Comments on: Now That the Copenhagen Agreement Puts Deforestation on the Table, What is it Worth? http://cleantechnica.com/2009/12/20/now-that-the-copenhagen-agreement-puts-deforestation-on-the-table-what-is-it-worth/ Clean Tech News & Views: Solar Energy News. Wind Energy News. EV News. & More. Tue, 30 Dec 2014 10:33:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.0.1 By: Susan Kraemer http://cleantechnica.com/2009/12/20/now-that-the-copenhagen-agreement-puts-deforestation-on-the-table-what-is-it-worth/#comment-25449 Mon, 21 Dec 2009 21:55:00 +0000 http://cleantechnica.com/?p=4253#comment-25449 “How would they cook food with solar?” Solar power makes electricity. So they would have electricity, many for the first time: that means lights, electric stoves, TV, etc. Or they could use solar ovens – very low tech but effective too.

]]> By: Stev http://cleantechnica.com/2009/12/20/now-that-the-copenhagen-agreement-puts-deforestation-on-the-table-what-is-it-worth/#comment-7946 Mon, 21 Dec 2009 16:41:44 +0000 http://cleantechnica.com/?p=4253#comment-7946 Old growth forests are carbon neutral, rotting wood releases the carbon back into the air. These native people would not be allowed to pick up wood from the ground? How will they cook food with solar panels again? And paying farmers money to not farm? I’m not a farmer, will I get paid not to farm? This sounds like utter nonsense. I hope the world does suffer a complete catastrophe so I don’t have to hear any of this crap anymore. Nuclear power is the only thing that can reduce carbon but we’re more interested in paying people money that doesn’t exist to influence people to do things they will never do.

]]> By: Stev http://cleantechnica.com/2009/12/20/now-that-the-copenhagen-agreement-puts-deforestation-on-the-table-what-is-it-worth/#comment-25448 Mon, 21 Dec 2009 16:41:00 +0000 http://cleantechnica.com/?p=4253#comment-25448 Old growth forests are carbon neutral, rotting wood releases the carbon back into the air. These native people would not be allowed to pick up wood from the ground? How will they cook food with solar panels again? And paying farmers money to not farm? I’m not a farmer, will I get paid not to farm? This sounds like utter nonsense. I hope the world does suffer a complete catastrophe so I don’t have to hear any of this crap anymore. Nuclear power is the only thing that can reduce carbon but we’re more interested in paying people money that doesn’t exist to influence people to do things they will never do.

]]> By: Susan Kraemer http://cleantechnica.com/2009/12/20/now-that-the-copenhagen-agreement-puts-deforestation-on-the-table-what-is-it-worth/#comment-7947 Mon, 21 Dec 2009 14:55:40 +0000 http://cleantechnica.com/?p=4253#comment-7947 “How would they cook food with solar?” Solar power makes electricity. So they would have electricity, many for the first time: that means lights, electric stoves, TV, etc. Or they could use solar ovens – very low tech but effective too.

]]> By: Susan Kraemer http://cleantechnica.com/2009/12/20/now-that-the-copenhagen-agreement-puts-deforestation-on-the-table-what-is-it-worth/#comment-25447 Mon, 21 Dec 2009 10:20:00 +0000 http://cleantechnica.com/?p=4253#comment-25447 It works to encourage reforestation because you can earn RECs for doing anything that reduces greenhouse gas emissions. (Leaving old growth forest qualifies for that.)

One example is the old growth Redwood forest in CA, which under CA cap and trade can be preserved now that it has a greenhouse-gas-reducing value.

http://articles.latimes.com/2009/jun/01/local/me-forests-carbon1

So here in the US farmers would be paid to leave some fallow land, not farm it under the climate bill in congress.

Under Copenhagen the Amazon native people would be paid to not use trees for firewood, so they would have money to buy solar panels or other clean power for electricity instead.

]]> By: Stev http://cleantechnica.com/2009/12/20/now-that-the-copenhagen-agreement-puts-deforestation-on-the-table-what-is-it-worth/#comment-7944 Mon, 21 Dec 2009 04:06:17 +0000 http://cleantechnica.com/?p=4253#comment-7944 I agree in stopping deforestation and continuing to reforest areas. I can’t see how capping and trading carbon emissions will help that. It seems more likely that by using less fossil fuels, you are led down a path of bio fuels which will lead to massive deforestation. Using fossil fuels is the reason we don’t need to cut and burn trees in America.

]]> By: Stev http://cleantechnica.com/2009/12/20/now-that-the-copenhagen-agreement-puts-deforestation-on-the-table-what-is-it-worth/#comment-25446 Mon, 21 Dec 2009 04:06:00 +0000 http://cleantechnica.com/?p=4253#comment-25446 I agree in stopping deforestation and continuing to reforest areas. I can’t see how capping and trading carbon emissions will help that. It seems more likely that by using less fossil fuels, you are led down a path of bio fuels which will lead to massive deforestation. Using fossil fuels is the reason we don’t need to cut and burn trees in America.

]]> By: Susan Kraemer http://cleantechnica.com/2009/12/20/now-that-the-copenhagen-agreement-puts-deforestation-on-the-table-what-is-it-worth/#comment-7945 Mon, 21 Dec 2009 03:20:41 +0000 http://cleantechnica.com/?p=4253#comment-7945 It works to encourage reforestation because you can earn RECs for doing anything that reduces greenhouse gas emissions. (Leaving old growth forest qualifies for that.)

One example is the old growth Redwood forest in CA, which under CA cap and trade can be preserved now that it has a greenhouse-gas-reducing value.

http://articles.latimes.com/2009/jun/01/local/me-forests-carbon1

So here in the US farmers would be paid to leave some fallow land, not farm it under the climate bill in congress.

Under Copenhagen the Amazon native people would be paid to not use trees for firewood, so they would have money to buy solar panels or other clean power for electricity instead.

]]>