practically driven to total annihilation due to………wait for it: Global warming. Yes, that’s it, global warming was driving the Australian feral camel population to extinction, driving me to tears watching a family of camels practically dying of thirst and hunger, not being able to find food and water etc etc. That programme did not tell me that there were 1.2 million feral camels. It just was used as a prop for the AGW scam.
Now, they are telling us that camels are the cause of global warming. So, either way, Aussie camels are dead, either because of global warming or because they ARE causing global warming.
AGW scam agendas driven by politicians hell-bent on flogging a dead horse…or a camel
So, dead camels are now to be traded for carbon credits. In some countries, new wives are traded for camels. Who knows, maybe the IPCC will one day issue carbon credits to be traded for new wives? LOL
This pathetic Gillard Labour government has made me feel so embarrased to be Australian that heaven forbid I will put on an Africaan accent next time I travel overseas.
I really don’t understand what Australia Gov. is thinking. If they reverted the entire country to the 16th century it wouldn’t have any meaning impact on climate. This reeks (pun intended) of another 10:10 stunt — aka if you don’t pay up we’ll start shooting indiscriminately.
And what’s more: Thousands of years ago, millions, maybe billions of ruminant beasts roamed the planet, from north american bison to yaks, deer, reindeer, water buffaloes sheep, goats etc etc. Wern’t these animals producing methane like today’s cars produce CO2? And while methane is a far stronger GHG than CO2, there was no ‘climate change’ during those times according to AGW proponents. Not. Climate change us what it is, climate change and change is the only constant in this planet’s climate. Only the climate-change deniers would want to deny this continuous change from happening by spending trillions of dollars, making cheape energy unaffordable, pushing up the poverty line and thus forcing 2/3 of the global population to become poor, the poor to become poorer and the most poor to die of hunger.
A bit off topic but an interesting aspect of this story.
I ran across an article discussing Mongolia mining ventures in 2014. Apparently, Mongolia has discovered huge coking coal, ferrous metal, rare earth minerals, and copper deposits. The proximity of Mongolia to China, Russia, Japan, etc. will reduce transportation costs and may reduce the cost of the related commodities.
source: http://www.mongolia-web.com/mining
If Australia was awake, they’d realize the economic implications and focus on helping Australia agriculture instead of destroying it.
In Canada every year environmentalists fight against the east coast seal hunt. They fight it because they claim it is bloody and brutal and it’s just for money. They provide the media with lots of video documentation and the anti-seal-hunt groups make lots of money through donations for their work. As a result, the EU has banned the import of seal pelts from Canada, and many Intuit seal hunters are now suffering cultural damage and lost income.
Now environmentalists are going to hunt camels. It will be bloody and brutal, and it will be for money (carbon credit money). How is this any different from the Canadian east coast seal hunt?
These people are mad. How do these people live with themselves?
Klem, the seal hunts are horrible, and the Inuit seal hunters can eat snow, for all I care. One would think that after centuries, they could come up with something better than clubbing newborn baby seals for a living. Killing camels for carbon credits is also hideous. You fault the environmentalists for opposing one (seal clubbing) and not the other (camel culling), yet you oppose one (camel culling) and not the other (seal clubbing), so you’re thinking is the same, just from two different points on the same line.
Interesting discussion on methane production, especially on the new nomenclature for the methane-producing unicellular critters. About as interesting as finding out blue-green algae have stopped being algae and are now prokaryotic cyanobacteria, which can cause algal blooms despite no longer being algae.
Ric Werme said on June 12, 2011 at 5:00 pm:
Hi Ric. Apparently these methanogens, classified in the domain Archaea, are a primitive form of life, without nuclei. They evolved enough to survive by making methane, and that’s where they stayed, just successful enough to exist in a suitable environment and that’s it, like government bureaucrats.
There are also the “matching” microorganisms, methanotrophs, that eat methane. Not surprisingly they are found in places where there is methane production such as “…oceans, mud, marshes, underground environments, soils, rice paddies and landfills.” The aerobic and anaerobic methanotrophs are different. In aerobic environments that type combines the methane with oxygen. The anaerobic ones have been found in deep waters such as in the Black Sea, such as mentioned in this 2010 Scientific American piece, resulting in less net methane production from organic matter decay than otherwise.
(As an interesting aside, that piece examines them in the Arctic Ocean, and notes how the (C)AGW warning of a Catastrophic! positive-feedback release of the potent GHG methane to the atmosphere from undersea deposits of clathrates, the methane hydrate ice, is largely nonsense as the methane will likely simply get eaten.)
So as to your (first) question, if it’s an aerobic environment then you won’t be getting methane production. But, there may be conditions, like in a mulch pile, where the oxygen will get locally depleted leaving the methanogens to finish the decomposition thus there will be methane production.
Haven’t we simply reached the obvious conclusion of this new paganism? We are now clearly at the animal sacrifice stage.
Atmospheric methane is measured in parts per BILLION by volume (p.p.b.v.). Methane did not increase between 1995 and 2006. Previous to that it was ‘increasing’ for some years. I could not find any sources re-2007- today.
Alex,
There was an uptick in ~2008, which led to a lot of foaming at the mouth in certain circles.
Here’s the latest, which has been met with more quiet, but it’s still a bit dated, so it will be interesting to see what it’s done in the last year or so.
http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/aggi/
Here are some things about that Australian Carbon Tax and climate change that I believe are true;
– Julie Gillard & Labour were elected on a MANDATE NOT TO INSTALL A CARBON TAX
– A tax is a Tax is A TAX someone is going to pay, someone is going to lose money and I bet some will come out of my pocket and yours.
– There is absolutely no evidence or proof that a Carbon Tax will make 1 iota of difference to the carbon balance.
– Gillards advisors are highly selected, highly overpaid “Scientists” who are all Global Warmist all claiming the science is settled.
– The climate system has a very large number of contributing elements and how they act and react is extremely complex – scientists can not even agree about what elements affect climate and have far less understanding about how those elements actually contribute to climate.
– The most upsetting thing of all is, even if we reduce our carbon footprint there is not 1 of these very clever scientists who will be able to tell you how much we will change the temperature BECAUSE THEY REALLY HONESTLY DO NOT KNOW!
Hey Julie, your scientists want to reduce Australia’s atmospheric CO2 by 5% by 2020? That works out to be about 65 CO2 molecules in every 1,000,000,000 (billion) great!, then make them really useful, give them chopsticks – go for it boys!!
“1Col says:
June 13, 2011 at 8:15 pm”
Any rational thinking person in Australia knows this carbon tax ISN’T about the environment. My justification for this statement is very simple. During the election campaign, forget what Gillard said, she’s a puppet being pulled here and there, it’s what Bob Brown said that gives a hint. He said, and I can’t actually quote, but it went along these lines “If we have a carbon tax we can provide the hospitals, build schools, roads and rail systems…..” yadda yadda yadda yadda. Now I ask what are they doing with EXISTING taxes if a NEW tax is required to provide this infrastructure? SCAM is a word that springs to mind.
Patrick Davis says: June 14, 2011 at 4:03 am
Nope, it is clearly the language of laziness, fraud and corruption.
Bob Day has something to say on the expenditure of people’s taxes
Beware the Bloated Public Sector
TO those struggling to put a roof over their heads and food on the table, the unions’ latest push for pay rises for those fortunate enough to be employed in the public sector will come as a bitter blow (“Unions launch new pay push”, 13/6).
Australia is rapidly developing a two-tier economy – the haves and the have-nots. The haves are those plugged into the public purse. The have-nots are those who have to survive in the real world.
What it reveals is that under Labor, Australia is going the way of many other countries – European countries in particular. The common thread running through these near-bankrupt economies is their bloated public sectors.
Bob Day, Adelaide, SA
source: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/beware-the-bloated-public-sector/story-fn558imw-1226074496076
Surprise! Surprise! The Secretary of the Climate Change Department is a Taxman! Temple Grandin is absolutely right when she says [in her “Animals in Translation”] that all our bureaucrats are “abstractified”. They have lost contact with the real world and live totally in their own computer generated world.
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/999/725/689/
Here is a link to a petition to stop the slaughter until some more reasonable solution can be found. There are people in African whose cattle are dying from the global warming drought. They would welcome a live camel. There are other solutions besides wanton slaughter.