Brookings: Fears that cap and trade will hurt farmers are baseless 4

Cross-posted from Wonk Room.

A new economic study reveals that concerns a cap on global warming pollution could hurt American agriculture are unfounded. As the Waxman-Markey green economy legislation (H.R. 2454) moves toward passage in the House of Representatives, the farm lobby and rural officials have questioned the bill’s costs to farmers.  Last week, Rep. Frank Lucas (R-OK), the ranking member of the House Committee on Agriculture, cried that farmers are “a prime target for a national energy tax“:

From higher energy costs to lost jobs to higher food prices, cap-and-trade promises to cap our incomes, our livelihoods, and our standard of living, while it trades away American jobs and opportunities.  . . . Whether it’s the fuel in the tractor, the fertilizer for the crops or the delivery of food to the grocery store, agriculture uses a great deal of energy throughout production. On average, 65 percent of farmers’ variable input costs are fuel, electricity, fertilizer, and chemicals. Even a small increase in the operating costs for our producers will hurt American agriculture.

Yesterday, the Brookings Institute released the topline results of an economic analysis of cap-and-trade systems, with sectoral impacts. This study models the worst-case economic scenario for cap-and-trade programs, modeling the impact of an inflexible system that does not include offsets, incentives for renewable energy development, or other cost-control measures. Even without the inclusion of an offset program to allow the agriculture sector to benefit from carbon market, their analysis found the impact on agriculture to be minimal:

Cap And Trade: Effect On Agriculture Sector (No Offsets)
Chart compiled by the Wonk Room from Brookings Institute data. The “Obama” and “Waxman-Markey” models do not include banking and borrowing of pollution allowances, unlike the actual Waxman-Markey legislation. The “hotelling” models include banking and borrowing, but no models include agricultural offsets.

Not only will the transition to a green economy not hurt America’s farmers, but it will save their livelihoods from the increasing threat of climate disruption, which impact the Brookings study did not model. In reality, the only sectors that face measurable pressure from a cap on carbon pollution are the coal and oil industries, who have enjoyed extreme profits at the expense of the rest of the economy — and yet have failed to make any real investments in clean energy.

Update: At Climate Progress, Joe Romm describes the “hit job” on climate legislation by The Washington Times that “abuses” this Brookings study.

Brad Johnson blogs at the Wonk Room on the climate crisis, energy policy, and building a green economy. Brad holds a bachelor’s degree in math and physics from Amherst College and master’s degree in geosciences from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He is the co-author of Technomanifestos, a history of the Information Revolution, and the founder of HillHeat.com, which covers climate policy in our nation’s capital.

Advertisement
Advertisement
  1. Delay And Deny's avatar

    Delay And Deny Posted 10:52 pm
    09 Jun 2009

    I'm sure that Corn State politician Barrack Obama will do his best to "persuade" the farmers....that what is not in their best interest is "good for humanity".WWAGD? 
  2. jestbill Posted 10:00 am
    10 Jun 2009

    Oh, oh!  [insert latest Democratic/Progressive plan] will hurt farmers.  It will hurt poor people. It will destroy the economy!In this case, it seems to me that fixing Climate Change might have negative economic effects but failing to fix it could be a little more serious.Claiming that some project will hurt some economic sector is not a telling argument in any case.  Change (of all kinds) tends to do that. 
  3. AntonioSosa Posted 7:11 am
    11 Jun 2009

    Of course cap-and-trade will hurt farmers! By increasing the cost of energy, it will hurt mainly the poor and the middle class.Kudos to the GOP and their “The American Energy Act,” which will help us have the energy we NEED for our farmers and companies to compete and provide employment and prosperity, and to free us from energy dependence on enemies like Hugo Chavez. Obama’s cap-and trade, on the other hand, will destroy the economy.  Cap and Trade “would be the equivalent of an atomic bomb directed at the U.S. economy—all without any scientific justification,” said famed climatologist Dr. S. Fred Singer. It would significantly increase taxes and the cost of energy, forcing many companies to close, thus increasing unemployment, poverty and dependence 

Add a Comment

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have an account, log in. If you don't have an account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.

Hello, Visitor!    Why not register?

Advertisement