[an error occurred while processing this directive]
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
[an error occurred while processing this directive]






From Kansas State University's:

Consortium for Agricultural Soils Mitigation of Greenhouse Gases (CASMGS)



Charles W. Rice, K-State Department of Agronomy, National CASMGS Director

(785) 532-7217 cwrice@ksu.edu

Scott Staggenborg, K-State Department of Agronomy (785) 532-7214 sstaggen@ksu.edu

Steve Watson, CASMGS Communications (785) 532-7105 swatson@ksu.edu



August 8, 2008

No. 63



* Current Carbon Credit Signup Deadline Is August 15



* Cap-and-Trade: Getting the Most Greenhouse Gas Reductions for the Money





CURRENT Carbon credit SIGNUP

deadline is August 15


August 15 is the deadline for farm operators or landowners with no-till or strip-till cropping practices or new grass plantings to sign up to sell carbon credits and still take advantage of a bonus provision that includes credit for 2007 practices.


Completed contracts to enter carbon credits onto the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) market must be postmarked by the mid-August date to qualify. Farmers can contract with either the National Farmers Union or AgraGate, a subsidiary of the Iowa Farm Bureau Federation, or the National Farmers Union. The Kansas Farm Bureau has partnered with AgraGate.


The 2008-2012 contract is for cropland farmed with continuous no-tillage or strip-tillage, or with grass plantings made since January 1, 1999. The contract also has a bonus clause for operators who used the conservation tillage practices in 2007. If the tillage practices qualify and can be verified the operator could earn credit for last year’s action. After August 15, the next contract will be for the 2009-2013 term, with a possible 2008 credit.


The amount of carbon credits allowed depends on the area of the state and the type of practices being used on the land. Most credits for no-till and strip-till vary between 0.2 and 0.6 tons of CO2 per acre in Kansas. Current CCX market prices are about $4 per ton of CO2 per acre per year. To get the latest carbon credit prices, go to:



Current contracts are available on the following web sites:


National Farmers Union: http://nfu.org/issues/environment/carbon-credits

AgraGate Web site: www.agragate.com


The National Farmers Union and AgraGate collect carbon credits from farmers, ranchers and private forest owners, aggregate the credits into large bundles, and then sell them on the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX).


-- Steve Watson, e-Update Editor



CAP-AND-TRADE: Getting the Most

Greenhouse Gas Reductions for THE Money


One of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce and its Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality’s goals in designing a comprehensive climate change program is to achieve the necessary greenhouse gas reductions for the least cost and with the least economic disruption. Reducing greenhouse gas emission will be an expensive proposition, but scientists tell us that not reducing emissions will leave future generations with serious problems that will cost even more to address.


The Committee’s White Paper discusses ways to keep costs as low as feasible while still achieving environmental goals. The most important way to keep costs down is to establish a system that will achieve lowest-cost reductions. The climate change debate often focuses on the need for expensive measures. If the program is structured properly, however, significant reductions can be achieved by economically beneficial measures (i.e. measures with savings that exceed costs). In large part, these measures are improvements in energy efficiency and productivity.


The decision to have a cap-and-trade regulatory program as the cornerstone of a mandatory climate change program is driven in large part by the ability of such a program to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to a specified level at the lowest possible overall cost to society and to lower the cost for regulated entities. As compared to more traditional forms of regulation, a well-designed cap-and-trade program generally should achieve the same environmental results at a lower cost because it provides flexibility to emitters, creates incentives for sources to use low-cost compliance strategies, and provides incentives for technological advances.


To read the complete White Paper, issued by the House Committee on Energy and Commerce and its Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality, go to:














August 18-22, 2008

Biofuels, Bioenergy, and Bioproducts from Sustainable Agricultural and Forest Crops

Bloomington, Minnesota



September 16-17, 2008 

Carbon Markets USA

Washington, D.C.



September 24-25, 2008

US Carbon Finance Forum

New York, NY







To subscribe, unsubscribe, or send comments or items for the newsletter, email Steve Watson at:


[an error occurred while processing this directive]