Committee Statement

 

The Honorable Frank D. Lucas

Ranking Member, House Committee on Agriculture

 

RE: Agriculture Committee hearing to review the low carbon fuel standard proposals

 

May 21, 2009

Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank you for holding today’s hearing to review the low carbon fuel standard proposals.

While many are focusing on the debate surrounding the Waxman/Markey cap and tax legislation, we cannot shift our attention away from other important environmental proposals. The Waxman-Markey bill currently being marked up by Energy and Commerce no longer contains a Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS), however, the original draft did. California is currently implementing its own LCFS and other states and regions may follow. These proposals intend to mandate the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in the fuel supply.

Protecting the environment is a worthwhile effort and I am all for it. However, we must make sure our energy policies are not held hostage by those who are not friends to production agriculture. I believe we must focus on incentives, innovation, and research to address environmental issues, not mandates. I helped craft the greenest Farm Bill ever in 2002. It increased funding to incentivize voluntary conservation programs by 80 percent. In 2008, I worked to improve and expand those conservation programs. And, I helped draft a new energy title to encourage agriculture to produce second generation bio-fuels.

Today, we will hear testimony on policies that continue to incorporate indirect land use change in determining a fuels lifecycle analysis. By using a very new method that incorporates many models together - both domestic and international - to determine a fuels impact on the environment, we are arbitrarily limiting our fuel supply and driving up costs for consumers – including our farmers and ranchers.

This is another example of how Speaker Pelosi and the administration’s environmental mandates increase fuel and other input costs for production agriculture, which leads to higher food costs. This is why I cosponsored legislation with Chairman Peterson to remove indirect land use from the RFS lifecycle analysis, and creates a new biomass definition which expands the amount of eligible feedstocks that can be used to meet the RFS mandate. We must continue to pave the way for second generation biofuels, to create energy diversity, and not limit our home grown feedstocks. We must make sure that the EPA is only administering policy as Congress intended, not developing its own environmental policy.

Again, if we want a real solution to climate change then we should focus on incentives, not mandates. We must remember that farmers and ranchers are natural stewards of the earth and they find new and innovative ways to reduce energy usage, reduce emissions, and sequester carbon while still providing America with an abundant and affordable food and fiber supply.

I look forward to hearing from our witnesses on this issue.

 

###

---