Biden spending bill ignites debate over dairy methane pollution



By Leah Douglas and Nichola Groom

WASHINGTON, Jan 11 (Reuters) - As U.S. President Joe Biden’s administration seeks to revive its ambitious social spending and climate plan in Congress, environmental groups and the farm industry are at odds over proposed subsidies aimed at offsetting agriculture’s substantial contribution to global warming. Tax credits and grants proposed in the administration’s sweeping “Build Back Better” bill(BBB) would bolster the small but fast-growing market for manure-based methane gas by supporting construction of machines that trap the gas from open manure pits on dairy farms and other livestock operations. Farmers could then sell the trapped methane for use in generating electricity or vehicle fuel in the form of compressed natural gas.

The proposed incentives have been hailed by dairy farmers and investors as a “game changer” that could pad farm incomes while combating climate change by providing a less-polluting alternative to fossil fuels. The industry that produces gas from organic waste says subsidies would boost the development of the machinery. But some environmental groups and Democratic lawmakers have lined up against the subsidies, saying they could backfire because if capturing and selling methane from cows becomes profitable, it could incentivize large farms to grow, increasing greenhouse gas emissions. They warn that supporting a market for biomethane fuel would delay a transition to an all-electric future. “If you start making money off of pollution, you’re not going to stop polluting,” said Rebecca Wolf, policy analyst at environmental group Food & Water Watch. The debate, which has intensified as use of the technology has expanded, reflects the difficulties of reducing emissions from dairies due to growing cow herds and a lack of commercially available technologies to reduce methane, which is produced both by manure and animal digestion. Methane, a potent greenhouse gas that has a higher heat-trapping potential than carbon dioxide (CO2), is the second-biggest cause of climate change behind CO2. Senate Democrats’ full support is needed to pass the BBB spending package, which has garnered no backing from Senate Republicans. Democrats were unable to pass the bill last month but say they hope to do so in some form this year. Some Democrats are critical of these methane-trapping machines, known as anaerobic digesters. Sen. Cory Booker, a New Jersey Democrat, told Reuters that money in the plan should instead be “targeted to family farmers for soil health and regenerative agriculture practices,” such as planting cover crops and employing no-till farming. West Virginia Senator Joe Manchin, a Democrat whose opposition to the spending plan led to its failure to pass the Senate in December, this month expressed support for clean-energy tax credits, bolstering the industry’s optimism that the plan could still be enacted. Livestock methane pollution accounts for more than a third of U.S methane emissions, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Digesters are mainly found at dairies because milking cows produce more manure than beef cattle. The spending plan would make digester owners eligible for a 30% tax credit and put billions of dollars into U.S Department of Agriculture (USDA) programs that could help digester companies offset their costs. Digester developers and investors say the criticism from green groups is a distraction from efforts to combat climate change. “What’s the alternative?" said Bob Powell, chief executive of San Francisco-based digester developer Brightmark LLC. “More methane into the air.” MISSED GOALS A previous deal between the administration of former President Barack Obama and the dairy industry to promote digesters failed badly in reducing emissions, according to a Reuters review of government documents and data. In 2009, the Obama administration and an industry group, the Innovation Center for U.S. Dairy, pledged to reduce the industry’s greenhouse gas emissions by 25% by 2020 over levels in 2007, in part by expanding federal support for new digesters. Instead, methane emissions in the sector have risen more than 15%, in part driven by growth in herd size, according to EPA data reviewed by Reuters. The number of dairy cows nationwide has grown 3.3% since 2009, according to USDA data, to 9.39 million cows. The dairy industry has since pledged to become greenhouse gas neutral by 2050, and the USDA will continue to work with the industry to meet that goal, according to an agency official. Current agriculture secretary Tom Vilsack was also secretary under Obama. The industry missed the 2020 goal in part because digesters were so expensive and there was no market then for the gas they captured, according to the Innovation Center’s Karen Scanlon, executive vice president of environmental stewardship, and Jim Wallace, senior vice president of environmental research. Digesters are pricey, typically costing between $4 million and $7 million each, and often require dedicated staff to run them. Digesters also don’t capture the 27% of U.S. methane emissions that come from livestock enteric fermentation, or cow burps, for which there is no commercial-scale solution. But the landscape has changed, industry officials said, because since 2017 digesters have been able to generate lucrative credits for the biogas industry under a California policy called the Low Carbon Fuel Standard. Even out-of-state producers can claim the credits if the gas they produce is piped to fuel the state’s’ trucks and buses. The value of those credits has roughly doubled since dairy methane was included in the program, to around $200, and the policy has helped to “super-charge the industry,” Wallace said. In a sign of the controversy around digesters, however, environmental groups in October petitioned the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to make them ineligible for credits, arguing that their presumed role in combating climate change was inflated and that the credits encourage making more manure. California is the top dairy state and the industry is responsible for more than half of the state’s methane emissions. CARB said it is evaluating the petition. Meanwhile the state is doubling down on the technology, and CARB has said it may need to spend between $700 million and $3.9 billion to build 200 additional digesters to help meet a goal it set in 2016 to reduce dairy methane emissions by 40% below 2013 levels by 2030. The cost depends on whether the digesters would be paired with polluting internal combustion engines or cleaner but far more expensive fuel cells. The state is currently on track to meet only half its emissions-reduction goal, after spending nearly $200 million on digesters since 2015. "We think we can realize the rest of the reductions that we’re hoping to see through additional digesters, as well as some other reduction processes,” said Ryan Schauland, acting chief of the project assessment branch of CARB. Investment in U.S. biogas projects has already tripled since 2017 to more than $1.6 billion, according to data from research firm AcuComm, including from players like oil companies Chevron CVX.N and BP BP.L , as well as car maker BMW, which are seeking to cash in on the biogas market and its subsidies. There are currently 317 operational manure digesters nationally, up from 141 in 2009, according to EPA data. At the moment, digesters favor large farms. One 2018 study of the potential for dairy biogas in Idaho found that a farm needed at least 3,000 cows for an “economically viable” digester operation. Just 714 of the U.S. roughly 40,000 dairy farms have 2,500 cows or more, according to the most recent USDA census. But the proposed incentives in BBB could benefit some smaller farms, said Jed Davis, head of sustainability at Cabot Creamery in Vermont. He said six of Cabot’s farms have digesters and more are in development. “I’m not imagining a future where every farm uses anaerobic digestion,” Davis said. “But I’m bullish on the fact that there is more opportunity than is currently available.”
Leah Douglas reported from Washington, D.C., Nichola Groom from Los Angeles. Editing by Richard Valdmanis and Julie Marquis

免責聲明: XM Group提供線上交易平台的登入和執行服務,允許個人查看和/或使用網站所提供的內容,但不進行任何更改或擴展其服務和訪問權限,並受以下條款與條例約束:(i)條款與條例;(ii)風險提示;(iii)完全免責聲明。網站內部所提供的所有資訊,僅限於一般資訊用途。請注意,我們所有的線上交易平台內容並不構成,也不被視為進入金融市場交易的邀約或邀請 。金融市場交易會對您的投資帶來重大風險。

所有缐上交易平台所發佈的資料,僅適用於教育/資訊類用途,不包含也不應被視爲適用於金融、投資稅或交易相關諮詢和建議,或是交易價格紀錄,或是任何金融商品或非應邀途徑的金融相關優惠的交易邀約或邀請。

本網站的所有XM和第三方所提供的内容,包括意見、新聞、研究、分析、價格其他資訊和第三方網站鏈接,皆爲‘按原狀’,並作爲一般市場評論所提供,而非投資建議。請理解和接受,所有被歸類為投資研究範圍的相關内容,並非爲了促進投資研究獨立性,而根據法律要求所編寫,而是被視爲符合營銷傳播相關法律與法規所編寫的内容。請確保您已詳讀並完全理解我們的非獨立投資研究提示和風險提示資訊,相關詳情請點擊 這裡查看。

我們運用 cookies 提供您最佳之網頁使用經驗。更改您的cookie 設定跟詳情。

風險提示:您的資金存在風險。槓桿商品並不適合所有客戶。請詳細閱讀我們的風險聲明