Download - Minnesota’s agriculture in a carbon constrained economy Bjorn Gangeness November 27, 2007
Minnesota’s agriculture in a carbon constrained economy
Bjorn GangenessNovember 27, 2007
Climate Change in Context Nearly inarguable evidence showing
human influence in raising average global temps The challenge of what to do and how
Solutions coming from different levels of government and citizen participation
Different sectors play different roles - energy generation to consumption to agricultural production
Minnesota’s emissions reduction goals 80% reduced carbon emissions
below 2005 levels in 2050, 30% in 2025 (eq. to 45.3MMT)
Reductions could come from efficiencies, reduced energy use, carbon offsets, geologic capture and storage, or terrestrial capture and storage
Carbon and Agriculture
Source: bp.com
Carbon and Agriculture
Large agricultural industry in Minnesota overwhelmingly focused on corn and soy
New initiatives that will make perennial biofuel crops more attractive Governor’s NextGen Energy Initiative Reinvest in Minnesota – Clean Energy
New Crop Initiatives and Carbon
The problem is the extent in considering carbon sequestration in development No mention of carbon stock goals No anticipation of carbon cap and trade
system If addressed, perennial biofuels may
develop more securely in an unsure marketplace
Reinvest in MN – Clean Energy $46 million requested appropriation for
2008 $40 M for bioenergy crop easements $6 M for administration
13,000 acres expected easements for a maximum 20 year payment of $3077/acre
Recognition of potential to work with other initiatives within the Federal Farm Bill
Tiered system of payments depending on type of practice implemented
Example of Tiered System
Relevant Criteria
Alternatives
No action – simply allow biofuels incentives to move forward on the current path
Integrate carbon credit system into the tiered payment structure based on BMPs
Set carbon stock increase goals for each tier
Full Appropriation Assumed ($46M in 2008)
No Action Alternative
Economic Efficiency 13000 acre goal but likely higher 1.6 MTCO2e/acre/yr 21,000 MT/yr or ~
420,000 MT over 20 yrs ($95/MT) Ecological Integrity
Monoculture Perennial is good for WQ Habitat is better than row-crop
Simplicity Monoculture is easier to harvest, plant,
manage
Carbon Credit Integration
Carbon Credit Integration
Addresses benefits of credit trading in each tier
No control over the carbon credit market so no price guarantees
Carbon markets are still voluntary, though a national system could change that
Carbon Credit Integration Economic Efficiency
Minimal administrative fees to integrate and promote seeking of carbon credits for practices
Stacked payments make incentives more attractive
Ecological integrity Grass species are not distinguished for in CCX
Simplicity More complicated than No action, but stacked
payments outweigh administrative consequences
Goal of Increased Carbon Stocks
Goals of Increased Carbon Stocks Higher sequestration goals per tier with
mixed practices Economic Efficiency
More diversified fuelstocks, less market sensitivity
Higher payments for higher sequestration rates Ecological Integrity
Wetlands and SRWCs create more diverse habitat than simple grass species
Simplicity The most complicated option
Recommendations
Train technical assistance providers in carbon markets
Follow the progress of the development of Midwest GHG Reduction Accord
Incorporate data from NextGen cellulosic pilot projects
Create flexibility within the RIM-CE structure that allows for more fluid transitions to alternative crops (among/between species)