California Climate & Agriculture Network

Advancing policy solutions at the nexus of climate change and sustainable agriculture

  • Home
  • About CalCAN
    • Guiding Principles
    • Opportunities & Challenges
    • Contact
    • Our Team
  • Our Work
    • CalCAN Fact Sheets
    • Climate-Friendly Farmer Stories
    • Ready…Or Not?
    • Videos
      • Workshop Video Presentations
      • CalCAN Summit 2011
      • CalCAN Summit 2009
    • Policy
      • Cap-and-Trade Revenue for Ag
      • California Air Resources Board
      • Carbon Market
      • Recommendations to Governor
      • Federal Climate Policy
      • SB 489: RE Equity Act
  • CalCAN in the News
  • Resources
    • Links
    • CalCAN Newsletter Archive
  • Blog
  • Donate

Fresno Farm Bill Forum

May 16, 2012 by Jeanne Merrill Leave a Comment
Congressmen Jim Costa and Dennis Cardoza, Central Valley Democrats, held a farm bill forum on April 28 in Fresno, California. This forum came on the heels of the Senate Agriculture Committee passing its 2012 Farm Bill out of committee and the House Agriculture Committee beginning its hearings on the bill. Without passage of a farm bill in 2012, key programs that support sustainable, rural communities and healthy food may be in jeopardy of deep cuts (see “Farm Bill Progress” above).

The California Caucus of the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition, which includes CalCAN, reached out to local farmers to participate in the forum, and I attended.

John Teixeira, CCOF member and former Fresno-Tulare Chapter chair, presented at the forum. The Firebaugh, CA-farmer noted the growing number of organic farms in the valley, saying: “A number of my neighbors are adopting organic farming practices because of the economic, health, and environmental benefits it provides.”

John highlighted the importance of key organic programs, including the National Organic Certification Cost Share Program and conservation programs like the Conservation Stewardship Program. John also noted the need to prioritize USDA research of locally-adaptive cultivars because “seed is the backbone of agriculture, and without the varieties that are best suited to our local climate, soil, disease, and pests, we cannot be competitive.”

Dwayne Cardoza, CCOF Fresno-Tulare Chapter chair, Steve Koretoff, CCOF board member, and organic producers Mike Smith and Will Scott joined with John to make one of the largest contingents of farmers at the forum. At the forum’s end, the organic growers spoke with Congressman Costa about a number of key issues, including support for farmers’ markets and the need to eliminate the surcharge on organic crop insurance.

Filed Under: Farm Bill 2012, Federal Policy

Food Fight Book Review

April 16, 2012 by Renata Brillinger 1 Comment

Part history text, part socio-political commentary and part call to action, Dan Imhoff’s new book offers something for everyone from the seasoned agriculture advocate to the newcomer on the food systems scene. “Food Fight: The Citizen’s Guide to the Next Food and Farm Bill,” published just a couple of months ago by Dan’s company Watershed Media comes just as the federal debate over the 2012 Farm Bill is heating up.

The book is divided into three sections: Why the Farm Bill Matters; Wedge Issues; and, Turning the Tables. To set the context, Dan summarizes the early history of the farm bill, describing the Dust Bowl, the Great Depression and the overproduction of crops that led to its creation as a cornerstone of the New Deal. The history lesson continues with a short summary of the impact of the Green Revolution on farm bill policy, as well as the story of how the bill came to include hunger and nutrition programs, and the ebb and flow of conservation programs to incentivize environmental stewardship on the nation’s farms and ranches. And because no discussion on the farm bill would be complete without discussing commodity subsidies, that’s covered too.

After laying down the foundation, Dan devotes the rest of the book to strategic topics. He lays out a number of “wedge issues” that could change the terms of the farm bill debate — things like government deficits, the increasingly apparent impacts of climate change on agriculture and other emerging ecological crises, the rise of the local food movement, food security concerns, and more.

The last few pages of the book are devoted to “turning the tables” and Dan offers a checklist of 25 ideas whose time has come — an aspirational menu for American agriculture. Finally, he provides a succinct activist tool kit with tips on organizing and a resource list of organizations across the country engaged in progressive advocacy on the farm bill and related issues.

Perhaps my favorite quote from the book — maybe because I can relate to it – is this one:
“I confess, I am a reluctant policy wonk. But these are the issues of our times. If Americans don’t weigh in on the Farm Bill, the agribusiness lobbyists will be more than happy to draft the next one for us as they have done for at least 30 years.”

The book is available online at Watershed Media where you can also see a number of other of Dan’s books. You can also order it on the action-oriented Food Fight site that features farm bill-related events, news and a “what you can do” section.

Filed Under: Farm Bill 2012, Federal Policy

Innovative Renewable Energy Projects Get a Boost

April 13, 2012 by Jeanne Merrill Leave a Comment

California farmers and ranchers produce more renewable energy than their counterparts in any other state.  But until recently small-scale bioenergy projects in the state struggled to get connected to the grid.  These innovative projects include producing combined heat and power from processing waste such as nut shells, olive pits, wine grape pumice, onion skins and more.

Fortunately, efforts to support innovative renewable energy production on farms and in food processing just got a boost with implementation of the Renewable Energy Equity Act, Senate Bill 489.

Small-scale bioenergy projects can now get connected to the grid under the Net Energy Metering (NEM) program, which previously only included solar, wind and fuel cell projects.  That changed when Governor Brown signed SB 489, authored by Senator Lois Wolk and sponsored by the California Climate and Agriculture Network.

Now farmers and food processors can use the simple and cost-effective NEM application process to get their bioenergy projects connected to the grid, eliminating what had been a significant hurdle for many of these projects.

Dixon Ridge Farm — a champion of SB 489 and an innovator that installed a bioenergy system to convert walnut shells to heat and electricity — is planning to take advantage of grid interconnection by upgrading to a system that can produce twice as much bioenergy as they currently do. Also, CalCAN is in dialogue with the Almond Hullers and Processors Association to explore a pilot project to use almond shells to generate renewable energy.

And it’s not just farmers who are taking advantage of SB 489.

Later this month, a new bioenergy project in the greater Sacramento area will officially go online, using the NEM program to get connected to the grid.  It will produce renewable energy for a packaging plant, using un-recyclable cardboard, food waste from a local supermarket and waste from a food processing plant as the feedstocks for the facility.  The end product from the bioenergy facility will then be used as compost by a local farmer.

It’s a great example of what’s possible when we remove barriers to innovative renewable energy projects.

Filed Under: California Policy, Farmer Resources, Renewable Energy

Report from the Commission on Sustainable Agriculture and Climate Change

April 4, 2012 by Renata Brillinger Leave a Comment

Guest Blog:

Doreen Stabinsky is a Professor of Global Environmental Politics at College of the Atlantic in Bar Harbor, ME. She is also a consultant and advisor on agriculture and climate change

“On a planet with sufficient food for all, a billion people go hungry. Another billion over-consume, increasing risks from chronic diseases.”

Last week, yet another high-level report on a topic of global concern was published by yet another group of eminent experts – this one on food security and climate change. The eminent experts – the Commission on Sustainable Agriculture and Climate Change – were assembled by a group of donor countries and the World Bank for the one-year task of producing the report and its recommendations.

High-profile attention to an issue as urgent as climate change impacts on agriculture is certainly welcome. With countries globally lagging in their attempts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to levels that will prevent dangerous temperature increases and the Kyoto Protocol gasping its last breaths as industrialized countries jump ship from legal obligations to reduce their emissions, someone needs to ring alarm bells about what increased temperatures and changing precipitation patterns mean for global food supplies.

Researchers at Stanford University last year published in Science magazine findings that global yields in maize and wheat had already decreased 3.8 to 5.5% respectively due to increasing temperatures. Current projections are for average global temperature increases of between 2.5 and 5° Celsius (4.5-9° Fahrenheit) before the end of this century. The Commission warns that: “Climate change above 3°C risks overall decreases in the global food production capacity that would be profoundly destabilizing even in places where food production remains adequate locally.”

For those looking for a brief, comprehensive introduction to the impacts of climate change on agriculture and food security, the report provides a well-referenced, solid and more-or-less balanced treatment. Industrial-scale, chemical-dependent agriculture (albeit disguised as “sustainable intensification”) has its place in the report, as do resource-conserving technologies and agroecological methods of production. As indicated by my opening quote, the report considers the food security challenges of both poverty and affluence. Notably, the Commission takes on the issue of food waste, writing for example that in the UK, “approximately 22% of household food and drink is wasted.”

Yet after a very thorough establishment of the problems to be addressed, the report proposes some oddly non-sequitur recommendations. The number one recommendation? Establish a “work programme” on agriculture under the Subsidiary Body on Scientific and Technological Advice (SBSTA) of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).  The lead on food security and climate change policy at the global level isn’t to be taken by the UN Food and Agriculture Organization and its Committee on World Food Security (which aren’t even mentioned in the list of possible relevant international institutions). It’s to be handled by an obscure, hyper-politicized subsidiary body of the climate change convention.

Expert reports are not immune to global political squabbles. In fact, expert commissions are sometimes established in order to obscure the politics behind conflicts through unbiased, objective, “expert” advice. With the bizarre prioritization of its recommendations, the Commission on Sustainable Agriculture and Climate Change provides hints that such an end is indeed at least part of its raison d’être.

At the global political level there is an ongoing fight between rich and poor countries on taking responsibility for action to stem the global climate crisis. Rich countries and the World Bank (the donors for the work of the Commission) are keen to have a work program on agriculture under the UNFCCC. They want to establish a mechanism through which poor countries do the work of reducing greenhouse gas levels through storing carbon in their soils and rich countries are relieved of the burden of reducing their own agricultural emissions. Up to this point, poor countries are not agreeing to that mode of “burden sharing,” not least because permanent emission reductions on the part of major emitters are essential to stemming the threat of climate change and soil carbon sequestration will only ever be uncertain and temporary.

(In addition to funding the Commission, the World Bank paid for a series of meetings over the course of 2011, all of which coincidentally concluded that a UNFCCC SBSTA work program was necessary. The findings of all these “expert” meetings have been exhaustively reiterated by rich country governments in the climate negotiations on a work program.)

Putting recommendation 1 and its obscure political messages aside, the report does provide useful recommendations, though means of implementation are less clear. Some of the recommendations are even bold and novel (for international policymakers anyway), such as recommendations to reshape food access and consumption patterns and to reduce loss and waste in food systems. In recommendation number two, the Commission highlights the need to significantly raise the level of global investment in sustainable agriculture.

Undoubtedly, however, given the seriousness of the challenges ahead of us, the most important message of the report lies in its final call to action: “Without a global commitment to reducing GHG emissions from all sectors, including agriculture, no amount of agricultural adaptation will be sufficient under the destabilized climate of the future. While change will have significant costs, the cost of remaining on the current path is already enormous and growing. Given the already intolerable conditions of many livelihoods and ecosystems, and the time lag between R&D and widespread application, urgent action must be taken now.”

Filed Under: Climate & Ag Research, General Information

Path to the Farm Bill: Senator Harkin Introduces Rural Energy Investment Act

April 4, 2012 by Renata Brillinger Leave a Comment

Reposted courtesy of the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition (NSAC)
March 30, 2012
http://sustainableagriculture.net/blog/rural-energy-investment-act/

On Thursday, March 29, Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) introduced the Rural Energy Investment Act (S. 2270) which would reauthorize and provide mandatory funding for several programs in the Farm Bill’s Energy Title.  The bill would provide $1.285 billion in farm bill mandatory funding over five years, including support for two farmer-based programs (see below) plus the Biorefinery Assistance Program which provides funding to companies developing commercial advanced biofuel plants.

Senators Kent Conrad (D-ND), Amy Klobuuchar (D-MN) and Al Franken (D-MN) are cosponsors of the bill.

NSAC is supportive of the bill’s provisions for the Rural Energy for America Program (REAP).  That portion of the bill would:

  • Simplify the application process for small projects by creating a three-tiered application system with application simplicity reflecting the size of the project;
  • Strengthen the environmental and health provisions by requiring USDA to include stronger environmental and health aspects in its award considerations; and
  • Expand start-up support for feasibility studies so that rural farmers and businesses can start projects with sound planning.

These provisions are the same as those in Senate Bill 2225 introduced by Senators Franken (D-MN) and Harkin (D-IA) on March 22, 2012.

The Rural Energy Investment Act would authorize mandatory farm bill funding for REAP of $70 million per year from FY2013 through FY2017.

The new bill would also amend the Biomass Crop Assistance Program (BCAP) to:

  • Allow lands scheduled to come out of the Conservation Reserve Program to be prepared for biomass crop production during the last fiscal year of their conservation enrollment schedule;
  • Define “qualifying eligible material” to better specify what materials are eligible to apply for collection, harvest, storage, and transportation payments and change payment limits to a maximum of $25 per dry ton for a maximum of 3 years;
  • Reduce the maximum number of years for contracts for establishing woody biomass feedstocks from 15 to 7 years;
  • Cap crop establishment payments at $500 per acre and at 50 percent cost share, but increase those limits to $750 per acre and to 75 percent for beginning, socially disadvantaged, and geographically disadvantaged farmers or ranchers; and
  • Provide USDA with additional authorities to limit CHST payments to avoid wasteful payments.

In our 2012 Farm Bill Platform, NSAC calls for more comprehensive reforms of BCAP, including to:

  • Eliminate the CHST component of the program given the very significant problems with the Farm Service Agency implementation of the CHST component;
  • Ensure that BCAP projects for the establishment of bioenergy crops conform to the program purpose of establishing new bioenergy crops, particularly perennials;
  • Require that, if project money is used to fund the production of an annual crop for bioenergy, annual crops must be part of a resource-conserving crop rotation;
  • Ensure that the BCAP project component is competitive and only available for developing new sources of energy;
  • Require that NRCS play a central role in the development and implementation of BCAP conservation plans; and
  • Deny BCAP eligibility for commodity program crop residues.

The new bill would authorize mandatory farm bill funding for BCAP of $75 million per year from FY2013 through FY2017.

Filed Under: Federal Policy, Renewable Energy

USDA Report on Rural Energy for America Program Achievements

April 4, 2012 by Renata Brillinger 1 Comment

Reposted from the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition (NSAC)
March 22, 2012
http://sustainableagriculture.net/blog/usda-reap-report/

This week, USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack released a report entitled The Impact of the Rural Energy for America Program on Promoting Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. The Report summarizes the energy efficiency and renewable energy projects funded by the Rural Energy for America Program (REAP) over the last three years, 2009 through 2011.  It also includes a state-by-state summary of REAP renewable energy projects, with a profile of selected projects.

Overall, during the 3-year period covered by the report, REAP accomplished the following:

  • Supported 5,733 renewable energy and energy efficiency projects nationwide;
  • Generated or saved an estimated 6.5 million megawatt hours of power;
  • Provided $192 million in grants and $165 million in loan guarantees to agricultural producers and rural small business owners for renewable energy systems and energy efficiency improvements; and
  • Fostered partnerships that have leveraged an estimated $800 million from other sources.

Since the Program was first established in the 2002 Farm Bill, it has provided resources for more than 13,000 rural small businesses and agricultural producers, saved enough energy to power nearly 600,000 American homes for a year, and funded more than 1,000 solar projects and more than 560 wind projects.

REAP provides grants, loan guarantees, and a combination of grants and loan guarantees to rural small businesses and agricultural producers.  USDA is taking applications for guaranteed loans for renewable energy systems and energy efficiency improvements through June 29, 2012.  Applications for REAP grants and loan/grant combinations are due no later than March 30th.

Additional information on applying for REAP funding is available in the Federal Register funding notice issued January 20. You can also contact your USDA Rural Development state office for more information.

Filed Under: Federal Policy, Renewable Energy

Investing in Sustainable Agricultural Solutions to Climate Change

March 29, 2012 by Renata Brillinger Leave a Comment

This year, California’s long-anticipated cap-and-trade program goes into effect. The ground was laid for the program in 2006 when Governor Schwarzenegger signed into law AB 32, the Global Warming Solutions Act, the country’s most comprehensive climate protection policy. Under the law, California will reduce its greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to 1990 levels by 2020.

After much debate, legal challenge and a ballot measure attempting to stop it, beginning this year the first steps of implementing cap-and-trade will get underway with full implementation beginning in January 2013.

Under cap-and-trade the largest polluters of GHGs are required to “cap” and subsequently reduce their GHG emissions through a combination of renewable energy production, energy efficiency and related measures. Alternatively, polluters can partially meet their obligations by purchasing additional “allowances” (aka permits to emit GHGs) or by buying “offset credits” on the carbon market from other entities that are voluntarily reducing their GHG emissions.

An aspect of cap-and-trade that has been giving relatively little attention until now is that GHG polluters will be required to purchase a small portion of their allowances via an auction. The state will hold the first auction in November 2012 and quarterly auctions each year thereafter, generating hundreds of millions of dollars this year and increasing to several billions of cap-and-trade program revenue in future years.

In an opinion piece in the Sacramento Bee on March 21st, former Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez (a co-author of AB 32) had this to say about the funds:

“…the sale of pollution permits creates revenue that can flow to technologies and programs that benefit the environment and the economy. Now, the Legislature has the responsibility to ensure that the forthcoming cap-and-trade proceeds get invested in ways that further reduce dangerous pollution and stimulate the economy. This is no easy task, but it is critical that decision-makers focus on what’s best for our state: continuing to support the fastest growing and cleanest parts of our economy; and resist efforts by those intending to undermine such an opportunity.”

CalCAN has been to making the case that some portion of the public funds from cap-and-trade should be invested in sustainable agriculture to support its potential for reducing GHGs and sequestering carbon. Bills introduced in 2010 and 2011 by Senator Lois Wolk (D-Davis) and sponsored by CalCAN would have allocated some revenue to research, technical assistance, farmland protection and incentives for farmers and ranchers to transition to practices with climate and other environmental and health benefits.

Though the bills did not pass, the message was heard by Governor Brown who included “sustainable agriculture” in his budget proposal as an eligible allocation for cap-and-trade funds. Importantly, the Assembly Speaker also included sustainable agriculture in his cap-and-trade revenue bill, AB 1532.

This spring, the legislature will take up the question of investment priorities for cap-and-trade revenue. CalCAN and its allies will continue to advocate for sustainable agriculture’s positive contributions to climate protection.

We invite you to learn more by downloading a backgrounder, and to join us in expressing your support by calling your State Senator and Assemblymember.

Join us in making the case for investing in sustainable agricultural solutions to climate change!

Please call your State Senator and Assemblymember today. It’s easy and fast to call, and it makes a big impact.

1.   To find your representatives, go to http://www.legislature.ca.gov/port-zipsearch.html and type in your zip code.

2.   Call the Sacramento office number of your State Senator and Assemblymember. Ask to speak to the staff person who handles agriculture issues.

3.   The message is simple:

“I am a constituent of Senator/Assemblymember ___________ and I am calling to ask him/her to support the sustainable agriculture provisions in AB 1532. Cap-and-trade investments should be made to support the solutions sustainable agriculture can provide in helping California reach its greenhouse gas reductions goals.”

4.   Report your call:
Please let us know you called. Drop us a line at: info@calclimateag.org.

Filed Under: AB 32 Implementation, California Policy, Featured - Sidebar

California Small Farm Conference Draws Enthusiastic Growers to Valencia

March 21, 2012 by Ted Quaday 1 Comment

More than 400 small farm operators in California came together in southern California recently for the 25th annual California Small Farm Conference. The event provided attendees with opportunities to learn the ins and outs of developing successful and sustainable farm businesses.

Bringing the next generation of growers into farming was an area of concern, as were means of protecting farms against invasive pests.  Farmers also got a chance to learn more about evolving energy and carbon markets as the state of California implements its cap-and-trade program.

Dave Runsten (left) and Bob Corshen with the Community Alliance with Family Farmers in Davis, CA confer during tabling activities at the 2012 Small Farm Conference in Valencia.

As a presenter in the “Alternative Energy & Carbon Markets: Promises and Pitfalls” workshop, I briefed farmers on the challenges climate change will bring including the potential for increased flooding in winter and deeper droughts in summer. Erratic and extreme weather events already seem on the way to becoming the norm. Yield reductions, shifting crop patterns and increased and changing pest and disease pressures are also likely to occur. All of these changes leave California’s farmers economically vulnerable.

I also talked about steps farmers can take to adapt to the changing climate. Some ideas include working to increase soil fertility and water-holding capacity, increasing biodiversity, and on-farm water storage, as well as finding ways to minimize the use of fossil-fuel based inputs including motor fuels and synthetic nitrogen fertilizer.

To learn more about what climate challenges lie ahead and ways to adapt, check out CalCAN’s web-based resource information.

On the policy front, I talked about the idea that the entire state needs to be looking for ways to invest in California’s agricultural future. One of the ways to do that is by directing some of the revenue generated by the new cap-and-trade program toward agricultural research, technical assistance and in support of on-farm practices that produce climate benefits.

Over the next few months, the state legislature will weigh in on areas where cap-and-trade revenue (estimated at between $500 million and $1 billion in 2012) should be invested.  CalCAN continues to advocate that sustainable agricultural solutions be a part of the cap-and-trade investment plan.

Among folks at the Small Farm Conference, interest in ways to help farmers meet the challenges of climate change was strong.  You can help CalCAN continue building statewide backing for this deeper investment in sustainable agriculture by contacting us at info@calclimateag.org.

Filed Under: AB 32 Implementation, Farmer Resources, Featured - Sidebar, Impacts of Climate Change, Uncategorized Tagged With: AB 32, California agriculture, cap-and-trade, climate change, climate legislation, effects of climate change, farmer, sustainable agriculture

U.S. Senate Ag Panel Considers Conservation At Second Farm Bill Hearing

February 29, 2012 by Ted Quaday Leave a Comment

Family farmers joined program administrators and others yesterday in telling the U.S. Senate Agriculture Committee that if you want to do some environmental good and help ensure a reliable food supply, make sure federal conservation programs are well-funded under Farm Bill 2012.

California rangeland in the Conservation Stewardship Program

Conservation was the focus of the ag panel’s second farm bill hearing on Tuesday, February 28.  Natural Resources Conservation Service Chief Dave White told the senators there is continued high demand for conservation programs despite rising crop prices that seem destined to move some conservation lands back into production.

According to the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition (NSAC), White singled out the Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP) as a particularly popular option among farmers.  “I have been stunned by the demand for this program,” said White. “We have to turn millions of acres away this year. CSP is where the cutting edge in conservation will become the mainstream.  It is the only way we will be able to sustain the land in order to feed 9 billion people.”

Minnesota farmer Darrel Mosel told the committee that the CSP “is a program that allows farmers to farm and at the same time enhance the conservation performance and environmental outcomes of their operation.  I believe that CSP is a shining example of what’s right in farm policy.”

The NSAC staff members attended yesterday’s hearing and provided a full report on the proceedings including additional commentary from family farmers making use of conservation programs to enhance production and preserve environmental quality.

Filed Under: Farm Bill 2012, Federal Policy Tagged With: Conservation Programs, Conservation Stewardship Program, farmer, NRCS, sustainable agriculture, USDA

Farm Bill 2012 Hearings Open As Next Year’s Budget Plans Emerge

February 16, 2012 by Ted Quaday Leave a Comment

A new chapter on Farm Bill 2012 opened Wednesday with the first in a series of hearings before the Senate Committee on Agriculture. The hearing focused on energy programs and rural economic development. It featured committee chair Senator Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) observing that the farm bill is a jobs bill as she advocated for early action to pass a new bill this spring.

While the Senate eases into its farm bill discussion, analysts at the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition are pouring over President Obama’s FY 2013 budget proposal, which was released on Monday. It’s a “mixed bag” says NSAC. There are big cuts proposed for working lands conservation programs and some up and down adjustments in discretionary spending for other sustainable agriculture programs. NSAC has provided a detailed analysis of the President’s proposal in the web post “Obama’s FY 2013 USDA Budget Request.”

The analysis is well worth the read as we gear up to support the sustainable agriculture elements of US farm programs.  It’s detailed, yet concise, and helps provide perspective to the administration’s agricultural priorities.  Among the troubling signals the administration is sending is a willingness to cut deeply into conservation programs.

That, in NSAC’s view would be a mistake: “Now is not the time to do further damage to the conservation baseline. Farmer and rancher demand for conservation dollars exceeds supply by multiple factors for most programs. If anything, in the face of renewed severe erosion, climate change pressures, water depletion, and mounting energy prices, we need a bigger, not a smaller investment in farm conservation to protect the land that is our long-term food security.”

At CalCAN will heartily agree with the NSAC assessment. The budget message coming from the White House tells us that we’ll have our work cut out for us in Washington, D.C. this year as we work to build a sustainable and climate-friendly food system.

Filed Under: Farm Bill 2012, Featured - Sidebar, Federal Policy Tagged With: Farm Bill 2012, policy, sustainable agriculture, USDA
« Older Posts

Investing in Sustainable Agricultural Solutions to Climate Change

This year, California’s long-anticipated cap-and-trade program goes into effect. The ground was laid for the program in 2006 when Governor Schwarzenegger signed into …
Learn More...

What’s New

  • Cap-and-Trade Revenue for Ag
  • Climate-Friendly Farmer Stories
  • Organic Fact Sheet
  • CalCAN in the News

Blog Archive

Blog Posts by Category

“Organic agriculture, if practiced on the planet’s 3.5 billion tillable acres, could sequester nearly 40 percent of current CO2 emissions.”

— Rodale Institute.  Regenerative Organic Farming: A Solution to Global Warming. 2008

Tag Cloud

AB 32 AB 1405 AB 1504 AB 2530 agricultural economy biomass CalCAN's work California agriculture cap-and-trade CARB carbon sequestration climate change climate legislation climate models CSP drought effects of climate change energy efficiency farmer farmgate sales farmland preservation Governor Jerry Brown green revolution green tech economy livestock agriculture NOVIC NRCS on-farm energy on-farm renewable energy organic agriculture organics Pew Center on Global Climate Change policy Prop 23 rangeland SB 237 solar Stanford University sustainable agriculture Sustainable Agriculture Network Texas oil companies USDA water shortages Wetlands Reserve Program Williamson Act

WP-Cumulus by Roy Tanck requires Flash Player 9 or better.

Copyright © 2010 California Climate and Agriculture Network. All rights reserved. | Contact Us

Site Hosted by Gaiahost | Site by Deeper Shades Design