Pull my finger! Phhttttgshhtht.
The flatulence joke is ever popular with boys of all ages.
But the sound involved is being repeated across the livestock network in the United States as beef, dairy and hog producers consider the Environmental Protection Agency’s proposal to impose a tax on greenhouse gas emissions, or GHG.
It’s actually belching that generates the bulk of methane emitted by livestock, (the attention-grabbing introduction to this column notwithstanding) and methane is said to trap heat in the atmosphere with 25 times the efficiency of carbon dioxide.
Read Also
Agriculture needs to prepare for government spending cuts
As government makes necessary cuts to spending, what can be reduced or restructured in the budgets for agriculture?
If the EPA proposal becomes reality, any entity with potential to emit more than 100 tons of GHG per year would have to obtain a permit to keep operating.
According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, that includes any dairy operation with more than 25 cows, any beef operation with more than 50 head and many hog operations. It would mean a fee of $175 per dairy cow, $87.50 per beef animal and $20 per pig.
American producers are calling it a cow tax but it would also apply to factories and large buildings.
Considering there are about 10 million cattle in the U.S., the plan would extract billions from American producers.
The impetus behind this “cow tax” is a United Nations estimate that farm animals worldwide generate 18 percent of emissions thought to be raising global temperatures.
According to a December story in the New York Times, agricultural emissions account for about 50 percent of GHG emissions in Brazil, Australia and New Zealand.
But in the U.S., they account for about 7.4 percent of GHG emissions, largely because other sources make up a massive percentage relative to other countries.
In Canada, government figures show agriculture generates about 8.5 percent of this country’s GHG emissions. Of that, livestock generates 2.6 percent.
We haven’t heard talk here about including agricultural emissions in environmental schemes. But to paraphrase a famous comment about international relations, when the U.S. belches, Canada can smell the stench.
Other countries have plans. New Zealand says it will include ag emissions in its trading scheme by 2013. Australia is contemplating a tax on cattle for methane emissions. Sweden plans to label food products based on the GHG emissions that can be attributed to their production.
Yet consumption of red meat worldwide is expected to double between 2000 and 2050, even though its production may become more expensive and difficult.
How is this going to compute?
