Bush greenhouse gas order raises hopes, concerns

Wednesday, May 23, 2007
Copyright Farm Week

President Bush issued an executive order last week aimed at reducing domestic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions linked to purported global climate change.

That could both offer opportunities and pose new regulatory risks for producers.

The order directs the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) with federal energy, transportation, and ag officials to eye regulations that would raise fuel economy standards, and pursues an “alternative fuels standard” which seeks use of 35 billion gallons of renewable/alternative fuels by 2017.

National Renewable Fuels Association President Bob Dineen sees Bush’s directive as recognition that “low-carbon renewable fuels like ethanol must play a central role in our nation’s efforts to counter the effects of climate change.”

Last week, House Ag Chairman Collin Peterson (D-Minn.) won committee passage of a measure that seeks use of renewable resources to meet 25 percent of U.S. energy needs by 2025.

A Senate committee has called for use of 36 billion gallons of renewable fuel by 2022.

Meanwhile, Tim Profeta, director of the Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions at Duke University, suggests agriculture “may be the first, best front for beginning to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions.”

USDA has called on Congress to fund development of “environmental credit markets” that would enable farmers to profit by capturing atmospheric carbon and “trading” carbon credits with utilities and other potential polluters.

“Our lands hold tremendous potential for sequestering emissions, for capturing carbon in the soil and in plants,” Profeta said.

However, American Farm Bureau Federation analyst Allison Specht warned efforts to regulate emissions also could result in higher ag fuel, electricity, and fertilizer costs.

Specht said many new congressional Democrats are “not real thrilled” with the Bush plan and may push for tighter emissions regulations, possibly targeting crop or livestock practices.

EPA’s 1990-2003 U.S. greenhouse gas emissions inventory attributed 71.6 percent of nitrous oxide (NOX) emissions and 7 percent of overall GHG emissions to cropping systems.

EPA cited chemical and fertilizer use, nitrogen runoff, soil and manure management, and burning of ag residues as “NOX” contributors.

However, The Fertilizer Institute (TFI) argues the agency has not considered the benefits of no-till conservation, precision fertilizer application, and other practices in projecting net ag GHG emissions.

“If you’re only looking at the input side and not taking into account all the green matter being grown out there and pulling these gases back out of the atmosphere, then you’re not looking at the entire picture,” Illinois Fertilizer and Chemical Association President Jean Payne said.

“How are we going to grow all this corn to make ethanol and pull all this stuff from the atmosphere if we can’t fertilize it?”

Payne said growers can best contribute to GHG reductions through use of nitrification inhibitors, proper timing of and rates for fertilizer application, and use of cover crops and “advanced efficiency” products.

Despite potential regulatory concerns, Specht recognizes “there are some opportunities” related to GHG reduction.

AFBF’s 2007 farm bill blueprint includes no funding to reward producer carbon sequestration and trading, but she noted the concept is a “fixture” in administration proposals that increasingly is being “floated around Capitol Hill.”

“As the farm bill progresses and other debate continues on this issue, it could become more relevant,” Specht said.