When it comes to greenhouse gas emissions, agriculture is a two-way street.
“We’re 10 percent of the emissions but 20 percent of the solution,” said David Burton, chair of Canada’s expert committee on greenhouse gases and carbon sequestration.
Farms are big producers of nitrous oxide and methane gases, but they can also be repositories of carbon dioxide.
Under the Kyoto protocol, Canada has committed to reducing its annual emissions by the equivalent of 240 million tonnes of carbon dioxide during the first commitment period of 2008-12.
Read Also
Farming Smarter receives financial boost from Alberta government for potato research
Farming Smarter near Lethbridge got a boost to its research equipment, thanks to the Alberta government’s increase in funding for research associations.
Burton said agriculture has the potential to deliver 20 percent, or 48 million tonnes, of the needed reductions.
Some of that will come through the budding bioproducts industry, which uses raw agricultural material to make industrial products.
The remainder will materialize from farmers using better management practices that decrease nitrous oxide and methane emissions and increase carbon sinks on their land.
A recent study prepared for Agriculture Canada by the Canadian Agri-Food Research Council and the BIOCAP Canada Foundation quantified some of the potential environmental benefits of the emerging bioproducts industry.
The study determined that ethanol production holds the greatest potential of all bioproducts in terms of greenhouse gas reduction.
It estimated Canada could produce 2.8 billion litres of ethanol by using available supplies of cereal, corn grain and straw. That clean fuel would reduce the country’s annual greenhouse gas emissions by 4.2 million tonnes.
Using biodiesel as a blend in diesel fuel would also reduce environmental pollutants as would biodiesel lubricity additives, which if mandated at 0.5 percent would lead to a further 2.9 million tonne reduction in greenhouse gases.
The paper also outlines the Kyoto-related benefits of using feedstocks to produce plastics, adhesives, automotive and construction materials, lubricants and chemicals.
Burton said if farmers change their management by improving livestock diets and feeding efficiency, using manure treatment techniques and conducting regular pen maintenance, producers could contribute 8.6 million tonnes worth of greenhouse gas reductions.
Grain farmers could add another 13.7 million tonnes by reducing tillage and summerfallow, decreasing fall applications of nitrogen, using shelterbelts and restoring permanent cover on portions of their land.
One of the obstacles in meeting those targets is that farmers seem indifferent.
In a recent poll on climate change conducted by Agriculture Canada, farmers said profit, trade issues, food safety and an aging farm population all weigh heavier on their minds than emissions.
“The fact that the greenhouse gas issue isn’t something that they’re laying awake at night worrying about doesn’t necessarily worry me,” said Burton.
That’s because better management practices also address issues that rank high on farmers’ lists, such as increasing profits, retaining soil nutrients and improving rural water and air quality. In other words, there are other ways to convince farmers to do the right thing.
What does concern Burton is the lack of a good tool for measuring how much agriculture contributes to Canada’s greenhouse gas reductions.
Provincial statisticians and industry players may have to be relied upon to provide more detailed information so a baseline can be established. Periodic radar and satellite images may also become part of a tracking mechanism.
