top of page
Search
  • Shiva Gupta

Joe Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act bets on low-tech climate solutions: Nature

By: Shiva Gupta


The Inflation Reduction Act includes a recognition that land is a significant ally in the struggle against climate change, from encouraging forest preservation to incentivizing climate-smart farming practices. Tax reductions for electric cars. Huge financial incentives are being offered to expand carbon-capture facilities, promote the creation of green hydrogen, and increase solar, wind, and next-generation battery production in the United States. $369 billion in climate and energy-related money is included in the historic Inflation Reduction Act, which was passed earlier this year. A large portion of this investment is geared towards high-tech solutions to help move the world's biggest historical emitter towards a brighter future.


Beyond those investments that make headlines, the Act also recognizes nature, a less-noticed but crucial component of the fight against climate change. Or, to put it more precisely, if given the opportunity, nature may be a powerful ally in the battle against climate change.


Tom Cors, director of North America policy and government relations at the Nature Conservancy, declared that "it's historic, without a doubt." He referred to fresh financing as a "once-in-a-generation investment" in efforts to preserve forests and advance climate-friendly agricultural methods. According to the Congressional Research Service, the funds allocated for "nature-based" climate solutions include $5 billion for nationwide forest protection and $20 billion for agriculture conservation.


Even if those sums are tiny in contrast to other major expenditures, many environmentalists argue that such investments are essential to the country's ability to meet long-term climate goals and serve as a reminder that maintaining the land also benefits wildlife and human health.


By tackling climate solutions that also solve the natural crisis, Cors claimed, "we can actually get a lot for our money." Natural climate solutions cannot take the place of our economy and energy sector becoming decarbonized. However, it serves as a complement to achieving greater emissions reductions than we otherwise could.


However, it is still unclear if the current laws will ultimately distribute money in the most efficient and long-lasting manner.


According to Peter Reich, a researcher at the University of Minnesota who has long examined how global warming affects forests, "the devil is always in the details." "How you spend the money specifically can have significantly greater or only slightly better effects on reducing climate change."


People will need the forests, wetlands, peatlands, and other landscapes that absorb a significant quantity of carbon dioxide annually to help moderate the Earth's warming. However, as wildfires burn, forests are cleared, permafrost melts or wetlands are dried out, the land also releases greenhouse gasses back into the atmosphere.


Emissions that warm the globe can rise if humans mismanage the land by carelessly razing forests or farming in unsustainable ways. On the other hand, adopting more intelligent agricultural methods and maintaining forests in ways that lower the risk of wildfire, for example, can make achieving climate targets more feasible.


Every year, thriving forests, reclaimed wetlands, and unaltered prairies may remove billions of tons of carbon from the sky. The land is now the largest and most dependable carbon sequestration technology available to mankind, making it valuable to preserve.


Jad Daley, head of the nonprofit conservation organization American Forests, pointed out that major funding for reforestation programs was included in the infrastructure spending package from the previous year, and that this year, President Biden signed an executive order to improve forest management. Nevertheless, certain conservation initiatives in the past have been supported just partially or not at all.


According to him, the Inflation Reduction Act would help strengthen current initiatives, such as a $700 million program to permanently protect forested land through conservation easements and local government purchases, $450 million to assist private landowners in better managing their forests, and $100 million to fund grants for novel and environmentally friendly uses for wood.


Then there are the countless sums earmarked for lowering the risk of wildfires on public lands and financing for towns to expand urban forestry initiatives that absorb carbon and aid in creating shade to fend off fatal "heat islands."


Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), chairwoman of the Senate Agriculture Committee, said in a statement following the passage of the legislation in that body, "We are empowering farmers, forestry professionals, and rural communities with the critical tools to be part of the solution."


A major issue with the legislation, according to Silvia Secchi, an economist and geographer at the University of Iowa, is that it doesn't offer anything novel. Instead, she claimed, it supports already-existing, wholly voluntary programs that pay farmers for actions, many of which they already take and that provide no assurance that any improvements would result in long-term greenhouse gas reductions.


She added that the additional funding, however, might have a "transformative" effect if it aids more farmers and ranchers in using methods that are beneficial to wildlife, the soil, and water quality, in addition to combating climate change.


The full amount of funding that proponents of environmentally friendly solutions would like is not provided by the Inflation Reduction Act. Additionally, it won't be enough to put the US entirely on pace to meet the emission-reduction targets that Biden has set for the country or to conserve all the landscapes that require protection.


But for many climate activists, it's preferable to the prolonged impasse on Capitol Hill.




Work Cited


“Inflation Reduction Act: Agricultural Conservation and Credit, Renewable Energy,

and Forestry.” Congressional Research Service, https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IN/IN11978.


“These cities have the most stifling heat islands in the United States.” The Washington Post, https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2021/07/15/heat-island-rankings-climate-central/?itid=lk_inline_manual_28.










26 views2 comments

Recent Posts

See All
Post: Blog2_Post
bottom of page