Oregon Ag Carbon Work Group

Introduction

Agriculture represents a small percentage of greenhouse gas emissions

Ag likely won’t be regulated under a greenhouse gas reduction program

Voluntary agricultural practices can help reduce greenhouse gas emissions and sequester carbon

Ag Carbon Work Group

Evaluated opportunities for agricultural offsets

Focused on voluntary sequestration/GHG reduction projects

Ag groups, environmental groups, agencies, offset experts participated

“Offsets” Overview

Reduction, removal or avoidance of emissions that compensates for emissions elsewhere

Available for non-regulated sectors Used by regulated sectors to help

comply with caps in cap-and-trade program

Key offset criteria

Additional - what will be eligibility date? Real Quantifiable - baseline vs. project

reductions Outside of capped sectors Permanent

Key questions

What types of practices will be eligible for offsets?

How to reward early adopters What potential do various practices in

Oregon have to reduce emissions? What prices are necessary to

encourage these practices?

GHGs evaluated

Carbon dioxide Methane Nitrous oxide

GHG Mitigation Soil sequestration

practices Nutrient management Irrigation water

management Manure management Livestock diet

management

Soil Sequestration Reduced tillage Crop rotation Pasture/range management Some data for east side Less data for west side Per-ton incentives will

probably be fairly low for E Oregon (although lots of other benefits from sequestered C)

Nitrous oxide reductions Application rates/timing Precision application Controlled-release products Irrigation water management Several research needs identified

Livestock diet management

Animal selection/breeding Improve feed digestibility Additives to reduce

methane production Little to no net economic

benefit from practices; so incentives would help encourage them

Need more research to be able to quantify benefits

Manure management

Minimize anaerobic conditions - aerate manure in lagoons

Avoid long storage periods Avoid application to saturated soils Anaerobic digesters

Energy projects

Most energy efficiency and renewable energy projects will not be eligible for offsets in the long-term.

Benefits of these projects will be claimed at the utility level.

However, there are other incentives available for these types of projects.

Some conclusions of group

Good practices for offsets in Oregon:– Digesters - benefits are really easy to quantify– Soil sequestration practices are eligible for some

programs already

Problems with offsets for other practices:– Need to reward early adopters– Not enough data to quantify the benefits of many

practices in Oregon at this time– Payment amounts for some practices won’t be

enough to encourage them

Conclusions

We know there are GHG reduction and carbon sequestration benefits from many practices, but just aren’t able to quantify them

It makes sense to offer incentives for these practices - just not necessarily “offsets”

Farm Bill seems to be an appropriate mechanism

Many FOTG practices already providing benefits

Conclusions

Reward “ecosystem services” that producers are providing, including erosion control, water quality protection, wildlife habitat, GHG reduction, and carbon sequestration

Allow “stackable” incentives - in other words, payments for each type of service provided by the producer

Conclusions

Need more research to help quantify benefits of a variety of practices

Also need technical assistance resources to assist producers with GHG reduction and carbon sequestration practices

Many GHG benefits described in FOTG - describe benefits for all practices that reduce GHGs and sequester carbon

Conclusions

Marketing can be another important benefit of documenting GHG reductions and carbon sequestration - both developing new markets and keeping existing markets

Next steps

Add a column about magnitude of effects to the “Climate Friendly FOTG practice” list

Identify systems of practices and compare benefits to other systems