A cap-and-trade program, such as the one that soon will be considered by the House of Representatives, is preferable to a carbon tax for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, says the National Pork Producers Council. However, added costs associated with climate change legislation remain a serious concern of America’s pork producers.
The organization told the House Agriculture Committee that a cap-and-trade program is likely to achieve greater and more sustainable emissions reductions—and do it for less—than a straight tax on greenhouse gas emissions. This is because cap and trade gives businesses flexibility to choose the lowest-cost emissions abatement method while also providing incentives for finding additional ways to reduce and offset greenhouse gas emissions.
The agriculture panel held a hearing last week on H.R. 2454, the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009, which recently was approved by the House Energy and Commerce Committee. The climate change legislation, among other things, would set a limit, or cap, on the amount of greenhouse gases that specific large emitters such as energy utilities could release to the atmosphere.
NPPC anticipates increased energy and input costs of at least 20 percent under climate change legislation, and it doesn’t think revenues from the sale of carbon offset credits will balance out that increase. This remains a serious concern of pork producers, given the industry’s bleak economic outlook. NPPC will continue to monitor the legislation as it moves through Congress.
Read NPPC’s testimony.