My initial thought was that it is better to spend $x to preserve the maximum
amount of forest and given high Aussie costs it MAY be better to spend the
money overseas. Of course there is a danger of corruption and inefficiency
in many O/S countries, which could not possibly occur in Aus????
On 29/03/07, michael hunter <> wrote:
I strongly oppose woodchipping, but it does differ from the
clearfelling and burning that goes on in Malaysia and Indonesia, with
resulting gigantic CO2 emissions, and replaced with Oil Palms which have
miniscule CO2 uptake.
In Tasmania, the trees are used for papermaking, and are replaced by
native forest or plantation timber, which take up CO2 and in theory
recycle
it after the paper endproduct breaks down.
The problem with all these great schemes is that they are very short
on
detail, like how much of the money goes to its intended purpose and how
much
is sidetracked by corruption and bureaurocracy.
Cheers
Michael
Michael Hunter
Mulgoa Valley
50km west of Sydney Harbour Bridge
===============================
www.birding-aus.org
birding-aus.blogspot.com
To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
send the message:
unsubscribe
(in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
to:
===============================
===============================
www.birding-aus.org
birding-aus.blogspot.com
To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
send the message:
unsubscribe
(in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
to:
===============================
|
