Farmers in California are facing challenges due to the state's climate program, which is creating a multimillion-dollar market for factory farm gas, or methane from animal manure, through the Low Carbon Fuel Standard. This program rewards the biggest and most polluting industrial hog and dairy operations, while disadvantaging family farm livestock producers [9cc02b3d]. The program incentivizes industrial operations to expand and build more factory farms, leading to more manure, air and water pollution, and climate-warming methane. Family farms practicing sustainable methods are barred from participating in the market [9cc02b3d].
State regulators in California are planning to reject a plan to phase out these harmful subsidies until 2040, giving major industrial operations decades to continue profiting from the program [9cc02b3d]. This has raised concerns among family farmers who argue that the program should be phased out sooner to support sustainable, traditional farming practices [9cc02b3d]. Darvin Bentlage, a family farmer, has urged California regulators to reconsider their approach and prioritize sustainable farming methods over industrial operations [9cc02b3d].
The challenges faced by farmers in California highlight the complexities of balancing environmental sustainability with the needs of the agricultural sector. While the state's climate program aims to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, it inadvertently disadvantages family farmers and promotes the expansion of industrial operations [9cc02b3d]. Finding a solution that supports both environmental goals and the livelihoods of farmers is crucial for the long-term sustainability of the agricultural sector in California.
Illinois State Climatologist Trent Ford says that only 1 of the past 18 months in Illinois was cooler than its 20th century average temperature [6d8aa1c5]. The House subcommittee on agricultural appropriations cut Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack's proposed budget by nearly $2.7 billion, with Chairman Rep. Andy Harris stating that climate change initiatives would not be prioritized over mission-critical services to farmers [6d8aa1c5]. A poll by Farm Journal magazine found that 85% of farmers surveyed believe conservation funding plays an important role in helping farmers adapt to extreme weather, and 67% believe it plays an important role in protecting farms from the effects of climate change [6d8aa1c5]. The article suggests that unless the House Agriculture and Ag Appropriations committees start listening to their constituents, farmers may become frustrated [6d8aa1c5].
California's "Polluters Pay Climate Cost Recovery Act of 2024," also known as Senate Bill 1497, would supposedly hold fossil fuel polluters accountable for the climate damages caused by their products. However, this legislation is flawed and could have significant financial repercussions for Californians. The act focuses only on the negative externalities of fossil fuels and overlooks their positive externalities. It also fails to consider that the costs of global climate change are hypothetical and attempts to assign blame to specific industries without considering the complex web of contributors to emissions. SB 1497 poses economic risks for Californians, introducing a carbon tax that could lead to higher prices for consumers and deter future economic development in the state. Estimates suggest that the legislation could reduce economic growth, job opportunities, and household incomes. The financial strain could have negative effects on Californians' lives, including adverse health effects. Policymakers should seek more evidence-based and equitable solutions to climate change that don't sacrifice economic growth and prosperity [9cc02b3d].
A groundbreaking new study has raised the estimated cost of climate inaction, making it more affordable to fix. The most commonly used economic models predicted climate impacts on the world economy at around $200 in losses per ton of carbon emitted, but a new study shows that the social cost of carbon is likely six times bigger, with losses of more than $1,000 per ton. This makes it more cost-effective for countries to act now to avoid greater costs in the future, even if other nations do nothing. The study's authors, Adrien Bilal and Diego Känzig, argue that it's worth it for countries of means to spend the money now to avoid much greater costs down the line. Their work has received significant attention and challenges previous economic models on the cost of climate inaction [6cb6e839].
The clean-energy transition is like carrying a credit card balance, the longer we delay paying for it, the more crushing the cost will become. BloombergNEF estimates the world must invest $215 trillion by 2050 to zero out carbon emissions. The article argues that $350 trillion to save the planet is a bargain. The longer we wait, the more expensive and difficult it will be to transition to clean energy. The article emphasizes the urgency of investing in the clean-energy transition to combat climate change [0c5d14d4].
For years, corporations have used economic arguments to oppose the transition to the green economy. Ecologically-minded people argue that short-term thinking prioritizes jobs and wages over the health of the environment and future generations. However, the economics of the situation can no longer be ignored. Last year was the hottest year on record, and the eight hottest years have all occurred in the last eight years. The cost of climate change in the United States is about $150 billion a year, not including healthcare costs. Consumer Reports predicts that climate change will cost a child born in 2024 between $500,000 to $1 million in their lifetime. The article argues that if concerns for human health and the environment have not been enough to drive the transition to a green economy, then concerns about economic welfare should be. The author questions if there is anything we care enough about to change the world for the better [d673d7da].
The University of Chicago's recent GenForward Survey showed that most voters younger than 40 are concerned about the economy and inflation, but not about the environment. Young Black voters, who are disproportionately affected by climate impacts, showed the lowest rate of concern. Climate change should not be a political issue, as it is a scientific fact that will impact all of humanity. The oil industry and disinformation have made climate change political. Voters concerned about the economy should prioritize climate change and elect leaders who take it seriously. Illinois ranks 37th in business tax climate, has a poor litigation environment, and is highly regulated, which has contributed to its lackluster economic performance and high unemployment rate. The newly enacted Interchange Fee Prohibition Act adds another burden on businesses in Illinois. The credit card industry's claims of pending doom are unfounded, as the legislation provides a commonsense approach to prevent retailers from paying swipe fees on taxes and tips. The legislation allows for exclusion or reimbursement of fees and does not create the problems the credit card industry suggests. Claims of racism against Black leaders in Chicago dispute the city's history of having elected Black mayors, a Black Cook County Board president, and producing famous Black Americans. The problems with the Chicago Transit Authority (CTA) have been well-documented and go back to multiple mayors. CTA President Dorval Carter Jr. has been criticized by minority CTA riders, and his deflections and lack of progress in addressing the issues call for new leadership. Submit a letter to the editor to voice opinions on various topics.
A recent research by the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication and the Center for Climate Change Communication at George Mason University found that a strong majority of registered voters support certain policies aimed at tackling climate change. The policies include federal funding to help farmers improve the ability of soil to absorb and store carbon, a national job training program to transition workers from fossil fuels to renewable energy, tax credits for electric vehicles and solar panels, tax credits or rebates for replacing oil- or gas-burning household appliances, regulating carbon dioxide as a pollutant, and transitioning the U.S. economy from fossil fuels to 100% clean energy by 2050. The survey also revealed that support for these policies varied across political ideologies, with Democrats showing robust support and conservative Republicans showing the least support. Moderate Republicans expressed strong support for the policies, indicating a potential for bipartisan agreement on climate solutions [3b84a5ce].
The recent survey conducted by the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication and the Center for Climate Change Communication at George Mason University indicates that 70% of U.S. voters believe that policies promoting clean energy will improve economic growth and create jobs. The survey revealed strong support for various climate policies, including federal funding for carbon storage in soil, job training for renewable energy, tax credits for electric vehicles and solar panels, tax credits or rebates for replacing oil- or gas-burning household appliances, and regulation of carbon dioxide as a pollutant. Additionally, 66% of voters support transitioning the U.S. economy to 100% clean energy by 2050. The survey also highlighted differences in policy preferences among political parties, with Democrats showing robust support for all climate policies and conservative Republicans showing limited support beyond agricultural carbon storage. However, moderate Republicans expressed strong support for each policy, aligning more closely with moderate Democrats. The findings suggest an opportunity for policymakers to build bipartisan consensus and advance effective climate initiatives [44ecf101].
Illinois State Climatologist Trent Ford says that only 1 of the past 18 months in Illinois was cooler than its 20th century average temperature [6d8aa1c5]. The House subcommittee on agricultural appropriations cut Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack's proposed budget by nearly $2.7 billion, with Chairman Rep. Andy Harris stating that climate change initiatives would not be prioritized over mission-critical services to farmers [6d8aa1c5]. A poll by Farm Journal magazine found that 85% of farmers surveyed believe conservation funding plays an important role in helping farmers adapt to extreme weather, and 67% believe it plays an important role in protecting farms from the effects of climate change [6d8aa1c5]. The article suggests that unless the House Agriculture and Ag Appropriations committees start listening to their constituents, farmers may become frustrated [6d8aa1c5].
Canada and Manitoba are investing $10.9 million in 32 projects through the Low Carbon Economy Fund. The projects aim to reduce emissions, help Manitoba businesses access low-carbon technologies, save money and energy, create jobs, and build climate resilient communities. The grants will primarily support the switch from diesel to electric grain handling equipment and from diesel to electric powered irrigation systems. Manitoba Environment and Climate Change Minister Tracy Schmidt and federal Environment and Climate Change Minister Steven Guilbeault express their commitment to reducing pollution and building more resilient communities. The first round of projects includes over a dozen local projects [15c09107].
The Government of Saskatchewan has filed an injunction against the Canada Revenue Agency over the non-payment of the carbon tax. Last fall, the federal government announced an exemption to the carbon tax for home heating oil, and the provincial government announced it would do the same for any home heating in Saskatchewan. There were concerns about how this move might affect carbon tax rebates for residents and possible fines or charges from Ottawa. In April, Premier Scott Moe said the Canada Revenue Agency would be auditing the province over the non-payment of the carbon tax. Justice Minister Bronwyn Eyre announced that the Canada Revenue Agency is trying to garnish the province's accounts, and the province has filed an injunction to stop it. The Government of Saskatchewan is also planning to push back against other federal regulations, including the Clean Electricity Regulations expected to come into effect on January 1. [042f6341]