Can we protect land for nature and carbon by simply buying it up? • Hacker News Board

Re: Can we protect land for nature and carbon by simply buying it up?

#61

Post by silon42 » Thu, Jul 21, 2022, 4:37 PM UTC

amalcon wrote: post #52

qchris wrote: post #7

In the United States, the American Prairie Reserve [1] is doing something along these lines in the area around the Wyoming/Montana border. In particular, their purchases (which often include private ranches that come up for sale) focus on building those corridors between existing public lands, effectively creating much larger continuous ecosystems that this article mentioned. It's probably easier to do in the United…

It would be tricky in more densely populated areas, thanks to the ruling in Kelo vs. City of New London . "The local government thinks they'll get more economic activity from someone else" is a valid reason to exercise eminent domain powers for some reason. It works in more rural places because, frankly, it's generally not worth the trouble of litigation there.

they don't have to use eminent domain, adding/increasing property tax is enough.

Re: Can we protect land for nature and carbon by simply buying it up?

#62

Post by idiotsecant » Thu, Jul 21, 2022, 4:38 PM UTC

RajT88 wrote: post #30

Eddy_Viscosity2 wrote: post #3

No. Most places have 'immanent domain' type laws were the gov can essentially seize your property (forcing a sale) to give to someone else. A rich developer could see all that sweet sweet natural land and make a strong case (with lobbying, backroom deals, the usual) that it would be better used with a new condo or factory or strip mine and get it anyway.

I have also read about cases where foreign owners just have their land straight up taken. Locals just assume the property while the owners are away and force them into a court unfriendly to foreigners.

Devil's advocate - if you don't even live in the country should you have the right to own property there?

Re: Can we protect land for nature and carbon by simply buying it up?

#63

Post by hedora » Thu, Jul 21, 2022, 4:41 PM UTC

adammarples wrote: post #56

citboin wrote: post #53

Can we create a nonprofit to do this for the Amazon rainforest?

I remember a documentary about a guy who did this, but came back next year to find they'd logged it anyway. Turns out you have to actualy enforce the law or it'll get broken! In the end he paid the guy who was logging his land to guard it anyway, the guy was dirt poor and just looking out for his family.

The current leader of Brazil is known as the Trump of South America. He's actively encouraging illegal logging in the rainforest, and the rate at which the Amazon is being clear cut is accelerating rapidly.

If ever there was a good case for the use of pre-emptive military force, it's this clown; his actions are directly destabilizing the world economy and will lead to trillions of dollars of damage / countless lives lost.

Re: Can we protect land for nature and carbon by simply buying it up?

#64

Post by hedora » Thu, Jul 21, 2022, 4:45 PM UTC

nimbius wrote: post #14

Its an unpopular opinion but no. Much as we cannot stop drowning in water with more water, we cannot extinguish climate change caused by technocratic neoliberal consumer capitalism with more of the same. The effort must exist outside a market. it cannot be commercialized, it exists as an inefficiency, and it remains a corrective action to right some of the most egregious hubris of mankinds existence on this planet. i…

It's easily solved with markets: Charge a carbon recapture tax equivalent to direct air capture of 150% of the product's greenhouse emissions. (This is affordable; it'd end up being about $1/gallon of gas tax.)

Getting our corrupt government to actually do that is another story, even with > 60% of the population calling for drastic, urgent action.

Re: Can we protect land for nature and carbon by simply buying it up?

#65

Post by rmbyrro » Thu, Jul 21, 2022, 4:45 PM UTC

> a million acres of peat is owned by just 124 individuals and organisations

Probably even more concentrated, since multiple organizations are likely to be controlled by the same individual(s).

Re: Can we protect land for nature and carbon by simply buying it up?

#66

Post by ZeroGravitas » Thu, Jul 21, 2022, 4:45 PM UTC

photochemsyn wrote: post #41

You can protect land for habitat, and you can preserve existing stores of carbon, but any notions about nature being a carbon sink capable of offsetting fossil fuel use are best discarded. Take a look at UK energy consumption (it's mainly gas and oil these days, with most coal phased out): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_in_the_United_Kingdom#/... The only carbon solution is figuring out how to not need fossil f…

It's true that not burning fossil fuels is the simplest and best place to start, but land use changes can add up, so shouldn't be totally neglected.

https://www.wri.org/insights/7-things-know-about-ipccs-speci...

Methane released from destroying Peatland for example.

Re: Can we protect land for nature and carbon by simply buying it up?

#67

Post by dougmwne » Thu, Jul 21, 2022, 4:47 PM UTC

hedora wrote: post #60

dougmwne wrote: post #40

Yes, but it’s a bad approach. Source: I have worked in environmental policy. See The Nature Conservancy, a large nonprofit that does this. But it is an inefficient use of funds. The US government has massive land holdings and the biggest budgets in the world. For a paltry amount, you can lobby them and convince them to use their resources for environmental protection, not yours. Basically the entire US environmental…

I've often wondered if it is possible for environmental groups to buy oil drilling rights at auction (to prevent oil companies from buying the wells). At the very least, it would run up the cost of the mineral rights, making the resulting oil/coal more expensive. In the best case, it would prevent drilling/mining.

I am pretty sure that’s not possible, as the government won’t sell the rights to just anyone, you need to qualify to participate. Making the government look foolish is not appreciated and the goal is to incentivize energy production, not enable trolls and political opponents. Besides, the rights are expensive and it is comparatively cheap to find some endangered corals or tie the whole thing up in court. The extractive industries have way more money than the greens, so best to skip the bidding war.

Re: Can we protect land for nature and carbon by simply buying it up?

#68

Post by ttyprintk » Thu, Jul 21, 2022, 4:48 PM UTC

hedora wrote: post #60

dougmwne wrote: post #40

Yes, but it’s a bad approach. Source: I have worked in environmental policy. See The Nature Conservancy, a large nonprofit that does this. But it is an inefficient use of funds. The US government has massive land holdings and the biggest budgets in the world. For a paltry amount, you can lobby them and convince them to use their resources for environmental protection, not yours. Basically the entire US environmental…

I've often wondered if it is possible for environmental groups to buy oil drilling rights at auction (to prevent oil companies from buying the wells). At the very least, it would run up the cost of the mineral rights, making the resulting oil/coal more expensive. In the best case, it would prevent drilling/mining.

In Colorado, those rights are detached from land ownership. A state commission chooses lease parameters and, with some local consequence, those leases fund rural schools. A better system might:

- Fund schools in a different way - Permit mineral rights to be owned just like private land - Require an insurance policy for exploration in the event it destroys a well or other water source

Re: Can we protect land for nature and carbon by simply buying it up?

#69

Post by dbingham » Thu, Jul 21, 2022, 4:50 PM UTC

qchris wrote: post #7

In the United States, the American Prairie Reserve [1] is doing something along these lines in the area around the Wyoming/Montana border. In particular, their purchases (which often include private ranches that come up for sale) focus on building those corridors between existing public lands, effectively creating much larger continuous ecosystems that this article mentioned. It's probably easier to do in the United…

There are actually quite a few community land trusts [1,2] out there. They can be conversation focused, housing focused, or focused on other priorities. But they all have similar structures - non-profits that are focused on acquiring some level of ownership over large tracts of land so that they can manage that land to achieve a goal (conservation, keeping housing affordable, etc).

My local conservation focused [3] one has been very successful and is the source of many of the best hikes in my area as well!

If you want to find similar projects, search for "conservation community land trust" and you'll find them! Alternately, here's a handy tool provided by the Land Trust Alliance a quick search turned up: https://www.landtrustalliance.org/find-land-trust

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_land_trust

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_trust

[3] https://sycamorelandtrust.org/

Re: Can we protect land for nature and carbon by simply buying it up?

#70

Post by kickout » Thu, Jul 21, 2022, 4:51 PM UTC

PretzelPirate wrote: post #11

We can also look into reducing the amount of monocropping we do. If the grain isn’t profitable, the land it’s grown on will drop in value, making it easier to purchase and use for re-wilding efforts.

Correct, problem is the most productive land isn't always the most profitable. That's how you end up with Maize grown in Western Kansas under dryland conditions.