carbon emissions Africa

CARBON EMISSIONS

Not Lower Present Carbon Emissions

A carbon tax is a great idea, if we had a government honest enough to implement it properly. We should all be concerned with carbon emissions that will be present in our atmosphere for 200 years. Surveys have found high majorities of economists (more than 80 per cent) also support carbon pricing. Justin Trudeau announced a carbon price for all of Canada, starting at a modest $10/ton of CO2 ($0.025/liter of fuel) in 2018 and rising over five years to $50 ($0.125/liter of fuel). The carbon tax would cost the average family about $1,250- $1,500 a year. So it means that we will be paying more for everything. That’s because almost all goods and services consume fossil fuel energy. This is a form of paying a sin tax for using energy, which may not lower emissions. (The $10/ton is equivalent to $0.09/US gal.)

British Columbia’s revenue-neutral carbon tax on fuel is equivalent to $30 per ton of emissions. In Alberta, a carbon levy will be applied to fuels at a rate of $20 per ton, starting Jan. 1, 2017, increasing to $30 per ton a year later.

Anyone familiar with carbon pricing knows Trudeau’s minimum price, even at $50 per ton, is far too low to significantly cut emissions. If Canada has any chance of meeting its target, which used to be reducing our emissions to 17% below 2005 levels by 2020 and 30% by 2030, he would need to set a carbon price of about $150 per ton, starting immediately.

Some pricing experts like Simon Fraser University’s Mark Jaccard estimated that the floor price should be $30/ton increasing every year until 2030 to $200/ton.  This would be an equivalent of $0.47/liter of gasoline or $1.77/US gal.  (1 liter = .264 US gal). Obviously, there would have to be an offsetting general tax reduction so as not to act as an extra burden to the average tax payer.

The Norwegian carbon taxes started in 1991 and were among the highest in the world ($44 US/ton of CO2). Despite significant price increases for some fuel types (13% for gasoline), the carbon tax effect on emissions was modest (a 16 % reduction in emissions). This implies a high cost of reducing emissions from sources on which the tax is levied.

The real enemy is heat and us.

So, on actually reducing greenhouse gas emissions, the impact of the carbon price is less clear.  You have heard it said that “We have met the enemy – and the enemy is us.”

The carbon tax may be just another cash grab masquerading as environmental policy. Some states or provinces are looking at a revenue neutral approach in order to recycle the tax for economic generation or a business tax cut. The danger is that it will just become another tax, lapped up by indebted states or provinces with no real desire to plow the proceeds back into cleaning up the planet.

A carbon tax of $50 per ton would generate about $30 billion annually at current emission levels. The Green Economy Network estimates one million person years of employment could be generated over five years from a $16-billion annual investment in public transit, renewable energy, high speed rail and energy efficiency.  How come this fund isn’t used to absorb wicked CO2 emissions from our atmosphere, which will last 200 years?

Taxing Americans or Canadians to try to make planet Earth greener is futile policy based on a half-blind approach that only considers emissions from our resources, not absorption from our forests. Unless we change that perspective, the inevitable result is a drag on our economy with job casualties, increased costs, and lost business opportunities, ultimately weakening United States or Canada’s ability to compete all because of global warming.

Part of the problem is that all carbon tax revenues raised through the federal government policy will remain in the state or province where they are collected. How can the state or province plug into the concept of supporting tree nurseries in under developed countries?

How many trees must we plant to use carbon dioxide produced by the average American in a year?

Tree Coalition claims that a mature tree can absorb CO2 at a rate of 48 lbs. (21.8 kg)/year. They also state that each person in the U.S. produces about 2.3 tons of CO2/year. If we use their figures then, it would require about 96 mature trees to offset each person’s CO2 footprint.

Planting enough trees on your own to offset your carbon dioxide production isn’t going to be easy. You would essentially need to plant a forest. 

Untitled-12

  1. First of all we are not talking about millions of dollars. A Today’s Tall Tree nursery in Africa can be set up for $60,000 to $80,000, which will propagate millions of trees each.
  2. The citizens of any one state or province will be pleased with the political leadership to support the most logical method of absorbing carbon dioxide emissions that are present in our atmosphere. Tree planting is simply the only way to absorb CO2.
  3. The first state or province to support this project can select which country they wish to partner. The citizens will feel more attached to a Today’s Tall Tree project in that country as it happens, which will be transparent and on line.
  4. Today’s Tall Tree is only part of the solution. Women farmers in Africa are leased 1.5 acres of farm land where they and their families will manage productive trees which will last over 25 years: fruit, nut and cacao trees. (Nobody will chop down a productive fruit tree.) Irrigation is the next stage of development, which can alleviate any possibility of drought and famine. We add inexpensive biochar fertilizer and nitrogen fixing trees to the mix.
  5. A Model Today’s Tall Tree Nursery can be replicated in various regions in the country. Each time that happens, glory is showered upon the leadership of the state or province. The World Bank Carbon Tax Fund can offer their own support to a well managed solution to absorbing emissions from CO2 . 

This is a similar plan:

untitled-2

As a bonus, the state or province and its new, green allies could label all  exports as “Proudly Carbon Neutral.”

Imagine the kind of eco-friendly economy that African countries, or any other forested country could build by generating carbon credits to sell to the world. Countries on the receiving end of cap-and-trade credits or carbon tax fund support could build entire green economies around conservation, not consumption. These countries have lots of rain and sun and no dormant winter months.

Imagine, too, the possibilities for indigenous people all over the world to leverage their traditional role as protectors of the environment into a feasible economic opportunity. We are constantly looking for ways to bridge gaps between modern society and native cultures, so why not empower indigenous people to take on a leadership role as stewards of the world’s precious forests? 

global warming carbon emissions

Obviously, we cannot reserve all that land in the United States to absorb carbon dioxide emissions. So we must rely on Africa or any other under-developed countries.

 Carbon Emission to be Solved

The world leaders must find a way to absorb carbon dioxide emissions that is in our atmosphere now. Trees and soils are the only way to absorb the present glut of CO2 in your world.

Presently these funds are improperly managed because they attempt to make the tax neutral by redirecting the fund for tax rebates to working families, cutting sales tax and reducing the tax on manufacturing. All this is very admirable but it doesn’t solve the high concentration of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere, which is presently causing global warming.

carbon dioxide conversion

The Funds to Finance Rehabilitation

There are two sources of funds based on two different methods of absorbing carbon emissions: one from biochar in soils and the other from planting of trees.

On one hectare of farm land of 500 trees:

  1. Land Degradation Neutrality (LDN) Fund for BIOCHAR IN SOILSldn fund

LND Fund seeks to mobilize US$2 billion annually; they estimate that the average cost of land rehabilitation is $100- $150/ha. In Africa, five countries have voluntary committed to LND including Algeria, Chad, Ethiopia, Namibia and Senegal.

i_image2_senegal

  • 500 trees/hectare will yield 50 tons of Carbon from branches and weeds or (50 tons x ⅓) 16.7 tons of CO2 emission absorption from the production of
  • The value of the capture of carbon in the form of Biochar is $250/year at the tax rate of $15/ton. (The LDN Fund offers $150/year based on $10/ton of carbon emissions.)
  1. The Carbon Tax Fund for TREES: the fund can support 500 trees for a total cost of $200/year for a period of 25 years plus an initial $750:

untitled-8 untitled-7

  • There will be 500 trees with a NPV of $0.50/tree: at the rate of $15/ton, the Net Present Value (NPV) is $200/year.
  • Add $1.00/tree for reporting and auditing for 25 years (that’s a one-off total – not per year): $500 to be monitored by Living Water MicroFinance Inc. for 25 years.untitled-10

This part of the fund will support each 1.5 acre farm that will have access to $150/year n the form of micro finance assistance complements of the Carbon Tax Fund. Each $150 will be recycled nine times for a total of $1,350.

This micro finance will be made available to women farmers and their families who need support before the orchards become productive after 18 months: they will maintain this agroforest farms by planting vegetable like yam in between the new tree seedlings. The micro finance loan will be due after the harvest.

untitled-11

The tree farm is supported by a Today’s Tall Tree Nursery managed by Living Water MicroFinance Inc. in order to reduce the cost of tree seedlings. The fruit and nut tree seedlings along with nitrogen fixing trees are supplied by Today’s Tall Tree Nursery.

untitled-12

The reporting and auditing of trees for 25 years at the rate of $1.00/tree will help finance a Today’s Tall Tree Nursery to service over 100 hectare (beginning with 50,000 tree seedlings). The estimated fixed cost is $80,000. This decentralized system is preferable to the present centralized nurseries that have costly transportation costs for very vulnerable tree seedlings.

This calculation does NOT include income streams from the fruit and nut produce, which are reserved for the women farmers and their families.  Later, irrigation can be added for a remunerative 275% crop improvement.

There will be a stipulation that all biomass on the 1.5 acre farm will be converted to Biochar every year. Creating Biochar on a farm involves incentives: the women farmer and her family will receive $150 based on the carbon tax rate of $15/ton for a total of 34 tons/year of carbon sequestered.

Living Water MicroFinance Inc. will arrange partnerships with African landlords (who provide a long term lease) for woman farmers and their families.

Leave a Comment below if you wish to have more information.

dinosaur global warmingThe only thing we can hope for is that we are better at adapting than the dinosaurs were.

CARBON TAX: Not Enough

MORE DETAILS:

TURNING COASTAL DESERT GREEN

HUG ENERGY uses wave energy to pump seawater to shore. Our industrial partners are able to desalinate the seawater using the pressure alone with no external energy source in a reverse osmosis system. The resulting fresh water is then put through drip irrigation systems able to irrigate 15-30 hectares of land. Green coastal deserts means more jobs and more food.Water-Scarcity3

Agroforestry could help solve Climate Change.

 HELPING SOLVE WORLD’S CARBON POLLUTIONcarbon emissions tree growth

New Trees are the only solution to soaking up Carbon Dioxide:A Full Scale Aquaponic Tree Nursery in Africa supported by:

  1. A Micro Hydro Electric System: no dams: HugENERGY.us
  2. An Irrigation System: NORTHydro.com
  3. A Rabbit and Fish Farm: AfriCAPITALISM.us
  4. An Agroforestry Intercrop System: LivingWaterIs.com
  5. The Charitable Arm: SunnyUp.net
  6. God’s Loveletters:  Godloveletters.com

NEAR-DEATH EXPERIENCES

PROOF OF HEAVEN

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *