Search by Category

Archives

25x’25 proposes amendments to climate bill to aid the ag and forestry sectors

From the 25x’25 blog:

The 25x’25 Alliance today issued a list of proposed amendments to the American Clean Energy and Security Act (HR 2454)
that the organization said are needed to maximize the benefits that
agriculture and forestry can provide in the cap-and-trade program
outlined in the measure.

The amendments, which were aired during a Farm Foundation forum at
the National Press Club this morning by Carbon Work Group Chairman
Nathan Rudgers, a former New York state agriculture commissioner and a
member of the 25x’25 National Steering Committee, address multiple
areas within the Waxman-Markey bill, including:

  • Domestic offsets must have identical characteristics and risks, i.e. fungibility, with each other and with allowances.
  • Sequestration offsets must be for a contracted duration, with a suggested “permanence” of fifty years.
  • The risks of unintentional reversals and leakage must be fully
    managed at a program-level, not at a project level. (At the same time,
    offset providers must be held accountable for any and all intentional
    reversals.)
  • Biological sequestration offsets must be credited at a discounted
    rate so that the difference between the value of the full offset and a
    discounted offset is the source of funds to manage all risks of
    reversal, such as from a forest fire.
  • The measure must recognize the abundant offset protocols and
    methodologies that have been previously developed under other programs
    by allowing the program administrator to quickly establish a list of
    pre-approved project types.
  • The bill must direct the program administrator to devise protocols,
    methodologies, procedures, registry requirements, verification
    requirements, and any other relevant process issues to be as
    operationally lean as possible and reduce overhead costs of compliance.
  • USDA should be the lead agency to assume responsibility for the majority of farm and forestry offset functions.
  • Domestic offset providers from the agriculture and forestry sectors
    should be treated equally under the Strategic Reserve, a price
    management mechanism, which sets aside extra permits that can be
    allocated to prevent unexpected allowance-price fluctuations.
  • Agriculture and forestry stakeholders currently engaging in land
    management practices that provide offsets – “early actors” – should be
    recognized under the cap-and-trade program and specifically protected
    against any bias that could accrue relative to other offset providers.

Comments are closed.