Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Table of Contents
Introduction............................1
Climate change science......2
How does climate change
influence agriculture? .........3
How does agriculture
influence climate
change? ....................................3
Agriculture’s role
in mitigating climate
change ......................................6
The value of soil carbon:
Potential benefits for
agriculture ...............................8
Charge systems:
Carbon tax ...............................8
Cap and trade: A private
market for greenhouse
gas emissions .........................9
Subsidizing positive
behavior .................................12
Summary ................................13
References .............................14
Resources ...............................14
Appendix:
How to get involved
in voluntary private
carbon markets....................15 An organic wheat grass field. Growing research is showing that organic production systems are one of the most
climate-friendly systems of food production.
Illustration of the greenhouse effect (courtesy of the Marion Koshland Science Museum of the National Academy of
Sciences). Visible sunlight passes through the atmosphere without being absorbed. Some of the sunlight striking the
earth (1) is absorbed and converted to heat, which warms the surface. The surface (2) emits infrared radiation to the
atmosphere, where some of it (3) is absorbed by greenhouse gases and (4) re-emitted toward the surface; some of
the heat is not trapped by greenhouse gases and (5) escapes into space. Human activities that emit additional green-
house gases to the atmosphere (6) increase the amount of infrared radiation that gets absorbed before escaping into
space, thus enhancing the greenhouse effect and amplifying the warming of the earth.
C
influence climate change? onserva-
are not necessarily considered. Benefits to tion tillage,
agriculture might be offset by an increased Agriculture’s contribution to organic
likelihood of heat waves, drought, severe
thunderstorms and tornadoes. An increase greenhouse gas emissions production, cover
in climate variability makes adaptation dif- Agriculture activities serve as both sources cropping and crop
ficult for farmers. and sinks for greenhouse gases. Agriculture rotations can dras-
sinks of greenhouse gases are reservoirs of
The U.S. Department of Agriculture carbon that have been removed from the
tically increase the
released a report in May 2008 that focused atmosphere through the process of biologi- amount of carbon
on the effects of climate on agriculture, cal carbon sequestration. stored in soils.
specifically on cropping systems, pasture
and grazing lands and animal management The primary sources of greenhouse gases in
(Backlund et al., 2008). The following find- agriculture are the production of nitrogen-
ings are excerpted from the report: based fertilizers; the combustion of fossil fuels
such as coal, gasoline, diesel fuel and natural
• With increased carbon dioxide and gas; and waste management. Livestock enteric
higher temperatures, the life cycle fermentation, or the fermentation that takes
of grain and oilseed crops will likely place in the digestive systems of ruminant
progress more rapidly. animals, results in methane emissions.
• The marketable yield of many hor-
Carbon dioxide is removed from the atmo-
ticultural crops, such as tomatoes,
sphere and converted to organic carbon
onions and fruits, is very likely to
through the process of photosynthesis. As
be more sensitive to climate change
organic carbon decomposes, it is converted
than grain and oilseed crops.
back to carbon dioxide through the process
• Climate change is likely to lead to a of respiration. Conservation tillage, organic
northern migration of weeds. Many production, cover cropping and crop rota-
weeds respond more positively to tions can drastically increase the amount of
increasing carbon dioxide than most carbon stored in soils.
cash crops.
In 2005, agriculture accounted for from
• Disease pressure on crops and domes- 10 to 12 percent of total global human-
tic animals will likely increase with caused emissions of greenhouse gases,
earlier springs and warmer winters. according the Intergovernmental Panel on
• Projected increases in temperature and Climate Change (IPCC, 2007b). In the
a lengthening of the growing season United States, greenhouse gas emissions
www.attra.ncat.org ATTRA Page 3
from agriculture account for 8 percent Greenhouse gases have varying global
of all emissions and have increased warming potentials, therefore climate
since 1990 (Congressional Research scientists use carbon dioxide equivalents
Service, 2008). Figure 2 presents recent to calculate a universal measurement of
data in carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2e). greenhouse gas emissions.
Figure 2. Greenhouse gas emissions and carbon sinks in agricultural activities, 1990-2005 (CO2 equivalent).
Avg.
1990 1995 2000 2005
Source 2001-2005
million metric tons CO2 equivalent (MMTCO2-Eq)
U.S. Agricultural Activities
GHG Emissions (CH4 and N2O)
Agriculture Soil Managementa 366.9 353.4 376.8 365.1 370.9
Enteric Fermentationb 115.7 120.6 113.5 112.1 115.0
Manure management 39.5 44.1 48.3 50.8 45.6
Rice Cultivation 7.1 7.6 7.5 6.9 7.4
Agricultural Residue Burning 1.1 1.1 1.3 1.4 1.2
Subtotal 530.3 526.8 547.4 536.3 540.1
Carbon Sinks
Agricultural Soils (33.9) (30.1) (29.3) (32.4) (31.7)
Other na na na na na
Subtotal (33.9) (30.1) (29.3) (32.4) (31.7)
Net Emissions, Agriculture 496.4 496.7 518.1 503.9 508.4
Total GHG Emissions, All Sectors 6,242.0 6,571.0 7,147.2 7,260.4 6,787.1
Total Carbon SInks, All Sectors (712.8) (828.8) (756.7) (828.5) (801.0)
Net Emissions, All Sectors 5,529.2 5,742.2 6,390.5 6,431.9 5,986.1
Source: EPA, Inventory of U.S. Grenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990-2005, April 2007, [http://epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/
usinventoryreport.html]. Table ES-2, Table 2-13, Table 6-1, Table 7-1, and Table 7-3. EPA data are reported i teragrams (tg.), which are equivalent to
one million metric tons each.
a. N2O emissions from soil management and nutrient/chemical applications on croplands.
b. CH4 emissions from ruminant livestock.
c. Emissions from fossil fuel/mobile combustion associated with energy use in the U.S. agriculture sector (excluded from EPA’s reported GHG
emissions for agricultural activities).
d. Does not include attributable CO2 emissions from fossil fuel/mobile combustion.
e. Change in forest stocks and carbon uptake from urban trees and landfilled yard trimmings.
5.
3. -ANURE management ./
Atmospheric carbon is fixed by trees and Carbon is lost back to the atmosphere
other vegetation through photosynthesis. through respiration and decompositon
of organic matter.
Aboveground carbon:
• Stem
• Branches
• Foliage
Belowground carbon:
• Roots Soil carbon:
• Litter • Organic
Some carbon is transferred from • Inorganic
belowground carbon (for example,
root mortality) to the soils.
C
organic agriculture could be implemented onservation
with other sustainable farming systems, Improving fertilizer efficiency through farming
such as conservation tillage, to further practices like precision farming using GPS
practices
increase climate change mitigation poten- tracking can reduce nitrous oxide emis-
that conserve
tial. See the ATTRA publication Pursuing sions. Other strategies include the use of
cover crops and manures (both green and moisture, improve
Conservation Tillage Systems for Organic Crop
Production for more information. animal); nitrogen-fixing crop rotations; yield potential and
composting and compost teas; and inte- reduce erosion
Generally, conservation farming prac-
tices that conserve moisture, improve yield grated pest management. The ATTRA Farm and fuel costs also
potential and reduce erosion and fuel costs Energy Web site contains information about increase soil carbon.
also increase soil carbon. Examples of prac- reducing nitrogen fertilizer on the farm at
tices that reduce carbon dioxide emissions the following link: www.attra.ncat.org/farm_
and increase soil carbon include direct energy/nitrogen.html.
seeding, field windbreaks, rotational graz-
ing, perennial forage crops, reduced sum- Methane capture
mer fallow and proper straw management
(Alberta Agriculture and Rural Develop- Large emissions of methane and nitrous
ment, 2000). Using higher-yielding crops oxide are attributable to livestock waste
or varieties and maximizing yield potential treatment, especially in dairies. Agriculture
can also increase soil carbon. methane collection and combustion systems
include covered lagoons and complete mix
Land restoration and and plug flow digesters. Anaerobic digestion
converts animal waste to energy by captur-
land use changes
ing methane and preventing it from being
Land restoration and land use changes released into the atmosphere. The captured
that encourage the conservation and methane can be used to fuel a variety of
improvement of soil, water and air qual-
on-farm applications, as well as to gener-
ity typically reduce greenhouse gas emis-
sions. Modifications to grazing practices, ate electricity. Additional benefits include
such as implementing sustainable stocking reducing odors from livestock manure
rates, rotational grazing and seasonal use and reducing labor costs associated with
of rangeland, can lead to greenhouse gas manure removal. For more information on
reductions. Converting marginal cropland anaerobic digestion, see the ATTRA publi-
to trees or grass maximizes carbon storage cation Anaerobic Digestion of Animal Wastes:
on land that is less suitable for crops. Factors to Consider.
C
“ reating farm
and forestry
Other renewable energy options invest in technology changes to use carbon-
systems with Renewable energy opportunities such as based fuels more efficiently and in general
wind and solar also present significant adopt practices that would lower their level of
strong incentives for
opportunities for the agriculture sector to greenhouse gas emissions. Thus a carbon or
growing soil carbon reduce greenhouse gas emissions. For fur- greenhouse gas emission tax values carbon
could well be at the ther information about these options, see in negative terms of tax avoidance. Those
center of climate the ATTRA publication Renewable Energy farms and ranches that emit or use less car-
stabilization.” Opportunities on the Farm. bon-intensive fuels pay a smaller tax.
(Mazza, 2007) From the perspective of farmers and ranch-
The value of soil carbon: ers, a carbon tax would increase the direct
Potential benefits for and indirect costs of agricultural production.
agriculture Farmers and ranchers use carbon-based
fuels directly in the forms of petroleum and
As Mazza (2007) has remarked, “creating
natural gas and indirectly in the forms of
farm and forestry systems with strong incen-
carbon-based fertilizers and pesticides and
tives for growing soil carbon could well be
fuel-intensive inputs. Thus, a carbon tax
at the center of climate stabilization.”
could move farmers and ranchers to shift to
Thus, a new crop that farmers and ranchers systems of production that either eliminate
may grow in the future is carbon. The Natural the use of fossil fuels and inputs or at least
Resources Conservation Service, part of the improve the efficiency of their use.
USDA, has long been a promoter of managing
However, proponents of carbon taxes have
carbon in efforts to improve soil quality.
generally sought to exclude the agriculture
As with any crop, farmers and ranchers sector from such taxation. For the most
need a market for this new crop, as well part, carbon tax proponents have been
as a price that will make it more profit- more interested in placing greenhouse gas
able to grow. From a broader social con- emission taxes on upstream producers of
text, the questions of who will purchase the original source products. This includes
this new crop and what is a fair price are coal, petroleum and natural gas produc-
also of private and public importance. Vol- ers and major emitters such as large elec-
untary private carbon markets exist in the tric utilities. Nonetheless, as people work
United States. Federal government markets to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, the
are expected to be created soon. How to potential to place a carbon tax on sectors
value carbon from the perspective of the like agriculture may become more likely.
Page 8 ATTRA Agriculture, Climate Change and Carbon Sequestration
Benefits of a carbon tax for than the net benefits of an inflexible cap”
(Congressional Budget Office, 2008).
farmers and ranchers
A major benefit of a carbon or greenhouse
gas emission tax would be the creation of a
Downside of a carbon tax
stream of tax revenue that the government The introduction of any tax results in dis-
could use to further induce the practice cussions of where the burden of taxation
and technology changes necessary to lower lies and issues of equity. In short, taxation
greenhouse gas emissions. For example, is about who pays and who does not. New
many of the current agriculture conserva- taxes also often result in a public discus-
tion programs, such as the Environmental sion of the fairness of the tax. There is logic
Quality Incentive Program and the newer to the argument that the burden of a car-
Conservation Stewardship Program, sup- bon or greenhouse gas emission tax should
port improvements in soil quality and could be placed fi rst and foremost on those who
be funded in part from emission or carbon either create carbon-intensive fuels or those
taxes, thereby providing a revenue source who are the largest emitters of greenhouse
to subsidize those who adopt or maintain gases. The greatest source of greenhouse
emission-reduction practices or carbon gas emissions in the United States is the
A
tax provides
combustion of fossil fuels. Since agriculture
sequestration activities. See the ATTRA a clear and
uses a small percentage of U.S. fossil fuels,
publication Federal Resources for Sustain-
an argument can be made that the burden stable cost
able Farming and Ranching for more infor-
of taxation should not to fall on this sector. to current practices.
mation. Tax revenues could also assist in
Still, agriculture is heavily dependent on
the support of conservation programs like
fossil fuels and any carbon or greenhouse
the Conservation Reserve Program, which
gas emission tax would likely be costly.
works to keep sensitive and highly erodible
lands out of production since these lands The ability of any individual farmer or
sequester soil carbon. rancher to pass on the increased costs of
fossil fuels that this kind of taxation would
Another benefit of this approach is that a create is much more limited than in other
tax provides a clear and stable cost to cur- sectors of the economy. For instance, if a
rent practices. A tax also makes it easier carbon tax is placed on diesel fuel, diesel
to determine changes that will be more fuel manufacturers can more easily pass on
profitable in a new cost environment. For the tax burden to the consumers of the die-
instance, if a concentrated animal feeding sel. The ability to pass on costs to consum-
operation understood the cost of their emis- ers is greater in industries where there is
sions as expressed by their emission tax, it little product substitution and where a few
would be easier for the operation to deter- producers dominate the market. This is not
mine alternatives to current practices that the case for farmers and ranchers, given
would be cost efficient. At a high enough tax their relative lack of market concentration
rate, installing methane digesters to lower and power.
greenhouse gas emission would become
economically feasible.
Cap and trade: A private market
Finally, it has been argued that a carbon for greenhouse gas emissions
tax approach is cost effective in imple-
mentation, at least when compared to the A government-sponsored cap-and-trade sys-
cap-and-trade method of achieving green- tem would create a new market for green-
house gas emissions by creating a new prop-
house gas emissions reductions. As recent
erty right — the right to emit.
Congressional Budget Office report states:
“available research suggests that in the near The market is created by a government
term, the net benefits (benefits minus costs) that sets a limit or cap on total greenhouse
of a tax could be roughly five times greater gas emissions allowed. Companies that
Over time, the government will continu- From the May 26, 2008 issue of High
ally lower the total level of allowances to Country News:
meet an established level of acceptable For example, if a farmer shifted to an
organic system of production, measurable
total emissions. As the supply of allow-
improvements in the ability of the farmer to
ances decreases, the value of the allow- sequester carbon could be verified and the
ances will rise or fall depending on demand farmer could sell this sequestered carbon at
and on the ability of emitters to make nec- the current carbon market price set in the
essary changes to reduce emissions or new emissions market (Ogburn, 2008).
Figure 5. Chicago Climate Exchange daily report. Source: Chicago Climate Exchange. www.chicagoclimateexchange.com
Crop diversity through rotations and Sequestration Reduces erosion and water require-
cover crops ments. Improves soil and water quality.
ANIMALS
Manure management Emission reduction On-farm sources of biogas fuel and
possibly electricity for large opera-
tions, provides nutrients for crops.
Rotational grazing and improved Sequestration, emission reduction Reduces water requirements. Helps
forage withstand drought. Increases long-
term grassland productivity.
T
are correct in their estimation of the incen- he public
technical assistance, efforts can be made tive needed to change farming and ranch- sector will
to assure that all farmers and ranchers — ing practices? Recently, Sperow (2007) esti- play an
regardless of their situation — take advan- mated an average cost to sequester carbon at
tage of these programs. Finally, resources important role in
$261 per ton of carbon. This is considerably
can be prioritized to different regions of the higher than the Paustian estimate. While
determining how
country or to specific practices or systems of the difference between these studies can
to engage the agri-
production so programs can be cost-effec- be explained by the fact that there is a wide culture sector in the
tive in reaching climate change goals.
regional variation in carbon sequestration reduction of green-
capacity and how sequestration is accom- house gas emissions.
Downside of subsidies plished, public costs would nonetheless be
Subsidies are a public cost, and this is a con- significant to achieve greenhouse gas emis-
siderable downside. Furthermore, subsidies sion reductions through subsidization.
are based on the idea that the government
can know and assure that the practices it Summary
pays for achieve the intended outcomes. For
example, the federal government provides The public sector will play an important role
significant subsidization of corn ethanol pro- in determining how to engage the agricul-
duction. Many argue that this changed the ture sector in the reduction of greenhouse
price of field corn and increased costs for gas emissions. The government can use its
people who use corn as animal feed and power to tax, subsidize or create a new mar-
for other countries that import corn to feed ket mechanism to do this. In 2008, the U.S.
people. There are also questions about how Senate debated climate change legislation,
subsidies can reduce greenhouse gas emis- including the Lieberman-Warner bill. This
sions. Will subsidizing a shift to a continuous bill proposes a modified cap-and-trade sys-
no-till cultivation operation result in greater tem with the expectation that the agriculture
carbon sequestration? If the scientific under- sector will provide at least 15 percent of the
standing of the relationship between carbon offsets needed to reduce greenhouse gas
sequestration and no-till is simply in error, emissions 71 percent from 2005 levels by
then public dollars spent to change farmer 2050. Whether this or future legislation will
behavior would be wasted. Furthermore, will become the base of future climate change
subsidization offer the least expensive way to improvements, there is little doubt that agri-
achieve a specific outcome? culture will play some role in the effort.
Appendix
How to get involved in voluntary contract expectations and verification policies. Review
all of these items with carbon aggregators before decid-
private carbon markets
ing to enroll.
The future of the voluntary carbon market remains
to be seen. Currently, farmer payments from carbon Eligibility
offsets alone are not substantial enough to rationalize
decisions for land management changes. However, it The following table was developed by the National Farm-
is important that the farm sector be included in solu- ers Union Carbon Credit Program to help farmers deter-
tions for mitigating climate change. Before enroll- mine eligibility for enrollment in specific projects (Farmers
ing in any type of carbon credit program, however, it Union, 2008). Different aggregators might have different
is important to understand eligibility requirements, requirements for eligibility, enrollment and contracts.
Verification
Finding an aggregator Once a project is approved, the aggregator is responsible
Several aggregators are located across the country for obtaining independent verification by an approved
to help farmers and ranchers enroll in carbon offset verifier to ensure the actual greenhouse gas sequestra-
projects. The following aggregators provide Web sites
with detailed information on contracts and enrollment. tion. A project is subject to initial and annual verification
For a full list of carbon aggregators for the Chicago for the duration of its contract with the Chicago Climate
Climate Exchange, visit their Web site at www. Exchange (Chicago Climate Exchange, 2009).
chicagoclimatex.com.
• National Farmers Union Carbon Credit
Program, http://carboncredit.ndfu.org
• National Carbon Offset Coalition, www.ncoc.us
Agriculture, Climate Change and
• Pacific Northwest Direct Seed Association,
Carbon Sequestration
www.directseed.org/carbontrading.html
By Jeff Schahczenski and Holly Hill
NCAT Program Specialists
How to enroll © 2008 NCAT
You will need to provide the following information to Holly Michels, Editor
enroll in carbon sequestration programs: Amy Smith, Production
• Land maps to document ownership of a given This publication is available on the Web at:
tract of land, including the legal description of www.attra.ncat.org/attra-pub/carbonsequestration.html or
the tract. www.attra.ncat.org/attra-pub/PDF/carbonsequestration.pdf
IP338
• Document of management practices, such as
Slot 336
program forms for croplands, grass and forest Version 012309
management.
Page 16 ATTRA