Not
just “green” energy – what about fracking?
Prairies
vanish in the US push for green energy
13
November, 2013
ROSCOE,
S.D. (AP) — Robert Malsam nearly went broke in the 1980s when corn
was cheap. So now that prices are high and he can finally make a
profit, he's not about to apologize for ripping up prairieland to
plant corn.
Across
the Dakotas and Nebraska, more than 1 million acres of the Great
Plains are giving way to corn fields as farmers transform the wild
expanse that once served as the backdrop for American pioneers.
This
expansion of the Corn Belt is fueled in part by America's green
energy policy, which requires oil companies to blend billions of
gallons of corn ethanol into their gasoline. In 2010, fuel became the
No. 1 use for corn in America, a title it held in 2011 and 2012 and
narrowly lost this year. That helps keep prices high.
"It's
not hard to do the math there as to what's profitable to have,"
Malsam said. "I think an ethanol plant is a farmer's friend."
What
the green-energy program has made profitable, however, is far from
green. A policy intended to reduce global warming is encouraging a
farming practice that actually could worsen it.
That's
because plowing into untouched grassland releases carbon dioxide that
has been naturally locked in the soil. It also increases erosion and
requires farmers to use fertilizers and other industrial chemicals.
In turn, that destroys native plants and wipes out wildlife habitats.
It
appeared so damaging that scientists warned that America's
corn-for-ethanol policy would fail as an anti-global warming strategy
if too many farmers plowed over virgin land.
The
Obama administration argued that would not happen. But the
administration didn't set up a way to monitor whether it actually
happened.
It
did.
More
than 1.2 million acres of grassland have been lost since the federal
government required that gasoline be blended with increasing amounts
of ethanol, an Associated Press analysis of satellite data found.
Plots that were wild grass or pastureland seven years ago are now
corn and soybean fields.
That's
in addition to the 5 million acres of farmland that had been aside
for conservation — more than Yellowstone, Everglades and Yosemite
National Parks combined — that have vanished since Obama took
office.
In
South Dakota, more than 370,000 acres of grassland have been uprooted
and farmed from since 2006. In Edmunds County, a rural community
about two hours north of the capital, Pierre, at least 42,000 acres
of grassland have become cropland — one of the largest turnovers in
the region.
Malsam
runs a 13-square-mile family farm there. He grows corn, soybeans and
wheat, then rents out his grassland for grazing. Each year, the
family converts another 160 acres from grass to cropland.
Chemicals
kill the grass. Machines remove the rocks. Then tractors plow it
three times to break up the sod and prepare it for planting.
Scattered
among fields of 7-foot tall corn and thigh-high soybeans, some
stretches of grassland still exist. Cattle munch on some grass. And
"prairie potholes" — natural ponds ranging from small
pools to larger lakes — support a smattering of ducks, geese,
pelicans and herons.
Yet
within a mile of Malsam's farm, federal satellite data show, more
than 300 acres of grassland have been converted to soybeans and corn
since 2006.
Nebraska
has lost at least 830,000 acres of grassland, a total larger than New
York City, Los Angeles and Dallas combined.
"It's
great to see farmers making money. It hasn't always been that way,"
said Craig Cox of the Environmental Working Group. He advocates for
clean energy but opposes the ethanol mandate. "If we're going to
push the land this hard, we really need to intensify conservation in
lockstep with production, and that's just not happening," he
said.
Jeff
Lautt, CEO of Poet, which operates ethanol refineries across the
country, including in South Dakota, said it's up to farmers how to
use their land.
"The
last I checked, it is still an open market. And farmers that own land
are free to farm their land to the extent they think they can make
money on it or whatever purpose they need," he said.
Yet
Chris Wright, a professor at South Dakota State University who has
studied land conversion, said: "The conversation about land
preservation should start now before it becomes a serious problem."
Wright reviewed the AP's methodology for determining land conversion.
The
AP's analysis used government satellite data to count how much
grassland existed in 2006 in each county, then compare each plot of
land to corresponding satellite data from 2012.
The
data from the U.S. Geological Survey and the Department of
Agriculture identify corn and soybean fields. That allowed the AP to
see which plots of grassland became cropland.
To
reach its conservative estimate of 1.2 million acres lost, the AP
excluded grassland that had been set aside under the government's
Conservation Reserve Program, in which old farmland is allowed to
return to a near-natural state. The AP used half-acre sections of
earth and excluded tiny tracts that became corn, which experts said
were most likely outliers.
Corn
prices more than doubled in the years after Congress passed the
ethanol mandate in 2007. Now, Malsam said, farmers can make about
$500 an acre planting corn.
His
farm has just become profitable in the past five years, allowing him
and his wife, Theresa, to build a new house on the farmstead.
Four
miles south, signs at each end of the town of Roscoe announce a
population of only 324. But the town, which relies in part on incomes
like Malsam's, supports a school, a restaurant, a bank, a grocery
store and a large farm machinery store.
The
manager of the equipment dealership, Kaleb Rodgers, said the booming
farm economy has helped the town and the dealership prosper. The
business with 28 employees last year sold a dozen combines at about
$300,000 apiece, plus more than 60 tractors worth between $100,000
and $300,000, he said.
"If
we didn't have any farmers we wouldn't have a community here. We
wouldn't have a business. I wouldn't be sitting here. I wouldn't be
able to feed my family," Rodgers said. "I think ethanol is
a very good thing."
Jim
Faulstich, president of the South Dakota Grasslands Coalition, said
the nation's ethanol and crop insurance policies have encouraged the
transformation of the land.
Faulstich,
who farms and ranches in central South Dakota near Highmore, said
much of the land being converted is not suited to crop production,
and South Dakota's strong winds and rains will erode the topsoil.
"I
guess a good motto would be to farm the best and leave the rest,"
he said.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.