Does the Democrats’ ‘Build Back Better’ plan adequately address agriculture and climate change challenges?

With the $27 billion directed towards agricultural conservation, combined with about $2 billion for agricultural research, the current Build Back Better proposal is a real step in the right direction. Ideally, the conservation proposals in BBB are a signal of what kind of policy priorities we are likely to see in the 2023 Farm Bill: large, focused on climate, and pretty quiet.

Such a boost to conservation incentive programs would have some pretty large climate benefits for US agriculture. This is doubly true given the language of the BBB plan, which states that funding for these programs must prioritize funding to projects that “address climate change.”

Paying producers to purchase equipment that can improve yields, reduce runoff, or adopt practices and adopt technologies that require less fertilizer, reduce methane emissions from cattle, or manage how animals graze can all add up to significant GHG reductions and other environmental benefits.

Related on the SLP

Scientists say gene-edited animals, not process itself, should be regulated How pioneering technology transformed Israel’s desert into an agricultural oasis

Ahead of the midterms, Meta has paid at least 29 anti-LGBTQ accounts for their posts

Viewpoint: RFK Jr.’s stacked FDA advisory council endorses multicancer screening test from ethically- questionable company that would increase false positives and waste billions of dollars

Viewpoint: The price Americans pay for science denialism

In a recent report, we at the Breakthrough Institute found that adopting existing technologies to the extent that is possible, can reduce greenhouse gas emissions from US beef production by 41 MMT CO2e/year by 2030, or approximately a half a percent of total current US emissions.

This is an excerpt. Read the original post here.