There has been no agriculture policy more controversial than
turning food into fuel. It’s been driven by a strange mix of objectives, the
desire by the United States after Middle East misadventures to lessen its need
for foreign oil, and a misdirected effort early on to “green up” transportation fuels. It’s in the spotlight again following the
release of the latest IPCC report on the dangers of climate change, and the
desperate need to cut back on carbon emissions from fossil fuels. The report argues that a minimum of 40% of emissions has to be cut by mid-century to
avoid catastrophe. It argues that there is about fifteen years left to bend the
emissions curve downward. Given the political, cultural and economic realities
we live with, this is an enormous task. I think farmers can and should play an
important role in finding solutions.
The worst part of the first generation of so called
bio-fuels was the use of corn as the feedstock for ethanol production. The U.S.
government created huge incentives to produce corn, and the limited
soybean-corn rotation has become a gold mine for mid-Western farmers. It increased
grain prices here on PEI too, and added to the financial hardship facing
livestock farmers who had to buy the costly feedgrains.
The trouble with corn is that it has to be “cooked” first to
turn the carbohydrate into sugars that can be distilled into alcohol. That
means burning natural gas, dimming much of its green halo. Sugar beets and
sugar cane are more efficient because they don’t require this first step. Even
better are ethanol production methods using cellulose from wood waste, or
perennial grasses like switch grass. Neither are used for food, but can benefit
farmers too, allowing them to profit from an energy crop grown on marginal land
not suitable for anything else. More recently smart energy researchers have
been pushing the idea of turning grasses and straw not into liquid fuel, but
into pellets which can be burned for space and water heating, even electricity
production. Link that with hybrid and electric engines, and the circle gets closed again. Farmers make
some much needed income from marginal land, and carbon emissions from fossil fuels are
cut.
The other bio-fuel that’s had unintended consequences is
bio-diesel. It’s a mixture of crushed oil seed like soybeans mixed with diesel.
It’s helped Europe reach carbon reduction targets, but at the expensive of
millions of acres of what had been domestic food production in South
America.
I think there are two other productive ways local farmers
can contribute to, and benefit from reducing carbon emissions. One is carbon sinks. Perennial pastures,
woodlots, soak up carbon dioxide as they grow. There have been tentative steps
to pay landowners to maintain these carbon sinks, the other side of a carbon
tax ledger, and that should be expanded.
The other idea is particularly important for PEI. It needs a little explanation. There are huge
financial benefits from royalties for provinces with oil and gas reserves that
allow energy companies to explore and produce.
It’s made Newfoundland and Saskatchewan have provinces, and Alberta the
envy of every other provincial treasurer.
The economic salvation from royalties pushes broke provinces like New
Brunswick to promote fracking, and the environmental risks that go along with
it.
Think about this. Why can’t there be a proper royalty regime
developed for renewable energy too.
Royalties are nothing more than a jurisdiction getting a piece of the action
from digging something out of the ground.
Now, with advanced wind turbines, having a good wind regime is no less
important to producing energy. And it’s renewable, the resource doesn’t
deplete, it’s there forever. Then a province like PEI with no oil and gas
reserves gets to play by the same rules as everyone else. Then New Brunswick
can look at tidal and wind power and say these can bring us back to solvency
too.
The IPCC report says the much lower cost of renewables is
the biggest development since its last report. Now rather than challenging
people to pay much more for fossil fuels to save the planet, the report says
renewables are competitive, in some cases cheaper. Throw in a carbon tax which
even oil companies say is necessary, and renewables look even better. Even the playing field on royalties too, and provincial governments can make better
policies.
And many of those wind turbines will end up on farmland, one
more opportunity for farmers to lower carbon emissions, and make some money.
No comments:
Post a Comment