Climate Change Legislation Myths and Realities

 

Myth #1            The earth is in a cooling cycle, so there is nothing to worry about.

 

Reality:  Based on over 420,000 years of CO2 and temperature data collected from ice core samples from the Vostok glacier in Antarctica, there is a relationship between the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and the temperature of the earth.  The data shows that temperature levels follow CO2 levels up and down.  Based on the Vostok ice samples, the levels of CO2 have cycled between 180 ppm (parts per million) and 300 ppm.  The latest readings from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration show historically high CO2 levels at or above 385 ppm, far higher than at any time in the last 420,000 years.  If the same pattern continues, earth’s temperatures will follow the levels of CO2 up.   

 

Myth #2            If Congress fails to enact climate change legislation, there will be no carbon emission reduction regulations. 

 

Reality:  NOT TRUE.  In fact, if Congress fails to act, the EPA will go forward based on its regulatory authority under the Clean Air Act and the Supreme Court’s directive to EPA from the Massachusetts vs. Environmental Protection Agency lawsuit.   The 2007 Supreme Court ruling ordered EPA to determine whether or not carbon emissions endangered the environment and human health. 

 

In early 2009, EPA ruled that carbon emissions do pose a threat to the environment and human health.  Therefore if Congress fails to develop its own alternative system to control the rising levels of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, EPA will move forward with its own regulatory system.  All farm organizations agree that EPA regulation of GHGs and carbon emissions represents the worst possible scenario for production agriculture.  

 

For agriculture, EPA would:

·         Not necessarily exclude agriculture from emission compliance as HR2454 does.

·         Likely be a much less flexible, more punitive and heavy handed regulatory approach than would a cap-and-trade system.

·         Likely drive up energy costs similar to other regulatory approaches that limit carbon emissions.

·         NOT provide for any market based economic benefits from sequestering carbon.

·         NOT incent wind energy development by increasing the value of “environmental attributes” known as Green Tags.   

 

Myth #3            Agriculture need not worry about potential adverse EPA regulation because Congress will stop EPA regulation.  Senators Lugar and Johanns have stated this will be the case.        

 

Reality:  Senators Lugar and Johanns are from the Minority Party, and are not in leadership positions.  A repeal of the existing Clean Air Act stopping EPA carbon emission reduction regulations would require the cooperation of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi to put such a Bill on the agenda and the desk of President Obama.  Without Leadership support, a repeal would not be put on the agenda, and if it did make it to the agenda without their support, it would require 60 votes in the Senate to get voted on, or to override a Presidential veto. 

 

Myth #4              Ag will be a capped sector under HR2454.

 

Reality:  Under HR2454, the agricultural sector is not a capped sector.  This is primarily due to the fact the EPA says ag/forestry has the potential to sequester up to 25% of GHG’s, while emitting only 7%.  This also eliminates the possibility of a cow tax, which was never under serious discussion in the first place.  Under EPA regulation, there is no such guarantee that the Ag sector will NOT be capped.

 

Myth #5              HR 2454 will require large amounts of ag land be taken out of production and planted into trees. 

 

Reality:  There is no such requirement.  Any decision to transition from ag land to trees would be made by the landowner based on the highest and best economic use of the land, just as it has always been.  New carbon sequestration incentives may make it more feasible to augment conservation and wildlife plans by giving landowners a more economically viable option to justify tree and shrub plantings in marginal areas.    

 

Myth #6              Electricity prices will go up thousands of dollars per individual per year.

 

Reality:  In HR2454, there are allowances set aside for electric utilities and distribution companies that will help keep electric ratepayers rates reasonably low. 

 

The latest Congressional Budget Office study estimates Climate Change Legislation would cost the average household only $175 a year by 2020.  The CBO report also said that the poorest 20 percent of American households would actually receive a $40 benefit in 2020, while the richest 20 percent of households would see a net cost of only $245 a year. 

 

The Environmental Protection Agency has estimated that the bill would only cost U.S. households an average of $98 to $140 a year from 2010 through 2050.

 

To do nothing would most likely mean significantly higher electricity costs as petroleum and coal are finite resources and continue to release carbon into the atmosphere.

 

Myth #7              Climate Change Legislation will break production agriculture by increasing input costs through caps on energy intensive industries.

 

Reality:  USDA’s  preliminary analysis of the effects of HR2454 shows that the ag sector will have modest costs in the short-term and net benefits, and significant net benefits over the long term.  The short-term impact on net farm income is less than a 1% decrease.  Costs remain low due to provisions that reduce compliance costs for energy intensive industries, such as the fertilizer and steel industries.  It is projected in the long-term that ag offsets (not including forestry) would add $15-$20 billion to the ag industry.

 

Iowa State University’s Analysis on HR2454 projects that on an average Iowa corn and soybean farm, production costs will only increase approximately 1.5%, which equates to $4.52/acre.

 

Myth #8              Climate Change Legislation will make the United States uncompetitive as we will lose manufacturing opportunities to companies from other countries that don’t limit carbon emissions.

 

Reality:   Our current reliance on foreign oil is a dead end environmentally and economically, and undermines our national security.  U.S. produced renewable energy is good for our economy, good for our environment, and imperative for U.S. strategic national security interests.  HR2454 creates a whole new energy industry in the United States resulting in new jobs including building the domestic manufacturing capacity for wind turbines, solar, bio-fuels, hybrid vehicles, etc. 

 

 

 

For More Information Contact The Nebraska Farmers Union

402-476-8815 – www.nebraskafarmersunion.org