What’s the carbon cost/benefit analysis for burning homes (and people), which releases carbon-dioxide, for land to plant trees, which consumes carbon-dioxide? Who cares?!!
I would like to use this story as more proof that enviro-nuts care more about pine trees and wood rats than about people, but I think this barbarism has to be chalked up to money.
To sum up the story, a company will get money from cap-and-trade if they plant trees, selling the carbon-dioxide suck of the trees to the evil polluters of Europe (i.e. productive factory owners). Some people are living on the land they want to plant the trees on. So, of course, the only solution is to threaten and burn them out of house and home. Now I’m all for private property rights. If people are squatting on land not their own, they should be removed by the authorities. But this is the problem with big government. Even if a program is for some angelic purpose, like saving the planet from devastation caused by the rising of global temperature of .2 degrees, when the government gets involved it leads to criminal enterprise. Cap-and-trade is government sanctioned extortion.