Vilsack: Climate bill would probably help farmers in short term, certainly in long term; few specifics

Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack told senators today that U.S. agriculture would probably gain more than it would lose from House-passed climate legislation "in the short term, and the economic benefits from offsets markets will easily outpace increased input costs over the long term," writes Rita Jane Gabbett of Meating Place, a meat-industry journal.

"But under questioning from both Republicans and Democrats, administration officials declined to provide several specifics about the projections, including how much commodity or food prices would rise as a result of crop acres switching to forestry," Jon Harsch and Sara Wyant report for Agri-Pulse. "The analysis also does not include implications for specialty crops." (Read more)

In his remarks, Vilsack did not guarantee the bill would be a net plus for farmers, saying, "The economic opportunities for farmers and ranchers can potentially outpace, perhaps significantly, the costs from climate legislation." Though he said "can potentially" and not "would," he then gave USDA estimates to back up his statement. "We believe these figures are conservative because we aren't able to model the types of technological change that are very likely to help farmers produce more crops and livestock with fewer inputs," he said. "Second, the analysis doesn't take into account the higher commodity prices that farmers will very likely receive as a result of enhanced renewable energy markets and retirement of environmentally sensitive lands domestically and abroad." For the USDA's full report, click here.