"Common sense" has never been applied to carbon dioxide (not carbon) or anything else connect to the climate change/warming frenzy.

A valid carbon credit should be a new or additional carbon sink. The entitlement to log should be in a pre-existing legal document. With deforestration avoided there is no net change in emissions. The the emitter is slightly out of pocket and the forest owner gets income in lieu of timber sales, for now anyway. Fire, cancellation of the agreement or extra logging next door means the deal is pointless. See
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2010/mar/11/greenwash-noel-kempff-forests

TV ads claim that structural uses (floorboards, furniture etc) for hardwood keep carbon out of the atmosphere and make room for extra growth. Perhaps but split logs may go the chipper to make paper, the post logging burnoff releases CO2 as do the diesel machines used in logging and transport. IMO forest should be preserved for biodiversity, water filtration and aesthetics not carbon credits. The way to reduce carbon is to not burn coal, oil and gas.

It is inevitable that a big fire is eventually going to come about in Victoria's Gippsland forests and much of the standing timber will go up in smoke. This is what happens when you don't do sufficient fire hazard burning or use logging to create fire breaks.

In 2003 almost 70% of the Australian Capital Territory's (ACT) pastures, pine plantations, and nature parks were severely damaged in a single fire.

Trees store carbon whether horizontal or vertical! So do most crops. If we would store carbon and simultaneously improve soil permeability, plus improved moisture retention? Plus produce an energy policy that keeps power prices down and forever! This is how it could be done utilizing Aussie know how aand innovation.

Imagine if all our domiciles were progressively retro-fitted with bio-digesters to convert organic waste, all of it, to methane. Which is then scrubbed and stored in bladders to be fed into ceramic fuel cells at the flick of a switch, Even where operated by a solenoid in the fridge or pressure pump wherever.

First, this combination would be almost carbon-free, given the exhaust product is mostly pristine water vapour. And so efficient as to produce in excess of a saleable 50% exportable surplus.

The byproducts of the process include endless free hot water and carbon-rich soil improver, added to annually!

Which stays locked in the soil for literal centuries and also thoroughly sanitised reusable water. And as millions of annual litres! Moreover, enough, one thinks, to grow all the cotton, rice, sugar etc., we need or could export.

Leaving current allocations for the environment and drought-ravaged municipalities!
TBC, Alan B.

Cont., the exportable surplus could be transmitted without significant loss to wherever we have roads!

By progressively converting them to maintenance free (virtually) graphene highways, which would allow us to drive an electric vehicle anywhere! And designed from the get-go for Completely autonomous vehicles!

The continual recharge on the go! Paid for the very same autonomous way we collect tolls now!

This system would make enough profit to pay for the entire rollout and any maintenance! As would the carbon-rich soil improver and the also thoroughly sanitized nutrient-loaded reusable, as literal, millions of litres o,f annual, subsoil, irrigation suitable, sanitised water.

Which would be universally applied as underground only tapes and under biodegradable film which would be planted through after the water and the film had destroyed all the emerging weed species.

And remain until after harvest to ensure the only moisture asperation occurred via the harvestable crop!

The end result? Four times the harvest for half the traditional water and a non-existent, weed control or fertilizer bill!
Alan B.

You know we're in deep trouble when our potential next prime minister, Bill Shorten, tells FM radio (KIIS FM, yesterday) that an electric car can be recharged in "eight to ten minutes", when the truth is 10-30 hours or longer - which would turn what was once a one leg or overnight trip into a five to six day expedition.

You know everything is going to be worse than expected when the potential next deputy prime minister, Tanya Plybersek, tells Alan Jones (2GB, today) that human beings are mainly responsible for global warming. But when Jones asks her to nominate the percentage of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere (0.04 per cent) she says, "I don't know".

And on the basis of that monstrous ignorance they are about to destroy the economy. I accept the need for forest management, but it has little to do with the concocted global warming hoax.