John Hansen, president of the Nebraska Farmers Union, said he finds it strange that both Nebraska Senators oppose a cap-and-trade regulatory approach that:

1. Would set aside the current Supreme Court mandated EPA inclusion of carbon emissions into the Clean Air Act responsibilities that would uses inflexible benchmark periods tied to inflexible particulate levels that would be the worst case economic scenario for Nebraska’s largest single industry, production agriculture, not to mention the manufacturing and electrical generation sectors.  “Remember, when the Senate fails to pass climate change legislation similar to the House of Representatives, they allow the EPA approach to proceed,” Hansen said.   
2. Has already been successfully tried in the U. S. in the early 1990’s to reduce acid rain pollution from hydrogen sulfide.  Air particulates were reduced far ahead of schedule with far below projected costs.
3. Is based on real market forces that create real market opportunities based on reducing carbon emissions while transitioning to ag based renewable energy sources.
4. Has already been successfully modeled in the United States with the Chicago Climate Exchange using the latest scientifically based, independent third party verified agricultural practices that sequester carbon while rewarding farmers and ranchers for practicing sound conservation practices that also build soil structure while reducing both wind and water erosion.
5. Nebraska farmers and ranchers have already willingly volunteered to utilize, making Nebraska the largest Chicago Climate Exchange utilizing state in the nation for agricultural carbon sequestration with over 3.1 million acres amounting only 6.4% of the eligible land.
6. Would provide Nebraska farmers with a new renewable energy based market opportunity by sequestering carbon.  For example, comparing 2008 carbon prices at $4.72 / ton versus and current 2010 prices of carbon at $0.15 / ton, thanks to Senate inaction of climate change legislation, they have already cost Nebraska farmers and ranchers $18 million in lost income.  That amount of income is equal to Nebraska landowners getting paid $4,000 per MW for wind energy to get Nebraska up from the current 1% of electricity coming from wind energy to 20%, and then exporting an equal amount out of state!  
7. Allows business to slowly transition from dirty carbon burning fuels to clean burning renewable fuels by utilizing market forces over time in a gradual fashion.
8. Reduces carbon emissions and reducing the human impact on climate change.  
9. Would end the built-in subsidies to the coal and oil interests by allowing them to continue to not pay for the societal, economic, and environmental costs of their carbon emissions.
10. Would level the economic playing field between the finite and dwindling oil and coal based carbon emitting fuels of the past and the renewable emerging clean burning energy sources of the future including wind, solar, biodiesel, corn and cellulosic ethanol, all of which Nebraska has in abundance and all of which would economically benefit our state, agriculture in particular.  

“Both Nebraska Senators say they oppose EPA including carbon emissions into enforcement of Clean Air Act authority, yet both pursue a public policy course that insures it,” Hansen said.  “Both Senators have yet to propose a better solution to the problem of carbon emissions.  Both Senators claim to be pro life and conservative.  From my perspective, both are neither.”  

Hansen said pro life and conservative people do not bet the “future of human life on earth that the overwhelming majority of scientific data and opinion are wrong about the relationship between earth temperatures and the amount of carbon in the atmosphere.”

“ When in doubt, especially during times of crisis, conservative people act with an abundance of caution,” Hansen said. ”It is the moral and political responsibility of our elected officials to lead, especially in times of crisis.  Words of justification will not offset the lack of appropriate and timely action on this issue that decides the future habitability of the planet earth.  Yes, it is even more important than the next opinion poll or the next election.”

On Tuesday. Sen. Mike Johanns  introduced legislation that would prevent cap-and-trade from being added to a House-Senate Conference bill if previous action has not been taken in the Senate.

According to Johanns, “This means that 67 Senators would have to vote to allow cap and trade to become law without having debated it in the Senate.”

“ Media reports indicate that some in the Majority are publicly contemplating trying to pass cap-and-trade by attaching it to a conference report during a lame duck session. This legislation would make such a move very difficult,” he said. 

Johanns said that the American people are “tired of being burned by backroom deals and procedural gimmicks.”

“My legislation holds Congress accountable and ensures a fair and open debate about cap-and-trade instead of quietly slipping it into law,” he said. ”It’s shocking that the Majority would consider circumventing the will of the public to pass cap-and-trade in a lame duck session with zero debate in the Senate. Cap-and-trade is too broad, overreaching and economically significant to be snuck into law without a transparent and honest deliberation.”

According to Johanns, his legislation would:

• Establishes a point of order against cap-and trade legislation that prevents it from being inappropriately added to a bill unless the Senate has already debated and approved cap-and-trade through normal Senate procedures.
  • Adoption of the amendment would not preclude the Senate from approving a cap-and-trade bill under regular order.  If a Senate cap-and-trade bill can garner 60 votes, the amendment would not be triggered.
  •   However, a two-thirds vote would be required to overturn this point of order (67 Senators) if House leaders attempt to circumvent the Senate by slipping it into a conference report.

It looks like only rich people will be able to make a statement about their concern about the environmental damage being caused by the gasoline powered internal combustion engine.

The New York Times reported that General Motors announced Tuesday “ The Chevrolet Volt, a plug-in car capable of driving about 40 miles at a time on battery power without using any gasoline, will have a sticker price of $41,000 before a $7,500 federal tax credit.”

Past the mid-point of Nebraska’s corn crop development, this week’s USDA weather and crop report indicates another possible record corn crop that could top more than 1.6 billion bushels even though fewer acres were planted this year.

According to USDA’s National Agricultural Statistics Service, row crop development was now ahead of last year and near average for most crops. Monday’s report said that Irrigation was underway but limited because of mostly adequate soil moisture supplies.

“In some cases, dryland fields were said to be indistinguishable from irrigated because of the ample precipitation,” the report said.

In Nebraska, the difference between a record and non-record corn crop is how the dryland crop is doing as it supplements more than one-third of the state’s corn crop.

Last year, corn for grain production in Nebraska based on year-end surveys is estimated at 1.58 billion bushels, up 13 percent from last year and a record high, according to the USDA. Yield of 178 bushels per acre is 15 bushels above last year and highest of record. Farmers harvested 8.85 million acres of corn for grain, up 4 percent from 2008. Of that amount, 3.68 million acres were dryland.

Corn condition, according to the report, rated 1 percent very poor, 3 poor, 11 fair, 62 good, and 23 excellent. Irrigated fields were 83 percent good or excellent and dryland fields rated 87, both above year ago levels. Corn silked was 85 percent, ahead of last year’s 74 and 79 average. Corn in the dough stage was 9 percent, near 7 last year and 11 average. Because of the damp weather, aerial spraying of fungicides was active.