My most unhelpful comment yet.
Surely this article simply retells the reality of the expected lies from interested parties the over simplification that can justify power.

When the land use credit got Australia closer to its already relaxed Kyoto target it seemed that Australia was indeed the 'lucky country'. Either that or the agency concerned knew how to please its political masters. This hasn't stopped Beattie, Campbell, Howard and others from repeating the 'on track' fib, along with 'clean coal will save us'.

Now Landcare has jumped on the carbon credit bandwagon. However I live near some old growth forests and I strongly suspect that carbon uptake is slowing even without logging. If the current drying trend continues I think that ferns and giant trees will give way to more open woodland. The current forest floor will rot giving up greenhouse gases. If that's true things could actually be getting worse while the official line is that everything is getting better.

Spot on Andrew McIntosh

Hydrocarbon emissions, resulting in CO2, in WA are increasing. All governments, with the aid of their senior bureaucrats, for the sake of "economic growth", are using spin to exploit public gullibility.

Last week, the soon to be retired head of the EPA advised that the Swan River is in poor condition and warned of the dire consequences if nutrients continued to be dumped in the river. So what's the EPA been doing for the last 30 years while this has been occurring? Mmmmm? Having lunch with industry lobbyists?

Both federal and state governments conveniently fail to allude to the massive emissions from the metal ore industry where just one company in a regional town emitted 570,000 tonnes of GHG. And that's just from their power station.

Other sources from their operations reveals some 189,000,000 kgs of
carbon and non-carbon pollutant emissions. All these figures reveal an increase from the previous year.

Governments boast that pollutant industries are encouraged to "effectively monitor and manage their own emissions".

That's what happens when greedy governments insist on "self-regulation" to appease the big end of town.

Economic expansion (resulting from pollutant industries) and climate health make poor bedfellows - you can no longer have both!

And the masses rush out to buy their long lasting fluro light bulbs -good little sheep aren't we?

As a past member of the NGGI Consultative Panel on Landuse Change and Forestry, and a current member of the SLATS Committee, I can only describe this as a standard piece of ACF funded spin, masquerading as scientific inquiry. The Australia Institute is funded indirectly by the ACF.

As for the discrepancy in recorded cleared areas between the national accounts and SLATS one need only mention two words, WOODY WEEDS.

SLATS detects the removal of them while greenhouse accounting has no brief to be measuring the loss of Lantana, Rubber Vine or young wattles etc.

But this is not to say that the NGGI accounts are faultless. They are, in fact, a crock of the proverbial. But most of this is a direct consequence of the gonzo logic of the European dominated IPCC who would seek to thrust their self interest upon the rest of the world.

Perseus

You continue to suggest that the IPCC and the ACF and other community members, concerned about anthropogenic, environmental degradation, are acting out of "self-interest."

Pray tell Perseus, what are these "self-interests" you keep alluding to?

Certainly, Dickie. Most Europeasn nations have comparatively small areas of forest so they must import all their paper and packaging material. And when the IPCC came to decide how to account for the carbon released when wood products break down deemed that all the carbon in a tree was emitted on the day the tree was cut. And this meant that all the emissions from european waste paper and packaging were shifted to the third world countries that they sourced their wood and paper from.

Their main competitors, USA, Canada and Australia all have their own extensive forest estates so we got lumbered with the emissions from this sector, even when in our case a lot of it is exported.

In one sleazy back room deal, the europeans gave them selves a competitive advantage with lower emissions targets that still allow unfettered growth in housing, packaging and printing sectors.

And the greens? They are just a bunch of luddite scum who want to stop anything that works even vaguely well. And they have demonstrated a capacity to delude themselves and excuse any level of deceptive conduct or misrepresentation.