Anybody Got A Plan?
By: Doug Busselman, Executive Vice President
The apparent strategy for dealing with the regulatory assault being planned by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) against American agriculture is to establish a role for those producing crops, likely using minimum tillage techniques, as being able to sequestrate carbon. If the Obama Administration is willing to go along with the plan, some agricultural producers will be able to be paid something for providing the benefit of offsetting the damage supposedly caused to the atmosphere by others.
Since political forces have determined that the scientific theory of man-caused climate change is the accepted reality – we need to figure out how to address the negative consequences coming our way. Make no mistake, EPA officials are coming after agriculture and whether they have any intention of providing incentives remains to be seen.
Given the “science” involved we’re not too certain what alternative approaches American producers (especially livestock producers) will be able to use in order to continue.
Perhaps we will be able to see research funding earmarks from Congressional members from areas of the country where livestock producers are significant enough for the members to care about. It is possible that somehow this research will find a way to provide approaches to be used (likely with fees paid) to deal with the types of “greenhouse gases” which supposedly have caused the problem which only destroying American livestock agriculture can solve.
Livestock (and other animals) in other places of the world obviously are not responsible for the problems that American agricultural livestock producers are causing.
Although we don’t expect any accountability from U.S. bureaucratic regulators, it might be worth challenging our elected representatives to seek answers in regard to how the actions taken by Americans will reverse the climate situation on a worldwide basis.
It would be worth establishing scientific monitoring systems to measure the actual performance of how much impact our nation’s demise actually resolves the world’s atmospheric challenges. An economic tracking system should be part of the overall system, publicly reporting the costs associated in accomplishing the resulting changes that will be achieved.
As part of the politically-correct assumption that our nation’s economy is alone to blame for the perceived end result of man-made global warming -- it needs to be clearly highlighted how much bang “our buck” is getting for the results being accomplished.
If accountability is to be established for those blamed for the gases that are believed to be causing the problem – we want accountability to be as strongly in force for those who implement regulations that possibly might not accomplishing anything beyond harming our nation’s well-being.
The apparent strategy for dealing with the regulatory assault being planned by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) against American agriculture is to establish a role for those producing crops, likely using minimum tillage techniques, as being able to sequestrate carbon. If the Obama Administration is willing to go along with the plan, some agricultural producers will be able to be paid something for providing the benefit of offsetting the damage supposedly caused to the atmosphere by others.
Since political forces have determined that the scientific theory of man-caused climate change is the accepted reality – we need to figure out how to address the negative consequences coming our way. Make no mistake, EPA officials are coming after agriculture and whether they have any intention of providing incentives remains to be seen.
Given the “science” involved we’re not too certain what alternative approaches American producers (especially livestock producers) will be able to use in order to continue.
Perhaps we will be able to see research funding earmarks from Congressional members from areas of the country where livestock producers are significant enough for the members to care about. It is possible that somehow this research will find a way to provide approaches to be used (likely with fees paid) to deal with the types of “greenhouse gases” which supposedly have caused the problem which only destroying American livestock agriculture can solve.
Livestock (and other animals) in other places of the world obviously are not responsible for the problems that American agricultural livestock producers are causing.
Although we don’t expect any accountability from U.S. bureaucratic regulators, it might be worth challenging our elected representatives to seek answers in regard to how the actions taken by Americans will reverse the climate situation on a worldwide basis.
It would be worth establishing scientific monitoring systems to measure the actual performance of how much impact our nation’s demise actually resolves the world’s atmospheric challenges. An economic tracking system should be part of the overall system, publicly reporting the costs associated in accomplishing the resulting changes that will be achieved.
As part of the politically-correct assumption that our nation’s economy is alone to blame for the perceived end result of man-made global warming -- it needs to be clearly highlighted how much bang “our buck” is getting for the results being accomplished.
If accountability is to be established for those blamed for the gases that are believed to be causing the problem – we want accountability to be as strongly in force for those who implement regulations that possibly might not accomplishing anything beyond harming our nation’s well-being.
Posted by Doug Busselman at 4/26/2009 5:05 PM 
Categories: Climate Change
Tags: EPA Air Quality Regulations Global Warming Agriculture
Categories: Climate Change
Tags: EPA Air Quality Regulations Global Warming Agriculture
Comments