Globally, agriculture accounts for about 14% of emissions. The percentage of agricultural emissions is lower in the U.S. because the U.S. economy is heavy in industry, energy and transportation. In underdeveloped countries, agriculture accounts for a higher percentage of emissions.
Vilsack will talk up the work at USDA focusing on 10 areas where programs are geared toward specific goals in addressing climate for both agriculture and forestry. (To learn more about USDA's plan to help farmers, ranchers and forest landowners respond to climate change, visit http://dld.bz/…)
Ohio farmer Fred Yoder, a former president of the North American Climate Smart Agriculture Alliance, is in Paris as well this week to talk at various side events about three pillars being pushed by some agricultural leaders in the U.S. to help deal with climate change. The goal right now in the U.S. is to get everyone active in agriculture to play a role.
"The reason we are going to COP 21 is because we want agriculture to be recognized for what they bring to the table," Yoder said at a recent forum in Minneapolis. "Instead of looking at agriculture and farmers as the culprit for all of these different things, we think there are solutions in agriculture."
The alliance is championing intensified agricultural production on land already in use as a way to avoid putting more environmentally sensitive lands into production.
"Farmers have to do things in a way they can produce food, feed, fiber and energy, and do it in a way that is efficient so they can farm another day," Yoder said.
The alliance also backs resiliency efforts with a heavy emphasis on soil health. Farmers are talking more about soil health in the United States than they ever have before, so that's helpful, Yoder noted. Resiliency, though, needs to be measured and metered.
"We have to figure out ways to prove we're climate smart. Metrics are needed to measure productivity with emissions," Yoder said.
Then, there is the mitigation pillar. That's the tough one. Yoder said the focus on intensification and resiliency needs to be highlighted to get U.S. farmers to talk about or focus on climate mitigation.
Marc Sadler, an adviser on risk, markets and agriculture at the World Bank, said U.S. agricultural efforts on climate mitigation are only incremental when more systemic, transformational changes are needed. If countries don't deal with mitigation strategies regarding farm production, farming will eventually account for 70% of the global emissions ceiling that scientists say the planet needs to stay under to avoid that 3.6-degree-F increase in temperature. Those agricultural emissions estimates also don't factor in the land-use changes such as deforestation that could occur as countries push to grow more food.
"If you want a driver for change, then there it is," Sadler said. "Because the reality is every other (industry) sector is doing something about it."
Sadler said he believes U.S. farmers are increasingly changing their perspectives on climate change. He joked that just a few years ago, bringing up the topic at a farm meeting in the Midwest would get a guy run out of the meeting. "Now, everyone is nodding and the farmer is saying, 'yeah, what are we doing about that?'" he said.
Sadler sees future regulatory pushes and corporate commitments as the main drivers in agriculture to get more emission reductions out of farms. For farmers, they have to be shown how climate solutions are going to make money, save money and save time.
"But we have to get away from the emotional rhetoric that is just clogging that conversation," Sadler said.
Sadler also said the world food map is going to look very different in 2050 and beyond. U.S. agriculture is going to see the effects of warmer temperatures and long-term depletion of groundwater in parts of the country. "The U.S. won't be exporting 35% of global grains in 2050. You are running out of water. You are so far over your own regional boundaries, you won't be there," Sadler said.
Chris Clayton can be reached at Chris.Clayton@dtn.com
FollowChris Claytonon Twitter @ChrisClaytonDTN
(AG/BAS)
Vilsack will talk up the work at USDA focusing on 10 areas where programs are geared toward specific goals in addressing climate for both agriculture and forestry. (To learn more about USDA's plan to help farmers, ranchers and forest landowners respond to climate change, visit http://dld.bz/…)
Ohio farmer Fred Yoder, a former president of the North American Climate Smart Agriculture Alliance, is in Paris as well this week to talk at various side events about three pillars being pushed by some agricultural leaders in the U.S. to help deal with climate change. The goal right now in the U.S. is to get everyone active in agriculture to play a role.
"The reason we are going to COP 21 is because we want agriculture to be recognized for what they bring to the table," Yoder said at a recent forum in Minneapolis. "Instead of looking at agriculture and farmers as the culprit for all of these different things, we think there are solutions in agriculture."
The alliance is championing intensified agricultural production on land already in use as a way to avoid putting more environmentally sensitive lands into production.
"Farmers have to do things in a way they can produce food, feed, fiber and energy, and do it in a way that is efficient so they can farm another day," Yoder said.
The alliance also backs resiliency efforts with a heavy emphasis on soil health. Farmers are talking more about soil health in the United States than they ever have before, so that's helpful, Yoder noted. Resiliency, though, needs to be measured and metered.
"We have to figure out ways to prove we're climate smart. Metrics are needed to measure productivity with emissions," Yoder said.
Then, there is the mitigation pillar. That's the tough one. Yoder said the focus on intensification and resiliency needs to be highlighted to get U.S. farmers to talk about or focus on climate mitigation.
Marc Sadler, an adviser on risk, markets and agriculture at the World Bank, said U.S. agricultural efforts on climate mitigation are only incremental when more systemic, transformational changes are needed. If countries don't deal with mitigation strategies regarding farm production, farming will eventually account for 70% of the global emissions ceiling that scientists say the planet needs to stay under to avoid that 3.6-degree-F increase in temperature. Those agricultural emissions estimates also don't factor in the land-use changes such as deforestation that could occur as countries push to grow more food.
"If you want a driver for change, then there it is," Sadler said. "Because the reality is every other (industry) sector is doing something about it."
Sadler said he believes U.S. farmers are increasingly changing their perspectives on climate change. He joked that just a few years ago, bringing up the topic at a farm meeting in the Midwest would get a guy run out of the meeting. "Now, everyone is nodding and the farmer is saying, 'yeah, what are we doing about that?'" he said.
Sadler sees future regulatory pushes and corporate commitments as the main drivers in agriculture to get more emission reductions out of farms. For farmers, they have to be shown how climate solutions are going to make money, save money and save time.
"But we have to get away from the emotional rhetoric that is just clogging that conversation," Sadler said.
Sadler also said the world food map is going to look very different in 2050 and beyond. U.S. agriculture is going to see the effects of warmer temperatures and long-term depletion of groundwater in parts of the country. "The U.S. won't be exporting 35% of global grains in 2050. You are running out of water. You are so far over your own regional boundaries, you won't be there," Sadler said.
Chris Clayton can be reached at Chris.Clayton@dtn.com
FollowChris Claytonon Twitter @ChrisClaytonDTN
(AG/BAS)
Comment