Impacts of HR2454 from Independent Sources

 

Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate

Ø      Climate Change Legislation would cost the average household only $175 a year by 2020

Ø      The CBO said that the poorest 20 percent of American households would actually receive a $40 benefit in 2020 from the legislation

Ø      The richest 20 percent of households would see a net cost of $245 a year

 

 

University Of Missouri FAPRI:

The Effect of Higher Energy Prices from HR2454 on Missouri Crop Production Costs

Ø      Analysis projects production costs for the average MO farm producing:

l       Dryland corn would only increase 3.2% by 2020, and 3.8% by 2030

l       Irrigated corn would only increase by 3.5% and 4.1%

l       Soybeans by only 1.6% and 2%, respectively

Ø      Summary: While these represent increased production costs, the increases are modest; especially considering no analysis was done of benefits to ag resulting from offsets or larger renewable energy market opportunities

 

 

Iowa State University: Costs and Benefits to Agriculture from Climate Change Policy

Ø      Analysis on impact of HR2454 on average IA corn and soybean farm

l       Report projects an increased production cost of $4.52/acre by 2020, which is roughly a 1.5% increase

Ø      Conclusion: If the U.S. adopts a cap-and-trade policy to combat climate change, the negative impacts on ag will likely be relatively small, particularly if ag emissions remain uncapped

Ø      The analysis went one step further and estimated that producers could make on average $8/acre for switching to no-till alone and selling the resulting carbon benefits in the offset market 

l       Add in the billions of dollars of revenue as a result of biomass, biogas, wind turbines, and solar cells, and the rural/ag economic impacts looks better still

 

 

USDA: A Preliminary Analysis Of The Effects Of HR2454 On U.S. Ag

Ø      In summary, USDA’s analysis shows that the ag sector will have modest costs in the short-term and net benefits – perhaps significant net benefits – over the long-term

Ø      Short-term impact on net farm income is less than a 1% decrease, but ag offset markets may cover these costs

l       Costs remain low in part because of provisions that reduce the impacts of the bill on fertilizer costs

Ø      Medium-term and Long-term costs to agriculture rise but remain modest

l       3.5% and 7.2% decreases in net farm income, respectively

l       However, benefits to agriculture from an offsets market rise over time and will likely overtake costs in the medium and long term

Ø      Other studies that account for the impact of higher energy prices on input substitution and demand for bio-energy find that HR2454 leads to higher ag incomes, even without offsets

 

 

U.S. Department of Energy: Energy Information Agency Analysis

Ø      Analysis concludes that the Waxman-Markey energy and climate legislation will cost Americans roughly the same as a postage stamp a day

l       Analysis projects an annual increase in costs of about $83 (adjusted for inflation) by 2030, or roughly 23 cents a day

 

 

Duke University Nicholas Institute For Environmental Policy Solutions:

The Effects of Low-Carbon Policies on Net Farm Income

Ø      On net, the U.S. agricultural sector would benefit from a U.S. climate policy

l       Analysis looks at $15/tCO2e, $30/tCO2e, and $50/tCO2e and shows the average per-acre cost of GHG-intensive input use would increase 0.85%, 2.94%, and 5.65% per acre, respectively

l       The gains in indirect revenues are the largest component of additional revenue, amounting to approximately $10–$36 billion per year

l       Direct GHG payments generate annualized revenues of $1.77–$18.11 billion per year

l       Overall, the revenue gained from direct (offsets) and indirect (increased commodity markets and renewable energy and bio-mass benefits) revenues could substantially exceed the relatively moderate increases in energy based input costs

 

 

Texas A&M AFPC: Economic Implications of the EPA Analysis of the Cap-and-Trade

Provisions of HR2454 for U.S. Representative Farms

Ø      In general, the feedgrain/oilseed farms located in or near the Corn Belt and wheat farms located in the Great Plains, have higher average annual net cash farm income under the three cap-and-trade alternatives

l       The analysis utilized the EPA estimated energy price changes, as well as, their estimates of carbon and ag commodity prices to evaluate the farm level impacts of HR2454 and assumed that a fee structure similar to that used by the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) would likely be imposed under HR2454 for CO2e trading

l       two NE farms used in this analysis, which had an average annual revenue generated from selling CO2e (2010-2016) of $10,337.80 on a 1,960-acre grain farm & $22,097.80 on 4,300-acre grain farm.The two Nebraska farms used in this analysis had average annual revenue generated from selling CO2e (2010-2016) of $10,337.80 on a 1,960-acre grain farm and $22,097.80 on a 4,300-acre grain farm

l       Rotational grazing and new grass seeding carbon credits were not accounted for in the studytwo NE farms used in this analysis, which had an average annual revenue generated from selling CO2e (2010-2016) of $10,337.80 on a 1,960-acre grain farm & $22,097.80 on 4,300-acre grain farm.two NE farms used in this analysis, which had an average annual revenue generated from selling CO2e (2010-2016) of $10,337.80 on a 1,960-acre grain farm & $22,097.80 on 4,300-acre grain farm.

 

 

 

For More Information Contact The Nebraska Farmers Union

402-476-8815 – www.nebraskafarmersunion.org