Is the American Farm Bureau Federation being short-sighted by opposing measures that have been proposed to mitigate climate change? Inside Climate News says so, in introducing the first of a series of stories about the powerful lobby and the issue.
Farm Bureau and President Trump "oppose any binding international, federal or local action that would regulate the emissions of greenhouse gases, or impose a market price or tax on them. Both refuse to embrace the core tenets of climate science," Georgina Gustin, Neela Banerjee, and John Cushman Jr. report for ICN, which calls itself a "Pulitzer Prize-winning, non-profit, non-partisan news organization dedicated to covering climate change, energy and the environment."
"For decades, the Farm Bureau has derailed climate action, deploying its political apparatus and 6 million members in a forceful alliance with conservative groups and the fossil fuel industry," ICN reports. Meanwhile, farmers are largely unprepared to deal with increased droughts, rain, heat, fires and storms that hurt crops. Instead of encouraging more climate-friendly practices, Farm Bureau has relied on taxpayer-funded subsidies to insure and partially insulate farmers from such risks, which are unsustainable in the long term, ICN says.
A spokesman told ICN in an email that Farm Bureau "is not a scientific organization, nor do we have climate scientists on staff. Our policy positions focus on the regulatory costs-and-benefits of policies in reaction to climate change." That was the only Farm Bureau response in the story.
ICN notes, "A landmark United Nations report issued in October included agriculture in its urgent call for "rapid, far-reaching and unprecedented changes in all aspects of society. The damages to agriculture from climate change are already happening and getting worse; and the latest science suggests they will be much more costly than previously thought. One study found that uncontrolled warming could cut the United States corn crop nearly in half."
One reason for Farm Bureau's disinclination to acknowledge climate change may be many of its state affiliates have "local farmers' cooperatives that run refineries and directly sell billions of dollars of fuel, alongside seeds and supplies," ICN says. "Less visibly, but more significantly, some state Farm Bureaus hold stakes in insurance companies whose for-profit investment funds hold millions of dollars of securities. The Iowa Farm Bureau's insurance business, through its fund, held investments last year of about $462 million in fossil fuel corporations, according to financial statements."
 |
| Part of an ICN graphic, from AFBF statements and the 2014 NCA |
"For decades, the Farm Bureau has derailed climate action, deploying its political apparatus and 6 million members in a forceful alliance with conservative groups and the fossil fuel industry," ICN reports. Meanwhile, farmers are largely unprepared to deal with increased droughts, rain, heat, fires and storms that hurt crops. Instead of encouraging more climate-friendly practices, Farm Bureau has relied on taxpayer-funded subsidies to insure and partially insulate farmers from such risks, which are unsustainable in the long term, ICN says.
A spokesman told ICN in an email that Farm Bureau "is not a scientific organization, nor do we have climate scientists on staff. Our policy positions focus on the regulatory costs-and-benefits of policies in reaction to climate change." That was the only Farm Bureau response in the story.
ICN notes, "A landmark United Nations report issued in October included agriculture in its urgent call for "rapid, far-reaching and unprecedented changes in all aspects of society. The damages to agriculture from climate change are already happening and getting worse; and the latest science suggests they will be much more costly than previously thought. One study found that uncontrolled warming could cut the United States corn crop nearly in half."
The U.N. report said farmers need not sacrifice profits, because climate-friendly farming practices are cheap and effective, and can actually increase farm profits. "With an all-out campaign to restore soil health, studies have found, U.S. land could absorb half of American agriculture's carbon footprint," ICN reports. "Modest annual improvements to arable soils, if adopted worldwide, could halt the increase in carbon dioxide in the atmosphere from all human activities."
Many economists favor approaches like emissions trading for farmers, but Farm Bureau has said for more than 20 years that putting a price on carbon would raise fuel prices and destroy farms while not helping curb global warming. "The Farm Bureau says it would tolerate market-based emissions trading — a way to reward farmers with carbon credits they could cash in — but only if it is voluntary and doesn't shift costs to other farmers," ICN reports. "Farm Bureau prefers direct government compensation for farmers who agree to plant in ways that keep carbon in the soil."
 |
| Inside Climate News chart shows crop insurance claims |
As for rank-and-file farmers, the jury is out on climate change. "Many farmers say they are unsure whether the changes they are witnessing are just natural variability, are not convinced that industrial and agricultural emissions are the main cause, and think they will be able to adapt to anything coming their way," ICN reports. It quotes Joe Glauber, former chief economist for the Agriculture Department: "Farmers believe they will be saved by technology and crop insurance." Research shows climate change causes drought and excess precipitation, by far the main causes of crop-insurance claims.
No comments:
Post a Comment