Studies agree: Climate-change bill would help U.S. agriculture in the long run

By Al Cross

carbon_storage_diagram

University studies of the House-passed bill to limit climate change generally agree that American agriculture “would gain more than it would lose” in the long run, Charles Abbott of Reuters reports on a review of the studies by Kansas State University.

“All of the studies said that costs of production would rise and in the short run per-acre profitability may decline, but, for the most part, the declines will be modest,” Abbott writes. “On the plus side, the bill exempts agriculture from emission caps, has provisions to ease the transition to higher fertilizer prices and offers the chance of revenue from development of a carbon-offset market. In such markets, polluters who find it too pricey to cut their own emissions could pay farmers to store carbon in soil or by growing trees.” (Read more)

KSU’s Department of Agricultural Economics reviewed studies by Texas A&M University, the University of Tennessee, the University of Missouri, Iowa State University, Duke University and the Agriculture Department. Here is the report.

Reprinted with permission from The Rural Blog.  Al Cross, former Courier-Journal political writer, is director of the Institute for Rural Journalism and Community Issues and The Rural Blog

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • Sphinn
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Mixx
  • Google
  • blogmarks
  • BlogMemes
  • De.lirio.us
  • Fleck
  • Furl
  • Ma.gnolia
  • NewsVine
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis
  • YahooMyWeb

One Response to “Studies agree: Climate-change bill would help U.S. agriculture in the long run”

  1. Hey there, You’ve done a great job. I will definitely digg it and personally recommend to my friends. I’m sure they will be benefited from this website.

Leave a Reply