Next time you hear a farmer complain about how unfair it would be to put a price on agricultural greenhouse gas emissions before technology arrives to help reduce them, reach for that pinch of salt.

In the same way that Greenpeace is happy to muddy the waters with simplistic claims that the use of 95 per cent "free allocation" for agricultural emissions is a free ride, which it's not, many farmers foster the pretence that if there's no science to help, then they shouldn't have to pay.

Why is that wrong?


For a start, there are already some ways