|
|
|
Climate change could affect ag land useBy Jennifer M. Latzke Climate variability and climate change can affect agricultural land use, according to William Hohenstein, director of the Global Change Program Office of the U.S. Department of Agriculture. He spoke during the National Sorghum Producers General Session Feb. 11. Sorghum growers are interested in the environmental side benefits of growing their crop, especially with the threat of Global Warming looming. Besides the use of sorghum in the biofuel industry, sorghum could be useful in sequestering carbon in soils. "Crops and grazing lands exist in an atmosphere that is increasing in concentration of carbon dioxide," Hohenstein said. Agriculture is a source of greenhouse gas emissions, especially methane and nitrous oxide, Hohenstein said. The sources of these greenhouse gasses are split between crop and livestock production. Agricultural soils, because of their management, are carbon sinks, or storage areas, though. There is an opportunity to reduce emissions in agriculture and forestry that are cost effective, Hohenstein said. And, utilities are partnering with farmers to take on actions that reduce emissions. Looking at a map of the Earth, we can see that carbon is stored in the northern hemisphere during the spring and summer, and then released during the winter, Hohenstein said. "The Earth 'breathes' in this manner, but there's a concern that carbon dioxide levels are increasing in the atmosphere dramatically, primarily because of emissions from fossil fuels," Hohenstein said. "When land is plowed out, we lose up to 50 percent of the carbon," Hohenstein said. "But, with conservation tillage and perennial vegetation, we can sequester a significant portion of carbon. We could even get back to pre-existing levels. "After 20 or 30 years, carbon could reach a new equilibrium in the soil, where it won't store any more," he added. "But, it will store more than if you'd stayed with conventional tillage practices." Forestry and agricultural management could potentially offset 10 to 20 percent of total U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, he added. But, the question is who should pay for carbon sequestration. Regulations and existing incentive programs provide offsets to private markets, for emissions trading. But participation in the offsets market is voluntary. There's also more information needed about the permanence of sequestration efforts, or leakage where sequestration benefits may move elsewhere. "Will the carbon stay out of the atmosphere?" Hohenstein asked. Who will assign liability if it doesn't, who will be responsible for continuous reporting, and other questions should be addressed with policy. A challenge lies in making voluntary greenhouse gas guidelines easy to understand and follow. USDA is working on the rules that could shape how contributions to a carbon credit market credit farmers. The first step, though, is creating better inventory methods for farmers and landowners to generate their greenhouse gasses footprint. Agricultural greenhouse gas sources include various practices, such as field residue burning, rice production, lime applications, nitrogen fertilizer applications, tree planting and more. The Voluntary Reporting of Greenhouse Gasses-Carbon Management Evaluation Tool (COMET-VR) is a decision support tool for producers, land managers, and others. Its database has information from the Carbon Sequestration Rural Appraisal and calculates the annual carbon flux on one or more parcels of land. It's found at www.cometvr.colostate.edu. "The debate is not over, is climate change occurring?" Hohenstein asked. "And, what do we do? Voluntary carbon markets offer farmers opportunities and potential risks. Rules are now being discussed that could shape how contributions from agriculture are given credit." The carbon trading market will come down to how stringent the commitments are structured and how economically viable a cap and trade system will be. Barney Gordon, professor of Agronomy at Kansas State University, also spoke. He presented research showing the benefits of sorghum in cropping systems in North Central Kansas over growing corn. A panel discussion of cellulosic biofuels included Bob Avant, Bioenergy Program director at Texas AgriLife Research in College Station, Texas; Thomas W. Robb, manager of Co-product Development for Abengoa Bioenergy Corporation; and Spencer Swayze, manager of Business Development for Ceres, Inc. There was also a panel discussion on the starch biofuels industry, which included John Neufeld, chief risk officer of White Energy; Greg Krissek, director of Governmental Affairs, ICM; and Tom Tucker, president of John Stewart & Associates. Jennifer M. Latzke can be reached by phone at 620-227-1807, or by e-mail at jlatzke@hpj.com. 3/10/08 Date: 3/4/08 Advertisement
Copyright/Privacy
Copyright 1995-2009. High Plains Publishers, Inc. All rights reserved. Any republishing of these pages, including electronic reproduction of the editorial archives or classified advertising, is strictly prohibited. If you have questions or comments you can reach us at High Plains Journal 1500 E. Wyatt Earp Blvd., P.O. Box 760, Dodge City, KS 67801 or call 1-800-452-7171. Email: webmaster@hpj.com |
Market Snapshot Inside Futures |
