Spotlight on Climate & Agriculture

Posted on August 19, 2010 by Allyse

Agriculture has much to lose as the climate changes. Climate change is a serious threat to the business of growing food, and this should worry anyone that earns a living from the land (as well as everyone that eats). California farmers are already hurting, here and now, and agriculture is too important for us to stand by as things get worse.

Every week there’s something in the news about water scarcity in the Central Valley, freak late spring chills, new pests that threaten whole industries, old pests advancing on new territory. While individual weather events are impossible to link to climate change directly, we do know that the weather is getting stranger and climate scientists say we’re headed for more extreme weather events in the decades to come. Climate change will mean exactly that: change. Climate change means instability, and that’s no good at all for pest management, irrigation planning, or planting decisions.

Climate change means that California will get more rain than snow in the winter, the Sierra Nevada snowpack will shrink, and therefore less water will be available in later months when we need it most. Climate change means that within our children’s lifetimes, some crops — including many key perennials like avocadoes, nuts, grapes, and stone fruit — may become difficult or impossible to grow in some parts of the state as winter chilling hours are reduced. Higher overall temperatures and elevated carbon dioxide levels mean that weeds and insects will thrive and migrate north. More frequent extreme weather events like droughts (pdf), heat waves, late frosts, and flooding will likely affect all sectors of the industry.

Agriculture has contributed its share to greenhouse gas emissions (on the global level, agriculture accounts for 13.5% of greenhouse gas emissions and here it California agriculture accounts for 6% of the state’s emissions). But there is good news: California agriculture has a whole lot to contribute to climate change mitigation. There are real, concrete steps that can be taken right now that will both ensure the viability of agriculture moving forward and reduce greenhouse gas emissions over the long term. With the right kind of public support, California agriculture can actually be an important part of the solution.

It is time to stand up, get creative, and support California’s farmers in their efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and mitigate climate change.

CalCAN is working to create incentives for all kinds of climate-friendly farming practices:

  • On-farm renewable energy production — Solar PV paired with large farm buildings, small and mid-scale wind projects paired with ranch and marginal lands, biogas generators paired with dairies, and biomass generators paired with processing operations are just some of the low-hanging fruit for helping California build a stable and diverse renewable energy mix.
  • Energy and water efficiency on farms — Although California has done great work encouraging energy efficiency on farms and ranches, we still have a long way to go.
  • Building organic soil matter to “sink” carbon — Reducing synthetic fertilizer inputs, employing cover crops, planting out fallow land, perennial cropping, and conservation tillage all sequester carbon.
  • Using organic farming — Organic farming systems offer some of the best opportunities to reduce emissions and sequester carbon.
  • Managing livestock and rangelands — Planting trees on rangeland can increase carbon sequestration, and feeding cattle a primarily grass diet can also reduce their direct methane emissions.
  • Preserving farmland — Farmland can provide numerous climate benefits, including the ability to sequester carbon, preserve open space, absorb and filter water, and continue to feed a growing population from stable, local sources.

All human activity is ultimately dependent on reasonably predictable weather patterns and reliable natural resources, but agriculture’s vulnerability to climate instability is truly unique in its immediacy.

Can the agricultural community mobilize in its own self-interest to support climate change mitigation? Can California provide the right mix of incentives and support to energize agriculture as a key piece of the solution? We think that California can.

Posted in General Information | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment  

Climate Lessons from the Green Revolution? The problem with false choices.

Posted on August 19, 2010 by Jeanne Merrill

A new study from Stanford University suggests that the Green Revolution is responsible for avoiding significant greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture.  But one has only to read the article with a critical eye to realize that the researchers’ assumptions are flawed.

The study’s authors compared agriculture’s current global greenhouse gas emissions with the GHG emissions under two hypothetical models.  Both hypothetical models looked at what would happen to GHG emissions if agriculture had to rely upon meeting world food demands without the benefits of Green Revolution technologies.  In one model, living standards were kept at 1960s levels and the other assumed the same standards of living we have today.

The models assumed that the only alternative to using the Green Revolution technologies of intensified use of pesticides, synthetic fertilizers, irrigation and hybrid seeds was to expand farming into marginal areas, such as forests and lands with poor soils. The result?  GHG emissions under the two models of farming without the use of Green Revolution technologies show much higher GHG emissions than what global agriculture emits today.  The study’s conclusion? The Green Revolution has been a good deal for the climate.

Unfortunately, the study’s unlikely scenarios tell us very little about GHG emissions from agriculture and the opportunities to achieve GHG emission reductions from agriculture and move toward sustainable farming systems.

The researchers note that in developing their climate models for their two hypothetical scenarios, they did not include GHG emissions from livestock, pesticides, fuel, machinery and burning of agricultural residues. Yet, these are significant sources of GHG emissions in agriculture that give us a more complete picture of agriculture’s climate footprint.  Since the 1960s, intensification of livestock confinement has increased significantly and with it has come an increase in potent greenhouse gases – methane and nitrous oxide (25 and 300 times more potent than CO2).  In California, GHG emissions from livestock account for a half of the state’s agricultural GHG emissions.

The study also ignores the most significant alternative to the Green Revolution – sustainable agriculture.  Our modern sustainable agriculture movement was born in response to the Green Revolution.  Rather than rely on toxic pesticides, synthetic fertilizers and hybrid and GMO seeds that threatened their health and threw off the ecological balance of their farms, sustainable and organic farmers shunned Green Revolution logic and developed farming systems based on ecological principles without the heavily reliance on synthetic, fossil fuel inputs.  And the climate benefits are clear.

Photo courtesy of USDA NRCS

A United Nations FAO study found that organic agriculture is 30 percent less energy intensive than its conventional counterpart. A UC Davis study funded by the California Energy Commission, found that organic soil management strategies (e.g. cover cropping, composting) offer some of the best strategies for reducing GHG emissions and sequestering atmospheric carbon in our soils.

The Stanford study does offer one important climate lesson – the expansion of agricultural production into marginal lands comes with it the risk of significant GHG emissions.  As we develop our agriculture and energy policies – particularly our biofuels policy – we should take care to avoid displacing food and feed production in the U.S. that drives the clear cutting of tropical forests to make way for increased grain production.

Posted in General Information | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment  

Calling All Farmer Policy Wonks!

Posted on August 1, 2010 by renata

One of CalCAN’s goals is to engage California farmers in representing their interests at the climate policy table. We believe that an effective response to climate change must support the solutions that farming and ranching has to offer, and must address the vulnerabilities of the agriculture sector. Policymakers need to hear directly from farmers and their allies to understand the vital role of agriculture.

A report by the Pew Center on Global Climate Change, released July 20, 2010, validates many of the assumptions underlying the work of CalCAN.

U.S. Agriculture and Climate Legislation: Markets, Myths and Opportunities examines the agriculture sector’s concerns about climate and energy legislation, and offers an assessment of the likely outcome of federal legislation for farmers and ranchers.

CalCAN Assumption #1: Agriculture is uniquely vulnerable to climate change.

The Pew report summarizes the findings of a recent study by the U.S. Global Change Research Project and USDA which identified several impacts to agriculture that can be expected as global temperatures continue to rise:

  1. Extreme and unpredictable weather events
  2. Increased weed, disease, and insect pest activity
  3. Decreased crop yields and nutritional value in some crops
  4. Livestock productivity is likely to decline
  5. Declining quality of livestock forage

CalCAN Assumption #2: Climate legislation can benefit farmers and ranchers economically.

From the Pew report:

“If properly designed and implemented, costs of climate and energy legislation can be minimized and the potential benefits to the agricultural sector maximized. Benefits include the opportunities presented by a robust offsets market, increased demand for bio-based forms of transportation fuel and electricity, increased demand for on-farm wind generation, expanded methane capture and electricity sales to the grid, and participation in stacking of environmental conservation payments.”

CalCAN Assumption #3: Farmers and ranchers should be incentivized to use climate-friendly practices that have additional environmental co-benefits.

The report states:

“Farmers and ranchers have a long history of creating new practices and developing techniques to maintain the quality of their land for years to come. Many existing and potential future practices have the effect of permanently increasing carbon stored on the land or avoiding emissions that would otherwise occur. Under climate legislation, these practices will most likely be eligible for compensation in the form of 5-10 year contracts for the carbon that is stored in the land, or the ability to generate carbon credits for captured emissions from manure. This program will allow farmers to be compensated for good practices.”

CalCAN Assumption #4: Regulations to reduce greenhouse gases are inevitable, and comprehensive, well-crafted legislation that addresses agriculture’s unique needs and opportunities is the best path forward.

The report summarizes a number of the forces at work to reduce GHGs in addition to federal legislation, including market-driven requirements (e.g., by WalMart, McDonalds), EPA regulation, state and regional programs (such as California’s AB 32 law currently being implemented), and nuisance lawsuits. It states that a “piecemeal [approach to] GHG requirements and the inability to leverage incentives will likely result in a worse outcome for farmers.”

CalCAN Assumption #5: Farmers should participate in crafting climate policy that will benefit their interests and enhance their ability to be part of the solution.

The Pew study found that “farmers have many reasons to be constructive participants in the climate and energy policymaking process, not least of which is the importance of farmer involvement in shaping future opportunities for the sector.” Further, they state that “Farmers have many reasons to be engaged participants in the climate and energy policymaking process. Productive engagement by American farmers can help ensure that U.S. policy addresses their concerns and embodies their ideas.”

We in the CalCAN network concur. Join us and get involved!

Posted in General Information | Tagged , , , , , , | 1 Comment