The climate bill being considered by the U.S. House of Representatives will reward farmers who plant trees or take other steps to control greenhouse gases, and remove for five years an obstacle to corn-based ethanol, farm-panel Chairman Collin Peterson said on Wednesday, according to Reuters.
Under the compromise, also according to the Reuters article,
- The Agriculture Department would oversee projects by farmers and ranchers to lock carbon into the soil by reduced tillage or planting trees. USDA is more popular in farm country than the Environmental Protection Agency, which runs most pollution control programs. Work dating from 2001 would be eligible for credit for carbon reduction, said Peterson. Inclusion of "early adopters" will broaden the appeal of the bill, said an agricultural lobbyist.
- A proposed EPA regulation, which would make U.S. ethanol makers responsible for greenhouse gas emissions from conversion of forests and grasslands overseas to cropland, would be sidetracked for five years during a study of the so-called indirect land use change. It could take effect only if three federal agencies agree and Congress could intervene to block a rule.
- Corn-based ethanol and some feedstocks for cellulosic ethanol would have trouble under EPA's current scoring of land- use change to meet targets for greenhouse gas savings.
- Agriculture would not be required to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The sector is a small producer of the gases.
However, according to Hoosier Ag Today, “ House GOP Conference Chair and Indiana Congressman, Mike Pence fears the worst, ‘I think it’s bad news in the city and on the farm, if the Democrats have found a way to cobble together enough votes to pass a national energy tax that’ll increase the input costs for agriculture, and increase the energy costs for every American household by thousands of dollars a year.’”
Further, the Hoosier Ag article quotes American Farm Bureau’s Paul Schlagle, who argues that “even with USDA running the ag carbon credit programs to pay farmers for capturing carbon in plants and soil, the bill’s a net loss for agriculture, ‘The best case scenario, with costs to farmers going 9% above what they would otherwise be by 2020, a potential loss of $5 billion straight out of farmers’ pockets.’”In its discussion on the issue, FarmPolicy.com included the following useful links: “An audio clip from yesterday’s AgriTalk Radio Program with Mike Adams, which included comments on these developments from Chairman Peterson- click here to listen (MP3-3:00). In addition, the legislative language for the agricultural amendment to H.R. 2454, the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009, is now available by clicking here. A summary of the amendment is available here.”
Posted: 6/25/09
