Feds’ Emissions Reductions Target Cannot Be Met Without Cutting Fertilizer Use, Impacting Crop Yields: Expert Panel

A farmer drives a wheat planting rig, with the Rocky Mountains as a backdrop, near Cremona, Alta., on May 6, 2022. (The Canadian Press/Jeff McIntosh)

Canadian farmers will have to drastically cut their fertilizer usage, thus impacting crop yields and threatening food security, in order to meet the government’s planned target of reducing fertilizer emissions by 30 percent below 2020 levels before the end of the decade, say agricultural experts.

Speaking at the Macdonald-Laurier Institute’s webinar ”More Food Or Less Fertilizer? Policy Pain in Canada’s Agriculture Sector,” Gunter Jochum, president of the Western Canadian Wheat Growers Association, said Canadian farmers have already nearly maximized their fertilizer efficiency.

“I don’t think we can reduce fertilizer emissions without reducing fertilizer actually at the moment, because we are already so efficient,” said Jochum.

The federal government’s voluntary 30 percent fertilizer emissions reduction target is part of its “Canadian Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act,” which outlines a national plan to reach “net-zero emissions” by 2050.

The government has maintained that its ambitious 30 percent target will not be mandated and that farmers will retain the right to choose whether or not they wish to reduce their fertilizer usage.

“The objective of the national target for fertilizers is to reduce emissions, not to establish a mandatory reduction in fertilizer use,” wrote the Department of Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) in a previous email to The Epoch Times.

But in his webinar address, Jochum noted that the government’s own National Inventory Report says that Canadian farmers are already 99.1 percent efficient in their fertilizer use and there’s not much room to reduce further without directly cutting its use.

“So we’re talking the last 0.9 percent,” he said. “And how do we get a 30 percent emission reduction out of that last 0.9 percent efficiency? That’s pretty darn difficult.”

The national emissions reduction plan says that Canada’s fertilizer emissions have increased by approximately 60 percent since 2005 and that they “are projected to keep increasing.”

Jochum said he is concerned that a 30 percent reduction in eight years, by 2030, is too ambitious.

“I’m very, very concerned about being able to achieve those [emissions] reductions,” said Jochum. “Because we are already so efficient, because of the type of crops we use, and because of the regional differences.”

Global Supply

Karen Proud, the CEO of Fertilizer Canada, says that the government set its emissions target too soon for farmers to meet it without reducing their fertilizer use.

“Can we reduce the emissions to the level that the government is seeking without affecting yields in today’s environment, with the technology we have today? I would say the answer is no,” Proud said.

Alana Koch, board chair of the Global Institute for Food Security, said that cutting fertilizer—which she called one of the most important tools for increasing crop yield—would immediately create food shortages.

“The global supply of fertilizer is already under immediate pressure,” said Koch, citing the impact of Russian sanctions on fertilizer and wheat supply globally.

“So we can’t [accept] anything that will look to, in fact, impede food production. We should be looking at incentivizing it.”

Jochum added that Canada’s agricultural climate plan looks very similar to the European Union’s (EU) “Farm-to-Fork Strategy,” which aims to radically reduce fertilizer emissions and livestock numbers across Europe.

“That is very troubling,” he said. “Because it’s not really science-based; it is special-interest-group-based ... and it leaves the scientists and farmers on the sidelines.”

‘Huge Economic Impact’

Sylvain Charlebois, one of the webinar’s panellists and a professor and researcher of food production at Dalhousie University, said that the government’s proposed emissions target would not only affect Canada’s food supply but also countries that rely on Canada’s food exports.

“We’re talking about food security for our nations, but we’re also talking about global food security,” Charlebois said, adding that the government’s emissions reduction policy, as currently framed, “will weaken our agricultural sector and not make it stronger.”

Koch also touched on this issue, saying that the emissions reduction plan will have an “unintended overall negative impact” on food production and crop yield.

“We'll see a huge economic impact,” she said, adding that “broad targets to reduce fertilizer emissions by 30 percent by 2030 will definitely result in a reduction in crop yield.”

Jochum added that he was skeptical the government will keep the emissions reduction target voluntary because of pledges it has reversed in the past.

“Now they say it’s a voluntary reduction of emissions,” he said. “It could be, [or] maybe they‘ll change their mind by this fall. Maybe they’ll change their mind next spring. It is very hard to gauge and it’s very hard to trust the current government.”

“Where is the government going with this? Why are they picking on [Canadian] food production, some of the most efficient, highest-quality food producers in the world?” Jochum asked, adding, “Who are we trying to impress here? And what does the government have to gain?”