Test So Nutrien is going to pay you for Carbon Credits. Test

Commodity Marketing

Tools

So Nutrien is going to pay you for Carbon Credits.

Test
SASKFARMER's Avatar Dec 2, 2020 | 08:51 1 Looks like the companies are ready to fleece farmers again with BS programs to screw us for their good.

Yep its not like the USA and Cargill with 60 Canadian to farmers in Iowa.

Nope, it's $20 to you and guess what with the fertilizer you will buy and the math shows you'll make an extra $30 an acre so MR Stupid farmer your actually getting $50.00 an acre.

In Make believe dollars.

Why in Canada cant farmers just get paid a fair price.

Nope read the fine print you **** up they go after you and take the farm.

What a ****ing country.
Last edited by SASKFARMER; Dec 2, 2020 at 08:55.
Reply With Quote
Dec 2, 2020 | 08:57 2 Soooooooo, did cash rent just go up another $20-30/acre? Reply With Quote
  • 1 Like


  • Dec 2, 2020 | 09:03 3 Nutrien is so far out of the market here not sure how doors stay open ? Reply With Quote

  • Dec 2, 2020 | 09:04 4 The issue of who pays the carbon credits and keeps track of farming practices is simple IMHO...

    If you are in crop insurance they will have your seeding intensity in percentage over your acres....and they have your data...thats step ONe

    Step two is the fact that it is the federal government imposing the tax and its rate...

    Step 3 is determining the sequestering rate...scientists and everyone believe science have determined those figures

    The formula is STEP1 X STEP 2 X STEP 3 = payment to farmers

    So between crop insurance knowing your seeding intensity X the rate of the carbon tax X the tonnes per acre sequestered EQUALS the payment to farmers.

    Then the government can collect the large emitters carbon tax and funnel it back to farmers using the above formula....

    I pay the carbon tax on fuel so my emissions are covered but my sequestering is not accounted for....


    Now let bureaucrats add the complications to it... Reply With Quote
    Dec 2, 2020 | 09:06 5 Having private companies do their own carbon credit program is bullshit because they can find a way for farmers to pay for it thinking they are getting something back....


    Government imposed this nonsense they should administer it as well...meaning the should tax the emitters and rebate the sequestering...

    All the pieces to do it and the required data is held within government agencies already.... Reply With Quote
  • 1 Like


  • SASKFARMER's Avatar Dec 2, 2020 | 09:09 6 Wouldnt it be nice if they actually paid farmers for doing what we have done for 37 years or more. I am sick of the BS where it's always everyone else and we get the scraps. Reply With Quote
    Dec 2, 2020 | 09:15 7
    Quote Originally Posted by caseih View Post
    Nutrien is so far out of the market here not sure how doors stay open ?
    They stay open because a good percentage of older farmers still equate Nutrien to the Pool, just like they do with Viterra. Reply With Quote
    Dec 2, 2020 | 09:15 8 They could scrap Agristabilty and implement a carbon credit program that is fair because it is a per acre payment.....size doesnt matter....farming practices do...

    And far simpler to administer....

    Example...1000 acre farm with a 99 percent seeding intensity and a 50 dollar per tonne carbon tax rate and 0.5 tonnes per acre sequestered.....is about 24.75 dollars per acre...
    if my math is correct

    And as the carbon tax goes up so does the payment...

    Of course people will have to report when they are working the ground but I dont see that as an impediment to get this going....



    Its an equalizer as well because when the irrigators than grows beans or potatoes and have to work the land they become an emitter to pay to the dryland continuous crop farmer...

    Wide angle view... Reply With Quote
    Dec 2, 2020 | 09:17 9 After reading the news release it looks to me that it is nothing more than a gimmick to sell a larger suite of products and services to farmers, going to benefit Nutrien far more than the farmer imo! Reply With Quote

  • Dec 2, 2020 | 09:22 10
    Quote Originally Posted by Hamloc View Post
    After reading the news release it looks to me that it is nothing more than a gimmick to sell a larger suite of products and services to farmers, going to benefit Nutrien far more than the farmer imo!
    This carbon credit issue is something that should be handled by government....WHY you ask...because they hold the required data of the emitters and they know the data of the sequestering that they haven't paid for....

    They have to be the regulator , setting the rates which they do already ,, but do you expect private companies to pay up for emissions ???? IMHO it would be like the abandoned well issue...


    A company emits they pay....a farmer sequesters they are paid...you dont need multiple companies doing the same thing...nickle and diming farmers...like Nutrien is trying to pull over ... Reply With Quote
    SASKFARMER's Avatar Dec 2, 2020 | 09:43 11 Ham I agree with you after reading the release its a basket of make-believe and some cash to farmers. Its a joke.

    Also Yes one Group Crap insurance maybe pays it out. No games nail the emitters and pay the guys that store.

    Enough of the games. Reply With Quote
    Dec 2, 2020 | 09:48 12
    Quote Originally Posted by SASKFARMER View Post
    Ham I agree with you after reading the release its a basket of make-believe and some cash to farmers. Its a joke.

    Also Yes one Group Crap insurance maybe pays it out. No games nail the emitters and pay the guys that store.

    Enough of the games.
    Unless you are privately insured on your crops..small percentage of farms..in order to have accurate records on seeding intensity....every company that pops up will want your data from crop insurance....I am not comfortable with everyone accessing my crop insurance. ...it reports fertilizer use , yields etc....that shouldn't be free data.

    Just let crop insurance handle it...they have the data collection and historical records system in house already...
    Last edited by bucket; Dec 2, 2020 at 09:53.
    Reply With Quote
    Dec 2, 2020 | 09:55 13
    Quote Originally Posted by SASKFARMER View Post
    Wouldnt it be nice if they actually paid farmers for doing what we have done for 37 years or more. I am sick of the BS where it's always everyone else and we get the scraps.
    My concern with these silly programs is will there be fines or taxes for land improvements.....read the fine print. Signing any of these contracts similar to the Viterra program could be asking for trouble. Reply With Quote
    Dec 2, 2020 | 10:09 14
    Quote Originally Posted by Oliver88 View Post
    My concern with these silly programs is will there be fines or taxes for land improvements.....read the fine print. Signing any of these contracts similar to the Viterra program could be asking for trouble.
    But maybe some of the land improvements are not quite what they seem...draining land on to the neighbours might seem like a great improvement for the farmer doing it....but it really just compounds the problem...without having a 30000 foot level look at what could be a good plan...

    Off topic but government has the opportunity to do so much more as far as land improvements or conversely looking at the opportunity for just leaving it as is...

    Thats why the US has land conservation programs....you get paid to leave as is...

    Maybe Canada has the option to make a workable program based on other countries experience...

    sorry....back to the regularly schedule program....I am talking in bizarro world..parallel universe... Reply With Quote
  • 1 Like


  • Dec 2, 2020 | 12:57 15 They pay one dollar, we will pay another two, 😬 Reply With Quote
    SASKFARMER's Avatar Dec 2, 2020 | 12:59 16 Oh at the 20 its a win-win for them and the farmers get a BS 30 dollars extra from using fertilizer. You cant make shit up like this. Reply With Quote
    SASKFARMER's Avatar Dec 2, 2020 | 16:31 17 This whole idea should have been pushed big time by all the farm groups. Just listened at noon to the canola head that is retiring. Yea he should. Total yea yea yea and nothing said.

    But I for one don't trust business to pay us the fair amount. Little games will be played and farmers will be responsible for the screw-ups.

    A gov agency federal should take what's collected and send credits to those who do something for the environment.

    Not solar panels and wind turbines that mine the earth for raw materials more than the actual savings in power. Reply With Quote
    Dec 2, 2020 | 18:28 18
    Quote Originally Posted by bucket View Post
    But maybe some of the land improvements are not quite what they seem...draining land on to the neighbours might seem like a great improvement for the farmer doing it....but it really just compounds the problem...without having a 30000 foot level look at what could be a good plan...

    Off topic but government has the opportunity to do so much more as far as land improvements or conversely looking at the opportunity for just leaving it as is...

    Thats why the US has land conservation programs....you get paid to leave as is......
    I was referring more to clearing bush, breaking new productive land, etc. Reply With Quote
    Dec 2, 2020 | 18:59 19
    Quote Originally Posted by Oliver88 View Post
    I was referring more to clearing bush, breaking new productive land, etc.
    Yes good point. ...but if you were compensated with a conservation program....would you still do it?

    I think that is what the conservation programs are for in the USA. Reply With Quote
    Dec 2, 2020 | 20:42 20 People get upset when GrainCos ask them to sign sustainability agreements that ask you not to do certain things on your land.

    People get upset when Ducks Unlimited get their claws into land.

    ALUS rubs some people the wrong way.

    How much control do you want to give up in exchange for how many dollars per acre annually.

    "Land improvements" for easier farming can be an oxymoron in relation to wildlife, environment, biodiversity.

    I have absolutely no room to judge anyone who cleared bush or landscaped to move water, as I did both. And bought land that had it done already.

    In my experience, "land improvements", has polar opposite affects on making land farming friendly and the well being of wild life and biodiversity. I saw it myself. The Ghetto isn't that marginal that leaving things the way they were never paid dividends farming those claimed acres. If there is a balance...... there isn't one in the Slum of the Ghetto now.

    Sometimes I think annual cropping creates more biomass than short grass prairie did. Then when the accumulation of dead prairie grass fuel got heavy natural prairie fires sent it all up in smoke. I bet some prairie grain fields haven't been burnt black in decades. Reply With Quote
  • 1 Like


  • SASKFARMER's Avatar Dec 3, 2020 | 07:36 21 You just hit the nail on the head.

    Years ago before the white man and trains and people. Alberta to Manitoba would burn some years if the wind was right and lightning strike dry grass would burn for days killing everything in its way.

    They never talk about that. Never.

    Just now we're bad for seeding and having all that area for animals to enjoy. Moose eating oats in southern Sask.

    But what do I know. Just pointing out things. Reply With Quote
    Dec 3, 2020 | 07:56 22 You can see the change in mainstream attitudes about the environment and agriculture with Macdonalds promoting "sustainable" beef. Looks like a lot of window dressing, but its a significant change in perspective on agriculture and environmental issues in the marketplace and with consumer demand. Reply With Quote
    Dec 3, 2020 | 08:16 23
    Quote Originally Posted by chuckChuck View Post
    You can see the change in mainstream attitudes about the environment and agriculture with Macdonalds promoting "sustainable" beef. Looks like a lot of window dressing, but its a significant change in perspective on agriculture and environmental issues in the marketplace and with consumer demand.
    What is " sustainable beef " ...someone explain this to me as I am stupid...

    Cows get bred by bulls, have calf, calf grows on pasture....some are fed at home others weaned and sent to a feedlot using grains and silage, then sent to a packer and packaged for stores...

    Cycle repeats....what has to be done to make it sustainable.....IMHO ...a good bull. Reply With Quote