<![CDATA[Grist Feed: Ag Policy]]> http://www.grist.org/ Articles about Ag Policy from your friends at Grist en-us webmaster@grist.org (Grist) Tue, 24 Nov 2009 9:21:00 PDT Tue, 24 Nov 2009 9:21:00 PDT 2009, Grist Magazine, Inc. All rights reserved http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss <![CDATA[Pollan says health-care reform will fail unless we change the way we eat]]> http://www.grist.org/article/2009-09-14-pollan-health-reform-will-fail-unless-we-change-eating-habits/ Mon, 14 Sep 2009 11:21:05 -0700 Grist http://www.grist.org/article/2009-09-14-pollan-health-reform-will-fail-unless-we-change-eating-habits/ Reprinted by permission from Grist. For more environmental news, humor, and inspiration, visit www.grist.org.

Michael PollanNPR’s Guy Raz: What if health care is overhauled and it doesn’t change the American diet in any way?

Michael Pollan: We’ll go broke. If we don’t get a handle on these health care costs, the new system or the old system, we’ll go broke. And that’s why I think that really food is the elephant in the room when we’re talking about health care.

First in The New York Times last week and then on NPR this weekend, Michael Pollan made that point that if we want to fix our health-care system, we have to fix our food system.

From his op-ed in the Times:

[T]he fact that the United States spends twice as much per person as most European countries on health care can be substantially explained, as a study released last month says, by our being fatter. ...

That’s why our success in bringing health care costs under control ultimately depends on whether Washington can summon the political will to take on and reform a second, even more powerful industry: the food industry. ...

Cheap food is going to be popular as long as the social and environmental costs of that food are charged to the future. There’s lots of money to be made selling fast food and then treating the diseases that fast food causes. One of the leading products of the American food industry has become patients for the American health care industry.

But even with that grim diagnosis, Pollan is optimistic about the future, arguing that if insurance companies are required to accept everyone, as called for by even weak health-reform legislation now in Congress, then the insurance industry will become a powerful ally in fight for better food and against the agribusiness lobby.

Grist’s Tom Laskawy is less optimistic, noting that the poor and the elderly—the most unhealthy groups—are likely to keep getting their health coverage from the government (Medicare, Medicaid, and the VA) and not the insurance industry.

Still, both Pollan and Laskawy are encouraged by New York City’s new anti-soda ad campaign, which Laskawy says is supported by health insurance companies.  Will we see more such public-health campaigns around the country, no matter what happens with health-care reform in Washington, D.C.?

Here’s an ad from NYC’s campaign:










Related Links:

Ask Umbra on trash, toxics, and tots

Top 25 reasons to give a damn about climate change

Global boiling declares war on Thanksgiving

]]> <![CDATA[Worldwatch gets $1.3 million Gates grant to look at sustainable ag in Africa]]> http://www.grist.org/article/2009-07-10-worldwatch-gates-africa-agriculture/ Fri, 10 Jul 2009 10:04:39 -0700 Tom Philpott http://www.grist.org/article/2009-07-10-worldwatch-gates-africa-agriculture/ Reprinted by permission from Grist. For more environmental news, humor, and inspiration, visit www.grist.org.

The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation has been roundly criticized in sustainable-ag circles for throwing its considerable girth behind a "New Green Revolution for Africa."

According to critics (including me), the "green revolution" approach promotes high-tech, expensive solutions to Africa's agriculture woes -- ones more suited to the interests of a few agribusiness giants than millions of smallholder African farmers.

In a move that may be a response to such criticisms, the Gates Foundation recently announced it was awarding a $1.3 million, two-year grant to Worldwatch to look at low-cost, low-tech techniques for improving ag productivity in Africa. From the press release:

• Adding nitrogen-fixing plants into crop rotations as a low-cost solution for enriching soils and breaking weed and pest cycles;
• Overcoming freshwater shortages with rain harvesting, efficient irrigation, micro dams, and cover cropping;
• Strengthening local breeding capacity, including the use of farmer-run seed banks and genetic markers of important crop traits;
• Tapping international carbon-credit markets to reward farmers for enriching their soils and planting carbon-sequestering tree crops;
• Involving women farmers in decision-making at all levels.

Before we celebrate a new direction for the foundation, it should be noted that $1.3 million is a relatively miniscule sum for the nation's biggest philanthropy. By contrast, the Gates Foundation (along with the Rockefeller Foundation) awarded $164 million to the Alliance for a New Green Revolution for Africa. (That discrepency reflects the ratio of the research cash the USDA plows into organic ag vs. industrial ag.)

Next week, I'll be talking to people from Gates and Worldwatch to learn more about the new program.

 








Related Links:

‘Copenhagen Diagnosis’ offers a grim update to the IPCC’s climate science

Copenhagen talks ready for take off: 5, 4, 3…

Obama administration may (finally) offer greenhouse-gas targets

]]> <![CDATA[Farm lobby: Shoot the climate bill, but keep the Peterson goodies]]> http://www.grist.org/article/2009-06-26-farm-climate-bill/ Fri, 26 Jun 2009 11:23:50 -0700 Tom Philpott http://www.grist.org/article/2009-06-26-farm-climate-bill/ Reprinted by permission from Grist. For more environmental news, humor, and inspiration, visit www.grist.org.

Give me the loot--then I'll shoot! I got mugged in Mexico City once. Guy whirled me around and pointed a gun at me. He had a crazed look in his eye--like he might be on familiar terms with a crack pipe or a glue tube. He demanded my wallet with a grunted threat to shoot. I handed it over. We went on our ways, both reasonably satisfied. He got some cash, and I got to live.

I've been thinking about that relatively straightforward transaction as I ponder the the farm lobby's stance on the Waxman-Markey vote. Their man Collin Peterson (D. Minn.) essentially mugged Henry Waxman. Backed by brute force--the assurance of as many as 50 "no" votes among Democratic reps--Peterson demanded that some pretty serious goodies for Big Ag in the climate bill (see here). Waxman, wanting his bill to live, handed them over. The farm lobby's reaction? They want to keep the goodies, but shoot the bill dead. Check out what the American Farm Bureau, the "Voice of [Industrial] Agriculture" is getting up to:

The American Farm Bureau Federation is urging all members of the House to vote “no” on a sweeping climate change bill that is scheduled for a floor vote on Friday and is asking them to vote “yes” on an amendment authored by House Agriculture Committee Chairman Collin Peterson (D-Minn.).

What? Can you vote "no" on a bill but "yes" on one of its amendments? Well, yes, but it makes no sense. If the bill dies, so do the amendments. And anyway, Grist's Kate Sheppard tells me, the goodies Peterson wrung out of negotiations are wrapped into a much larger amendment by Waxman; there's no stand-alone Peterson amendment.

Why are they doing this? Hard to say. But here's what I think. Big Ag (as I've been saying for a while) is nervous about climate legislation, and for good reason. Industrial agriculture sucks in titanic amounts of fossil fuel, and spews out breathtaking plumes of greenhouse gas. Even though ag is exempted from any GHG cap under Waxman-Markey and has been from the start, a GHG framework threatens the ag lobby's long-term interests. So that's why they oppose the bill. So why bother to come out in favor of the amendment? Clearly they need to acknowledge Peterson's good work on their behalf. Getting a measure into the bill that would ice the EPA out of the business of assessing ethanol's GHG footprint was certainly a coup--and clearly difficult for the Farm Bureau to oppose outright.

Other Big Ag groups have taken a similarly schizophrenic stance toward today's vote. The National Pork Producers Council declared it "can't support" the bill, but added:

NPPC is grateful to Chairmen Peterson and Waxman for reaching a compromise on language related to the agricultural greenhouse gas offset credits. Although NPPC supports the Peterson amendment--and urges lawmakers to vote for it when it comes up during floor consideration--the organization remains concerned about the overall cost to U.S. pork producers of the climate change bill.

As for the National Corn Growers Association, here's Hoosier Ag Today:

The National Corn Growers Association commended House Agriculture Committee Chairman Collin Peterson and others for their efforts, but NCGA President Bob Dickey said, while they support adoption of the Peterson amendment, they will remain neutral on the overall bill pending further analysis.

In other words, grab for for the loot, but shoot the victim. I hope Mexico City's junkies don't start embracing that attitude.




Related Links:

Fourteen Democratic senators stick up for coal

Corporate agribusiness divides farmers

House passes landmark health-care bill with one GOP vote

]]> <![CDATA[The bad and maybe not-so-bad of the Waxman-Peterson deal]]> http://www.grist.org/article/2009-06-25-not-bad-waxman/ Thu, 25 Jun 2009 10:37:41 -0700 Tom Philpott http://www.grist.org/article/2009-06-25-not-bad-waxman/ Reprinted by permission from Grist. For more environmental news, humor, and inspiration, visit www.grist.org.

Take this, Collin! Language of the Waxman-Peterson compromise has been released (full text here; and here's a summary)--and in some ways it's worse than I originally thought, and in some ways potentially better.

The bad part involves the provision around indirect land-use change and ethanol. It would, for the next five years, prevent that the EPA from considering international indirect land-use change when assessing the GHG footprint of ethanol. Yesterday, I declared it a travesty, but added that it didn't change much on the ground, since the 2007 Energy Act already grandfathered in 15 billion gallons of corn-based ethanol--a huge increase over current production levels.

I sort of assumed sanity would be restored after five years--that is, that the EPA would then be free to assess whether the U.S. biofuel program is inspiring farmers in other parts of the world to plow up ecologically crucial areas like rainforests.

But that's not how it works. The legislation requires there to be yet another study--by an "independent panel"--assessing indirect land-use effects. According to the summary, "After the study is completed, the Secretaries of Agriculture and Energy and the EPA Administrator must make a joint determination to accept or reject the study."

In other words, the EPA administrator still won't be able act independently based on science--he or she will have to form a consensus with the ag and energy secretaries, both of whom have other interests besides protecting the environment. As Peterson himself boasted yesterday, "What that means is that USDA has veto power over this."

Great! Traditionally, you don't gain the post of USDA chief without bowing deep before the biofuel gods. Recall that our current and previous USDA chiefs (Vilasack and Johanns) both served stints as chair of the Governor's Ethanol Coalition. Will things be different in five years? We can hope!

And while it seems impossible for corn farmers to pump out enough product to generate more than 15 billion gallons of corn-based ethanol ever, much less within five years, cellulosic ethanol could be up and running by that time. (After all, isn't it eternally five years away?) Contrary to popular belief, cellulosic feedstocks do present indirect land-use issues--and it would be nice if they could be judged based on science, and not against the interests of ethanol producers.

The carbon-offset language gives me some very cautious hope that the compronmise won't mean a complete sop to agrichemical interests. The amendment charges the USDA chief with coming up with a "list of domestic agricultural and forestry practice types that are eligible to generate offset credits under this title because the practices avoid or reduce greenhouse gas emissions or sequester greenhouse gases."

There's almost no doubt, as I warned a couple of weeks ago, that chemical no-till--a practice that sequesters little if any carbon but uses loads of herbicides--will be enshrined as a credit-worthy practice. The amendment language places "altered tillage practices" on an "initial list." Such offset definitions could shift yet billions more to chemical-intensive, monocrop agriculture. That's dismal--a kind of crime, given the gravity of climate change.

But there's also nothing stopping organic-ag practices from making the list, either--and with organic champion Kathleen Merrigan as Vilsack's deputy, it just might happen. After all, the USDA's own research reveals that "organic builds soil better than [chemical] no-till." Moreover, the "initial list" includes "winter crover cropping"--a classic organic practice,

If this bill becomes law, the organic-ag community should work this angle hard. Don't panic--carbon offsets for going organic! Or for that matter, folks who already practice organic ag. After all, the amendment is quite friendly to "early actors." As the summary puts it: "Practices, such as no-till farming and avoided deforestation, will be available to earn offset credits under the new program, as long as they were started after 2001 and result in additional greenhouse gas reduction." Lots of organic farms have emerged since 2001. Let's get 'em carbon-offset cash!

 




Related Links:

Top 25 reasons to give a damn about climate change

Global boiling declares war on Thanksgiving

Fourteen Democratic senators stick up for coal

]]> <![CDATA[Quiz: Should I see the critically acclaimed documentary ‘Food, Inc.’?]]> http://www.grist.org/article/2009-06-16-quiz-food-inc/ Tue, 16 Jun 2009 10:24:21 -0700 Sara Barz http://www.grist.org/article/2009-06-16-quiz-food-inc/ Reprinted by permission from Grist. For more environmental news, humor, and inspiration, visit www.grist.org.

A quiz, dear Grist reader, to determine if you should see the new documentary 'Food, Inc.' (You start with 0 points. Total your points as you answer the questions.):

Farmer Joel Salatin of Polyface Farm in Virginia.Photo: Food, Inc.

Do you eat food? Yes, three-square meals a day. Add 1 million points.
No, I'm not into that right now. Subtract 50 points. Have you read The Ominvore's Dilemma? Yes, I loved it.  I own a signed first edition, and I have a poster of Michael Pollan in my bedroom. I can probably recite the text of the 2008 Farm Bill from memory.  Do you want me to try? Subtract 50 points.
Well, I started it.  I read the bit about corn, and the crazy farmer in Virginia who slaughters his own chickens, but the chapter about Big Organic went on and on, and yeah, I decided to read The Devil Wears Prada instead. Add 1 million points.
No.  I work for Monsanto.  I'm reading this to track "organic" propaganda. You enviros are all wussies. Add 50 points.  Where does meat come from? Industrial CAFOS that poison our food system, pollute toxic waste, emit greenhouse gasses, depend on fossil fuels, exploit our livestock, and damage local economies.  Subtract 50 points.
The store! Right? Maybe the farm? Add 1 million points.
A thriving agricultural system that supports our farmers, contributes to the economy, and feeds the world. Now, I've copied this URL into my database, and BTW, we're scanning IP addresses too. Expect to hear from our lawyers. Add 50 points.

Total your score …

Over 1 million points: Should you see Food, Inc.? Yes.  Right now.  Run. Run out to the movie theater and buy a ticket for you and anyone around you. Let's face it, you’re interested in food issues, a little afraid of E. coli, and against your better judgment, you're never going to pick up that copy of the OD ever again. That's why Food, Inc. is here; it's essentially the movie version of OD, with a little bit of Fast Food Nation thrown in for good measure (Eric Schlosser is a producer of the film).

Besides the politics, Food, Inc. is a riveting documentary.  Fast-paced and chock full of detail, the film does not shy from shocking, rarely-seen footage.  Want a glimpse of a modern-day chicken coop? What about the meat filler in your hamburger? Ever seen someone slit a chicken's neck? Welcome to our food system.  This is where your lunch came from.

Between zero and 1 million points: Chances are this movie wasn't really made with you in mind*.  You know more about food politics than the filmmakers do, and Food, Inc. is an awaken-the-masses-with-bright-colors-and-scary-footage documentary.  Much like what "Who Killed the Electric Car?" did for electric vehicles, the film's aim is surely to bring the food debate to the mainstream.

Even if you effectively have a PhD in biological pest management, there is still something to be gained from seeing Food, Inc. When I saw the film, I was surprised to learn that batteries contain corn products, and that within 12 years the amount of Roundup Ready soy grown in this U.S. spiked from 2 to 90 percent of all U.S. soy beans. (For the record, Monsanto was very displeased with how it was characterized in the film and has since published a counter website) Plus, you can take your non-foodie friends and watch their jaws drop when they see a CAFO on the big screen.

* Exception! Do you utter Michael Pollan's name in the same breath as "communist" or "arugula"? Do your paychecks come from the globe's dominant GMO seed purveyor? Did you consider "3" at all? If so, you should make it a priority to see the inside of a CAFO or hear farmers speak frankly about your company's products. Even if you shudder at the word "organic," you should see Food, Inc. to flesh out your understanding of the food system.

Under 0 points: I urge you to reconsider some life choices. But what the hell? Yes, you too should see Food, Inc.

Watch it: Food, Inc. opened in theaters in New York, Los Angeles, and San Francisco on June 12. The film opens in Seattle and other cities across the country Jun 19.  Check the film website to find a screening.

 









Related Links:

Top 25 reasons to give a damn about climate change

Global boiling declares war on Thanksgiving

The new wave of urban farming (and fresh food from small spaces!)

]]> <![CDATA[We need to reform America’s food safety system from the farm up ]]> http://www.grist.org/article/Serious-about-change-End-the-Jungle-2.0-/ Thu, 12 Mar 2009 13:41:07 -0700 Dave Murphy http://www.grist.org/article/Serious-about-change-End-the-Jungle-2.0-/ Reprinted by permission from Grist. For more environmental news, humor, and inspiration, visit www.grist.org.




Related Links:

Top 25 reasons to give a damn about climate change

Global boiling declares war on Thanksgiving

Hot planet to Obama: What’s your Plan B?

]]> <![CDATA[Using less fertilizer has no meaningful effect on yield]]> http://www.grist.org/article/Less-is-almost-as-much/ Tue, 10 Mar 2009 13:17:28 -0700 Tom Laskawy http://www.grist.org/article/Less-is-almost-as-much/ Reprinted by permission from Grist. For more environmental news, humor, and inspiration, visit www.grist.org.




Related Links:

Top 25 reasons to give a damn about climate change

Global boiling declares war on Thanksgiving

Climate Citizen: Michael Pollan on agriculture and health care

]]> <![CDATA[Kent Conrad is trying to kill reform at the USDA]]> http://www.grist.org/article/Action-alert-Chuck-Hassebrook/ Tue, 03 Feb 2009 11:38:23 -0800 Tom Laskawy http://www.grist.org/article/Action-alert-Chuck-Hassebrook/ Reprinted by permission from Grist. For more environmental news, humor, and inspiration, visit www.grist.org.




Related Links:

Inhofe to Boxer: “We Won, You Lost, Now Get a Life!”

Merkley wants Senate jobs bill to help finance building efficiency retrofits

Top 25 reasons to give a damn about climate change

]]> <![CDATA[True agricultural policy reform may require climate reform first]]> http://www.grist.org/article/Food-reform-meet-climate-change/ Tue, 03 Feb 2009 09:13:46 -0800 Tom Laskawy http://www.grist.org/article/Food-reform-meet-climate-change/ Reprinted by permission from Grist. For more environmental news, humor, and inspiration, visit www.grist.org.




Related Links:

Clean energy opportunities

Top 25 reasons to give a damn about climate change

Global boiling declares war on Thanksgiving

]]> <![CDATA[Picking the battles will be key to reforming food policy]]> http://www.grist.org/article/Reforming-food-policy-Trade-and-agricultural-subsidies/ Thu, 22 Jan 2009 16:04:29 -0800 Tom Laskawy http://www.grist.org/article/Reforming-food-policy-Trade-and-agricultural-subsidies/ Reprinted by permission from Grist. For more environmental news, humor, and inspiration, visit www.grist.org.




Related Links:

Obama administration may (finally) offer greenhouse-gas targets

Top 25 reasons to give a damn about climate change

Global boiling declares war on Thanksgiving

]]> <![CDATA[All eyes on ag chief Vilsack’s undersecretary pick]]> http://www.grist.org/article/Change-we-can-believe-in-at-USDA/ Mon, 19 Jan 2009 17:09:42 -0800 Dave Murphy http://www.grist.org/article/Change-we-can-believe-in-at-USDA/ Reprinted by permission from Grist. For more environmental news, humor, and inspiration, visit www.grist.org.




Related Links:

Top 25 reasons to give a damn about climate change

Global boiling declares war on Thanksgiving

Hot planet to Obama: What’s your Plan B?

]]> <![CDATA[Trying to restructure the House Agriculture Committee might not be worth it]]> http://www.grist.org/article/Farm-policy-reform-where-to-start/ Thu, 15 Jan 2009 14:34:31 -0800 Tom Laskawy http://www.grist.org/article/Farm-policy-reform-where-to-start/ Reprinted by permission from Grist. For more environmental news, humor, and inspiration, visit www.grist.org.




Related Links:

Obama administration may (finally) offer greenhouse-gas targets

Top 25 reasons to give a damn about climate change

Global boiling declares war on Thanksgiving

]]> <![CDATA[Coming together to work toward a sustainable food and farm future]]> http://www.grist.org/article/Hope-and-the-new-USDA-chief/ Wed, 14 Jan 2009 23:29:29 -0800 Dave Murphy http://www.grist.org/article/Hope-and-the-new-USDA-chief/ Reprinted by permission from Grist. For more environmental news, humor, and inspiration, visit www.grist.org.




Related Links:

Top 25 reasons to give a damn about climate change

Global boiling declares war on Thanksgiving

Hot planet to Obama: What’s your Plan B?

]]> <![CDATA[Grist cooks lunch for America’s leading food writer]]> http://www.grist.org/article/Eat-food.-With-Michael-Pollan.-Talk-shop/ Mon, 12 Jan 2009 16:14:32 -0800 David Roberts http://www.grist.org/article/Eat-food.-With-Michael-Pollan.-Talk-shop/ Reprinted by permission from Grist. For more environmental news, humor, and inspiration, visit www.grist.org.




Related Links:

Obama administration may (finally) offer greenhouse-gas targets

George Voinovich (R-Ohio) [UPDATED]

Al Franken (D-Minn.)

]]> <![CDATA[Two gray eminences of the food movement lay down the law on farm policy]]> http://www.grist.org/article/The-soil-crisis/ Mon, 05 Jan 2009 12:59:57 -0800 Tom Philpott http://www.grist.org/article/The-soil-crisis/ Reprinted by permission from Grist. For more environmental news, humor, and inspiration, visit www.grist.org.




Related Links:

Copenhagen talks ready for take off: 5, 4, 3…

Obama administration may (finally) offer greenhouse-gas targets

Inhofe to Boxer: “We Won, You Lost, Now Get a Life!”

]]> <![CDATA[<em>NYT</em> weighs in on Vilsack pick]]> http://www.grist.org/article/More-sunlight-on-USDA/ Sat, 20 Dec 2008 15:26:59 -0800 Tom Philpott http://www.grist.org/article/More-sunlight-on-USDA/ Reprinted by permission from Grist. For more environmental news, humor, and inspiration, visit www.grist.org.




Related Links:

Top 25 reasons to give a damn about climate change

Global boiling declares war on Thanksgiving

Hot planet to Obama: What’s your Plan B?

]]> <![CDATA[Updates on secretary of agriculture appointment]]> http://www.grist.org/article/a-renewed-call-for-food-reform/ Sat, 13 Dec 2008 13:53:58 -0800 Steph Larsen http://www.grist.org/article/a-renewed-call-for-food-reform/ Reprinted by permission from Grist. For more environmental news, humor, and inspiration, visit www.grist.org.




Related Links:

Top 25 reasons to give a damn about climate change

Global boiling declares war on Thanksgiving

Hot planet to Obama: What’s your Plan B?

]]> <![CDATA[Prez-elect urged to name progressive farm-policy chief]]> http://www.grist.org/article/yet-more-on-obama-and-usda/ Fri, 05 Dec 2008 10:27:41 -0800 Tom Philpott http://www.grist.org/article/yet-more-on-obama-and-usda/ Reprinted by permission from Grist. For more environmental news, humor, and inspiration, visit www.grist.org.




Related Links:

Copenhagen talks ready for take off: 5, 4, 3…

Obama administration may (finally) offer greenhouse-gas targets

Inhofe to Boxer: “We Won, You Lost, Now Get a Life!”

]]> <![CDATA[How to change USDA with sustainable agriculture allies]]> http://www.grist.org/article/beyond-secretary-of-agriculture/ Tue, 25 Nov 2008 14:13:48 -0800 Steph Larsen http://www.grist.org/article/beyond-secretary-of-agriculture/ Reprinted by permission from Grist. For more environmental news, humor, and inspiration, visit www.grist.org.




Related Links:

Top 25 reasons to give a damn about climate change

Global boiling declares war on Thanksgiving

Hot planet to Obama: What’s your Plan B?

]]> <![CDATA[Food sovereignty needs to be the center of renewed negotiations]]> http://www.grist.org/article/time-to-fundamentally-reassess-the-wtos-doha-round/ Sat, 22 Nov 2008 23:20:49 -0800 Thomas Dobbs http://www.grist.org/article/time-to-fundamentally-reassess-the-wtos-doha-round/ Reprinted by permission from Grist. For more environmental news, humor, and inspiration, visit www.grist.org.




Related Links:

City preps and countries posture ahead of Copenhagen talks

15 people worth watching in Copenhagen (a slideshow!)

Top 25 reasons to give a damn about climate change

]]>