CANADA’S quest to be a player in the worldwide biofuel boom took a step forward last week when the federal and provincial governments agreed on a commitment to have all gasoline and diesel contain an average of five percent renewable fuel by 2010.
It is a welcome goal to spur forward policy makers and rally the industry.
It will require an enormous increase in ethanol and biodiesel production, creating new demand for grain and adding strong support for grain prices.
But the focus now switches to the incentives and programs needed to reach the target. Their structure will determine the benefit that farmers enjoy from the policy.
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?
Opportunity for rural advancement will be squandered if the biofuel industry is built entirely by big business and farmers are relegated to the role of input supplier.
Farmers and rural communities must be assisted to stake a major ownership claim so they can extract a larger share of the profits and employment from the industry’s growth. The former Liberal government’s plan failed at this.
Ottawa and the provinces must also provide for interprovincial trade in biofuel so that it is produced where the grain is produced, not where parochial provincial governments decide.
Governments should also support sustainability by encouraging value-added spinoffs to the fuel plants, such as livestock feeding, milling and grain component processing. Alternative fuel sources such as biomass should be explored to fire the biofuel plants.
As the Conservative government puts meat on its biofuel policy skeleton, it must not forget other pressing environmental issues with implications for farmers.
The Conservatives are steering away from the Kyoto protocol designed to limit global warming, largely because its greenhouse gas reduction targets for Canada would be impossible to meet without major economic upheaval.
The Conservatives’ promised replacement, a made-in-Canada policy focused mainly on cleaner air, is not yet defined.
The Liberal government was developing a greenhouse gas reduction policy, with agriculture slated to play a big role.
A host of research programs prompted by Kyoto looked at ways to reduce farm energy use and to determine the value of farm-based carbon sinks.
Research also looked into alternative fuels such as biomass from farm residue.
A national drive toward energy use efficiency and development of clean alternative energy technologies seems a rational, even necessary, response to soaring oil costs.
Clean, efficient energy use is now a key factor in the ladder of global competitiveness in agriculture and every other industry.
The Conservative government must provide quick, clear policy direction and financial commitment to this file to maintain or better Canada’s position on that ladder.
And by welcome coincidence, such investment should also yield environmental benefits.
