COOKSON BEECHER
Capital Press
June 6, 2009
The results of a climate-change survey focusing on input from ag, forestry and other interests is now available online.The survey is the result of a climate-change questionnaire crafted in March by the U.S. House Agriculture Committee and sent to more than 400 ag- and forestry-related organizations.More than 200 organizations responded, with replies coming from a diverse group including commodity, conservation, forestry, research, energy, business and nonprofit interests as well as the public.The compilation of the survey results, which includes answers to 29 questions, runs to more than 2,500 pages.Among the responders were the American Nursery and Landscape Association, the Chicago Climate Exchange, the Association of Consulting Foresters of America, Defenders of Wildlife, the California Association of Wine Grape Growers, the California Farm Bureau, California Citrus Mutual, Cargill Inc., Oregon State University Extension Service, National Grain and Feed Association, National Meat Association, National Organic Coalition, Western United Dairymen, Western Growers and Washington state's Ecology and Natural Resources departments.According to a letter from House Agriculture Committee Chairman Collin Peterson, D-MN, that went along with the questionnaire, farmers, ranchers and forest landowners have been participating in agricultural programs that reduce carbon for years.The questionnaire's goal, he said, was to identify ways that these practices could be recognized and incorporated into climate-change legislation. The letter also pointed out that Congress is poised to consider a range of options to reduce greenhouse gasses. Two of the options are to mandate or authorize cap and trade programs or to impose a tax or fee on greenhouse emissions.But Peterson also told those who received the questionnaire that some of the proposed legislation would allow producers to receive emission allowances to generate carbon offsets that could be sold under a cap and trade program, and for that reason producers could benefit from a carbon-reduction program.In answering one the questionnaire's first questions, "Should agriculture and forestry sectors be covered under a carbon-reduction program?" Joel Nelson of Citrus Mutual summed up one of the industry's prevailing thoughts about this:"Citrus Mutual is conflicted as to the need for this type of program," he said. "The scientific community is split as to whether global warming and climate change is occurring, and if so, is our climate reverting back to what it once was less than a century ago? We profess to not know the answer to that question, but we acknowledge that some preparedness is warranted in case. For this reason we believe the committee should take small steps towards this effort because there is so much we don't know and because of unintended consequences."In a press release about the survey, Peterson said that the "tremendous response" to the questionnaire reveals the concerns and contributions that the organizations and individuals participating in the survey can offer in the discussion about climate change."The information we received from this survey will help us educate other members of Congress about the potential contribution and impact of climate change legislation on agriculture and rural communities," the congressman sai
Saturday, June 6, 2009
Vilsack calls for agriculture and forestry carbon credits
MCAFEE, Ky. — U.S. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said he would push Congress to add carbon credits for agriculture and forestry to the climate bill now moving through the House, and to give his department authority to oversee those segments of the proposed “cap and trade” system, rather than the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
“We will be advocating forcefully” for both provisions, Vilsack said at a community forum in central Kentucky cattle country.
He also said he agreed with House Agriculture Committee Chairman Collin Peterson, D-Minn., that calculations of the carbon footprint of ethanol should not include “indirect land use,” such as the conversion of forest land to agriculture when expansion of corn acreage for ethanol pushes production of other crops elsewhere, including other countries.
Not in agreement
That position is not in agreement with a recent finding by EPA, but Vilsack told reporters that EPA’s proposal is still “subject to peer review,” and he is confident that a final rule on the topic will find him and EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson in agreement.
Peterson said he and at least 26 other rural Democrats will oppose the Waxman-Markey climate bill unless EPA’s position on indirect land use is not reversed.
Vilsack said agriculture emits 7 percent to 10 percent of U.S. greenhouse gases but could be as much as “25 percent of the solution” via farming practices that prevent carbon dioxide from entering the atmosphere.
USDA is better suited
He said USDA is better suited than EPA to monitor those practices, since it has more than 2,000 offices and employees “in virtually every county in the country.”
During the forum, which lasted about an hour and a half, Vilsack touched on many issues facing his department.
Here’s a sampling.
Animal ID
Though he was on a cattle farm in the state that is the largest cattle producer east of the Mississippi River, Vilsack didn’t mention animal agriculture until asked about what is probably the hottest issue on his plate, the National Animal Identification System.
The system is voluntary and Vilsack said only about 30 percent of producers participate, so some in Congress are reluctant to keep funding it, but an effective system is needed to maintain foreign markets.
Some countries have temporarily blocked imports of U.S. beef after reports of animal diseases such as bovine spongiform encephalopathy, commonly called “mad cow disease.”
Vilsack said, “I’m a little scared that if you do away with the program . . . you have a more difficult time convincing our trading partners that American beef is safe.”
Improve the system
Vilsack said the department’s current listening sessions on the issue may find “a creative way we can improve this system so more people can participate.”
He told reporters that a participation rate of 70 to 80 percent is needed to give confidence to foreign markets, but declined to put a time frame on that goal.
In a separate interview, he declined to say what circumstances should require the program to become mandatory “because people will read into that answer . . . that I’ve made a decision about how the animal identification system should work.”
Strong objections
The prospect of a mandatory system has brought strong objections from small farmers, who say its cost would be too much for them, but Vilsack said he had also “heard small producers say this is a good thing.”
He said the suggestion of subsidies for small farmers to join the system is “still up in the air,” awaiting conclusion of the listening sessions.
“I would hope that by the end of the summer we’ve got a clear idea of what will work.”
Dairy farmers in crisis
Dairy farmers are “in crisis,” Carolyn Orr of the Council of State Governments told Vilsack as she asked him when the system that controls their industry will start to be reformed.
“I don’t want to say that change is imminent, because this is a contentious issue,” Vilsack replied.
He said USDA has been “trying to stop the bleeding in dairy,” by putting 200 million pounds of nonfat dry milk into food programs and reinstating its export-assistance program for the industry.
The latter move was strongly criticized by 29 nations at the World Trade Organization.
Vilsack said he heard recently about a California dairyman who committed suicide, leaving seven children and a wife to keep their farm going.
“There’s a human cost to this that we sometimes don’t appreciate,” he said, after telling that story and one about calling the widow of an Iowa hog farmer who killed himself in 1999, soon after Vilsack became the state’s governor.
“We try to do all we can for these people,” he said with a touch of frustration. “I just don’t want to have to make another call like that.”
Conservation programs
To a questioner who voiced concern about proposed budget cuts in conservation programs, Vilsack said there wouldn’t be a cut in spending, because applications for payments always fall short of the appropriations.
In fact, he said, “I think you’re going to see a pretty significant increase.”
To another questioner, who asked for resumption of full funding for the Resource Conservation and Development Program, Vilsack said he knows from his experience as a governor, state senator and mayor that the program does good work, but “it’s just a question of who pays for it,” and who benefits from it.
States and localities get the benefit, he said, and the department must fund places to cut its budget to help reduce the federal deficit.
He said the current budget proposal was drafted in four weeks, as the administration began, and it did not have time to dig deeply for places to save money and spend it more efficiently.
The Department of Food?
Vilsack and his audience appeared to agree most about the need to educate people outside rural areas about their connections to agriculture.
“I think there’s going to be a real interest on the part of consumers to know their farmer,” he said.
The secretary said USDA is “often misunderstood,” and he is working with non-rural members of Congress to “rebrand the department.”
He said the planting of a “people’s garden” outside the huge USDA headquarters on Independence Avenue in Washington provides “a very graphic opportunity for people to understand” the department’s relationship to food.
“We take our food supply for granted,” he said. “I think we also take our water supply for granted. We can no longer do that.”
Begin at early age
He said public education should begin at an early age.
“The more we can get kids’ hands in the dirt, the better off we will be as a country,” and the better the decisions the political system makes about agriculture will be, he said.
Later in the day, Vilsack visited a food bank in Louisville.
(Al Cross is the director of the Institute for Rural Journalism and Community Issues at the University of Kentucky, Lexington, Ky.)
“We will be advocating forcefully” for both provisions, Vilsack said at a community forum in central Kentucky cattle country.
He also said he agreed with House Agriculture Committee Chairman Collin Peterson, D-Minn., that calculations of the carbon footprint of ethanol should not include “indirect land use,” such as the conversion of forest land to agriculture when expansion of corn acreage for ethanol pushes production of other crops elsewhere, including other countries.
Not in agreement
That position is not in agreement with a recent finding by EPA, but Vilsack told reporters that EPA’s proposal is still “subject to peer review,” and he is confident that a final rule on the topic will find him and EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson in agreement.
Peterson said he and at least 26 other rural Democrats will oppose the Waxman-Markey climate bill unless EPA’s position on indirect land use is not reversed.
Vilsack said agriculture emits 7 percent to 10 percent of U.S. greenhouse gases but could be as much as “25 percent of the solution” via farming practices that prevent carbon dioxide from entering the atmosphere.
USDA is better suited
He said USDA is better suited than EPA to monitor those practices, since it has more than 2,000 offices and employees “in virtually every county in the country.”
During the forum, which lasted about an hour and a half, Vilsack touched on many issues facing his department.
Here’s a sampling.
Animal ID
Though he was on a cattle farm in the state that is the largest cattle producer east of the Mississippi River, Vilsack didn’t mention animal agriculture until asked about what is probably the hottest issue on his plate, the National Animal Identification System.
The system is voluntary and Vilsack said only about 30 percent of producers participate, so some in Congress are reluctant to keep funding it, but an effective system is needed to maintain foreign markets.
Some countries have temporarily blocked imports of U.S. beef after reports of animal diseases such as bovine spongiform encephalopathy, commonly called “mad cow disease.”
Vilsack said, “I’m a little scared that if you do away with the program . . . you have a more difficult time convincing our trading partners that American beef is safe.”
Improve the system
Vilsack said the department’s current listening sessions on the issue may find “a creative way we can improve this system so more people can participate.”
He told reporters that a participation rate of 70 to 80 percent is needed to give confidence to foreign markets, but declined to put a time frame on that goal.
In a separate interview, he declined to say what circumstances should require the program to become mandatory “because people will read into that answer . . . that I’ve made a decision about how the animal identification system should work.”
Strong objections
The prospect of a mandatory system has brought strong objections from small farmers, who say its cost would be too much for them, but Vilsack said he had also “heard small producers say this is a good thing.”
He said the suggestion of subsidies for small farmers to join the system is “still up in the air,” awaiting conclusion of the listening sessions.
“I would hope that by the end of the summer we’ve got a clear idea of what will work.”
Dairy farmers in crisis
Dairy farmers are “in crisis,” Carolyn Orr of the Council of State Governments told Vilsack as she asked him when the system that controls their industry will start to be reformed.
“I don’t want to say that change is imminent, because this is a contentious issue,” Vilsack replied.
He said USDA has been “trying to stop the bleeding in dairy,” by putting 200 million pounds of nonfat dry milk into food programs and reinstating its export-assistance program for the industry.
The latter move was strongly criticized by 29 nations at the World Trade Organization.
Vilsack said he heard recently about a California dairyman who committed suicide, leaving seven children and a wife to keep their farm going.
“There’s a human cost to this that we sometimes don’t appreciate,” he said, after telling that story and one about calling the widow of an Iowa hog farmer who killed himself in 1999, soon after Vilsack became the state’s governor.
“We try to do all we can for these people,” he said with a touch of frustration. “I just don’t want to have to make another call like that.”
Conservation programs
To a questioner who voiced concern about proposed budget cuts in conservation programs, Vilsack said there wouldn’t be a cut in spending, because applications for payments always fall short of the appropriations.
In fact, he said, “I think you’re going to see a pretty significant increase.”
To another questioner, who asked for resumption of full funding for the Resource Conservation and Development Program, Vilsack said he knows from his experience as a governor, state senator and mayor that the program does good work, but “it’s just a question of who pays for it,” and who benefits from it.
States and localities get the benefit, he said, and the department must fund places to cut its budget to help reduce the federal deficit.
He said the current budget proposal was drafted in four weeks, as the administration began, and it did not have time to dig deeply for places to save money and spend it more efficiently.
The Department of Food?
Vilsack and his audience appeared to agree most about the need to educate people outside rural areas about their connections to agriculture.
“I think there’s going to be a real interest on the part of consumers to know their farmer,” he said.
The secretary said USDA is “often misunderstood,” and he is working with non-rural members of Congress to “rebrand the department.”
He said the planting of a “people’s garden” outside the huge USDA headquarters on Independence Avenue in Washington provides “a very graphic opportunity for people to understand” the department’s relationship to food.
“We take our food supply for granted,” he said. “I think we also take our water supply for granted. We can no longer do that.”
Begin at early age
He said public education should begin at an early age.
“The more we can get kids’ hands in the dirt, the better off we will be as a country,” and the better the decisions the political system makes about agriculture will be, he said.
Later in the day, Vilsack visited a food bank in Louisville.
(Al Cross is the director of the Institute for Rural Journalism and Community Issues at the University of Kentucky, Lexington, Ky.)
Monday, June 1, 2009
Carbon credit scheme will draw organized crime: Interpol
Monday Jun 01, 2009
By The Edmonton Journal
Organized crime syndicates are eyeing the nascent forest carbon credit industry as a potentially lucrative new opportunity for fraud, an Interpol environmental crime official said on Friday.
Peter Younger, an environmental crimes specialist at the world's largest international police agency, was referring to a UN-backed scheme called "reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation." REDD aims to unlock potentially billions of dollars for developing countries that conserve and restore their forests. In return, they would earn carbon credits that can be sold for profit to developed nations that need to meet greenhouse gas emission reduction targets.
"If you are going to trade any commodity on the open market, you are creating a profit-and-loss situation. There will be fraudulent trading of carbon credits," he told Reuters in an interview at a forestry conference in Nusa Dua on the Indonesian island of Bali.
"In future, if you are running a factory and you desperately need credits to offset your emissions, there will be someone who can make that happen for you. Absolutely, organized crime will be involved."
Younger called on governments, multi-lateral bodies and NGOs to involve law enforcement agencies more in the development of REDD policies and in the fight against illegal logging and deforestation, which are responsible for about 20 per cent of mankind's greenhouse gas emissions.
"It struck me, as I sit here at this conference, as ironic that I am the only policeman here. You say you want to strike up partnerships to address illegal logging -- who with?" he said. "Consider resourcing law enforcement efforts and not just relying on NGOs and other nice people to do it for you."
Forests soak up vast amounts of carbon dioxide, and REDD aims to reward governments and local communities for every tonne of CO2 locked up by a forest over decades, equating to a potentially very large flow of cash globally for forest credits.
Local communities are supposed to earn a share of REDD credit sales to pay for better health, education and alternative livelihoods that entice them to protect rather than cut down surrounding forests. But revenue-sharing measures have yet to be worked out. Fraud could include claiming credits for forests that do not exist or were not protected, Younger said.
By The Edmonton Journal
Organized crime syndicates are eyeing the nascent forest carbon credit industry as a potentially lucrative new opportunity for fraud, an Interpol environmental crime official said on Friday.
Peter Younger, an environmental crimes specialist at the world's largest international police agency, was referring to a UN-backed scheme called "reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation." REDD aims to unlock potentially billions of dollars for developing countries that conserve and restore their forests. In return, they would earn carbon credits that can be sold for profit to developed nations that need to meet greenhouse gas emission reduction targets.
"If you are going to trade any commodity on the open market, you are creating a profit-and-loss situation. There will be fraudulent trading of carbon credits," he told Reuters in an interview at a forestry conference in Nusa Dua on the Indonesian island of Bali.
"In future, if you are running a factory and you desperately need credits to offset your emissions, there will be someone who can make that happen for you. Absolutely, organized crime will be involved."
Younger called on governments, multi-lateral bodies and NGOs to involve law enforcement agencies more in the development of REDD policies and in the fight against illegal logging and deforestation, which are responsible for about 20 per cent of mankind's greenhouse gas emissions.
"It struck me, as I sit here at this conference, as ironic that I am the only policeman here. You say you want to strike up partnerships to address illegal logging -- who with?" he said. "Consider resourcing law enforcement efforts and not just relying on NGOs and other nice people to do it for you."
Forests soak up vast amounts of carbon dioxide, and REDD aims to reward governments and local communities for every tonne of CO2 locked up by a forest over decades, equating to a potentially very large flow of cash globally for forest credits.
Local communities are supposed to earn a share of REDD credit sales to pay for better health, education and alternative livelihoods that entice them to protect rather than cut down surrounding forests. But revenue-sharing measures have yet to be worked out. Fraud could include claiming credits for forests that do not exist or were not protected, Younger said.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)