October 22nd, 2020

Alberta farmers can be part of climate solution

By Letter to the Editor on December 7, 2019.

We have in Alberta a new government which says there is a consensus among 97 per cent of climate scientists that humans are the main cause of global warming, yet they seem to have only climate policy in their toolbox; the TIER program which puts a carbon tax on large emitters and uses the revenues to drive innovation and efficiency in those same companies.

Alberta farmers can also be part of the solution. Sure, engineers can capture CO2 in power plants and bury it miles underground, but it’s darned expensive. We can get more bang for our buck by paying farmers to sequester carbon in the soil; this includes means like grazing of native fescue grasses by Alberta cattle which supply the free-range beef I’ve been buying for 25 years; thank you very much!

In Germany there are more than 5,000 farm-based biogas plants burning methane, and they get paid a premium for sending clean power out onto their electricity grid. I only know of one such project in Alberta; why not hundreds more? Starland County has led the way in helping local farmers and ranchers to install solar panels; there should be a program making this happen across the province.

We shouldn’t wait for dictates and regulations from Ottawa to address the climate crisis. In our oil and gas industry as well as our farming communities, we already have many of the solutions at hand; we just need some supportive policies to unlock and deploy them. I’ve always been a city kid, but I’m happy to support good work in rural Alberta that brings food and resources to my home and table, and builds a sustainable future for our children.

Roger L. Gagne


Share this story:

Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Well stated, Mr. Gagne, and supported by the growing number of farmers and ranchers embracing regenerative agriculture.



A reasonable argument about a political movement. Nothing to do with climate or reality. A foot of snow to all the chicken littles wasting fuel flying themselves and hundreds of their near and dear to international greenie conventions at taxpayer cost. Rightly they ought to be arrested and forced to repay. Villified not eulogized! Did you read Obamster bought a $12.5mm Martha Vineyard property this week? On the beach. A foot above sea level. He is VERY concerned about AGM and its fearsome sealevel rise. Believe what they do not what they say.


Wow. People use airplanes and Obama bought property with beachfront.

Irrefutable proof of a sophisticated climate hoax involving all of the science academies in the world in their pursuit of world domination. Yes, reducing the combustion of fossil fuel will bring civilization to its knees and make the world ripe for space invasion -their fleet hiding just out of sight on the flip side of the flat earth.

Before this happens, though, sequestering carbon in the land is a win for healthy soil, and a win for Obama’s property (and the billions more living in vulnerable coastal areas)

Citi Zen

Climate change brought the extinction of the dinosaurs. Caused by carbon emitting automobiles and industry. Climate change has been happening since the beginning of time, and it’s not going to stop by imposing penalties on us. This is all so pointless.


I guess the dinosaurs were not as smart as they thought they were. Maybe we can do better.

I hear from J57 that the sun is bigger than the earth, so isn’t it all pointless?

George McCrea

Historically the claim of consensus has been the refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming threat the matter is already settled. Whenever you hear the consensus of scientists agrees on something or other, reach for your wallet, because your being had. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because the broke with the consensus.

Yah, obama is really concerned, just reportedly purchased an 11.75 million dollar property in Martha’s Vineyard with its own beach house and waterfront.

Time for Fed Up to chime in and berate another dead guy. This time Michael Crichton. Thought I would mix it up for him and give Klein the day off.


Could you offer us a word that you would accept to describe when all but a few scientists in a discipline accept the validity of a hypothesis, G.?


Drives me bonkers hearing all the time that 97% of scientists agree that the planet warming is do mostly to human activity.
How about that big ball of gas that greets us daily in the east and says good-bye in the west. Its close to a million miles in diameter compared to our paltry eight thousand. It goes through cycles of high and low sun-spot activity. How do these so-called scientists measure the effect of a star they know so little about.
This planet has been warming and cooling on a regular basis for eons I am sure, and humans have-and had to adapt! That’s what we do best.
They predicted a ice-age back in the seventies but now we are heating-up. They don’t know from one year to the next. To pretend they are the sole authority on the climate now just like Greta is a slap in the face to the rest of us.


By ‘the rest of us’ do you mean the remnants of people employing a mode of defence which consists in the subject’s refusing to recognize the reality of a traumatic perception ? One fewer in number since the tragic loss of Michael C.


No refusal here! But the climate religion hysteria persists.