Farm scale viability of fossil fuel alternatives questioned

Glacier FarmMedia – The chief executive officer of the Agri-Food Innovation Council (AIC) has said the technology to replace fossil fuels with alternative sources isn’t yet scalable.

Serge Buy told the standing committee on agriculture recently that examples of farmers using biomass to dry grain are just that, and only larger farms with bigger, healthier budgets are likely to be able to afford new technology in the short term.

Why it matters: Drying grain can represent a significant cost to farmers and it relies heavily on fossil fuels.

The committee is studying Bill C-234, amendments to federal legislation that would exempt natural gas and propane used to dry grain and heat barns from the price on carbon in the four backstop provinces of Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba and Ontario.

[RELATED] Carbon price exemptions preferred over rebates, committee hears

Buy’s comments didn’t seem to sit well with at least one Liberal committee member, Ryan Turnbull, who represents Whitby, Ont.

He said his research discovered that 12 years ago there were 16 examples of grain-drying technology that were all scalable.

Turnbull said these are commercially viable solutions.

“So, is it not true that there’s actually grain-drying technology and it’s been around for at least 12 years and yet it hasn’t been adopted by the industry?” he asked.

Buy disagreed.

Turnbull then said there are in his riding “greenhouses and barns that are being heated and cooled with solar, geothermal and air-source heat pumps, which is the same as I can do in my home.”

He said many homes in his riding are powered the same way.

“How can you actually sit there and tell us that there is no viable technology when I have examples in my riding?” he said to Buy.

Buy repeated that the technologies are not scalable. Their cost, whether they are manufactured at a scale that allows all producers to use them and whether they are viable in all parts of the country are all issues, he said.

Turnbull agreed with Tom Green, senior climate policy adviser at the David Suzuki Foundation, who said the carbon price signal must be kept to encourage adoption of new technology.

He said it “seems really rational” to have the price signal and incentives because industries haven’t adopted new technologies on their own.

[RELATED] New technology uses radio waves to dry grain

Buy agreed that the government should support farmers to invest in technology.

“Absolutely, hallelujah, this is great, but should they tax them to do so? That’s a different philosophical way of seeing things. If you penalize people long enough and hard enough, will they make changes?”

Earlier in the meeting, witnesses said the rebate offered through C-8, a government bill, doesn’t work.

Branden Leslie, manager of policy and government relations for Grain Growers of Canada, said the rebate is applied inconsistently and an exemption is preferable.

“If you bring off all of your cereals dry and you really don’t need to use your dryer that year at all, then you could still be eligible for a rebate under C-8 based on your overall expenses, despite you not using any of the fuels that we’re trying to solve this year,” he said.

He and others said the government’s incentive program to purchase more efficient grain dryers is laudable, but $20 million doesn’t go very far when applied across the country.

Brendan Byrne, president of Grain Farmers of Ontario, said the rebates under C-8 are less than 15 per cent of what producers are paying in carbon tax.

Ray Orb, president of the Saskatchewan Association of Rural Municipalities, told the meeting that farmers have reported the rebate would be about three per cent of their costs.

Discussion of a sunset clause on C-234, in which the exemption would end after a period of time, indicated that 10 years might not be long enough for widespread change.

Liberal MP Rechie Valdez, Mississauga-Streetsville, suggested biomass is a way forward and specifically referenced BioDryAir in Manitoba.

She cited a farmer who spent about $150,000 in grain drying in 2019 but spent only $3,200 the next year after switching to biomass.

“Would you agree that this system would be something that’s more cost-effective without putting a price on pollution?” she asked.

Leslie said he would like to know the cost of conversion.

There is also the question of how much drying the farmer did from one year to the next.

Buy told the committee there are two ways to deal with fossil fuel use and pollution.

“We penalize the farming communities and hope that by hitting (them over the) head repeatedly, they magically abandon fossil fuels or polluting sources of energy. Or we take measures to support the farming community as it transitions to alternative fuels and less polluting sources of energy. Imposing a carbon tax on the farmers that don’t have alternatives feels like we’re hitting them over the head.”

He repeatedly said scalability is a problem and he warned the committee that carbon pricing is increasing the urban-rural divide.

“If you want to tax the polluting Hummer-driving urban warriors until they are forced to ride a bicycle please fill your boots, but do recognize that farmers drive trucks because they have to,” he said.

Green said politicians are spreading misinformation about pollution pricing and misrepresenting its impacts. He said most households receive more back than they pay and implementing the exemptions in C-234 “would set Canada on a slippery slope of sector-by-sector and interest-by-interest exemptions that risk fundamentally undermining the (Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act) as an economy-wide measure.”

– This article was originally published at The Western Producer.