Agricultural Credit Generation

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Water Quality Trading Claire Schary Water Quality Trading Coordinator U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 10 – Seattle Region 10 – Seattle
Advertisements

RTI International RTI International is a trade name of Research Triangle Institute. Economic Study of Nutrient Credit Trading for the Chesapeake.
Pollutant Trading Discussion 22 July Why Allow Trading? §To make point sources pay §To lure nonpoint sources into doing pollution control so we.
Water Quality Trading Claire Schary Water Quality Trading Coordinator U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10, Seattle, WA Region 10, Seattle,
Developing Modeling Tools in Support of Nutrient Reduction Policies Randy Mentz Adam Freihoefer, Trip Hook, & Theresa Nelson Water Quality Modeling Technical.
Minnesota Watershed Nitrogen Reduction Planning Tool William Lazarus Department of Applied Economics University of Minnesota David Mulla Department of.
Current Planning for 2017 Mid-Point Assessment Gary Shenk COG 10/4/2012 presentation credit to Katherine Antos and the WQGIT ad hoc planning team.
WRI’s NutrientNet and USDA’s Nutrient Trading Tool Presentation to NACD May 11, 2011 Sara Walker, World Resources Institute.
Nonpoint Source Pollution Reductions – Estimating a Tradable Commodity Allen R. Dedrick Associate Deputy Administrator Natural Resources & Sustainable.
Buyer Seller Nutrient Credits Compensation ($) Maryland’s Water Quality Trading Program Phase II – Agricultural Nutrient Trading in Maryland John Rhoderick.
Agricultural Water Pollution: Some Policy Considerations Catherine Kling Center for Agricultural and Rural Development, Iowa State University Iowa Environmental.
Ann Swanson Executive Director Chesapeake Bay Commission May 2012 Market Solutions and Restoring the Chesapeake The Economics of Nutrient Trading.
Forest harvesting practices are a suite of BMPs that minimize the environmental impacts of road building, log removal, site preparation and forest management.
NRCS and Edge of Field Water Quality Monitoring Edward Henry and Rebecca Donegan NRCS-NY.
Assessment of Different Quantification Approaches and Application of Multiple Practices for a Single Farm Unit Dennis Haak, Agriculture & Agri-Food Canada.
Water Quality Reduction Trading Program Draft Rule Language Policy Forum January 29,
Taking the Next Step: Implementing the TMDL. What IDEM Provides to Help With Implementation  Compiling all the data in one place  Data-driven recommendations.
Virginia Assessment Scenario Tool VAST Developed by: Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin.
Review of Scenario Builder BMP crediting Christopher F. Brosch University of Maryland Extension Chesapeake Bay Program Office
BMP CHALLENGE Experience: Cannon River Watershed Partnership Information provided by: Dave Legvold Executive Director Cannon River Watershed Partnership.
How Breakthroughs in Information Systems Can Impact Local Decisions Bruce Babcock Center for Agricultural and Rural Development Iowa State University.
Suzanne Trevena EPA Water Protection Division Chair Milestone Workgroup December 4,
Status Report on Chesapeake Bay Clean Up Plan Wastewater Sector June 2, 2010.
EPA Chesapeake Bay Trading and Offsets Workplan June 1, 2012.
Deliberative, Pre-decisional – Do Not Quote, Cite or Distribute 1 Chesapeake Bay Water Quality Trading.
Robert M. Summers, Ph.D. September 16, 2015 How can we make sure the Chesapeake Bay Restoration really works?
Critical Issues in Implementing Trading Programs in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed STAC Workshop May 14, 2013 Annapolis, MD.
2004 Tributary Strategies: Assessment of Implementation Options Steve Bieber Water Resources Program Presented at: COG Chesapeake Bay Policy Committee.
Clifton Bell, P.E., P.G. Chesapeake Bay Modeling Perspectives for the Regulated Community.
Introduction to Water Quality Trading National Forum On Water Quality Trading July 22-23, 2003 Chicago, Illinois.
Maryland’s Nutrient Trading Program How Trading Works John Rhoderick Maryland Department of Agriculture.
Maryland Water Quality Trading Committee Role of Aggregator George Kelly Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC February 22, 2015.
Prepared by the Falls and Jordan Lake Watershed Oversight Committees John Huisman - DWQ & Julie Henshaw - DSWC.
Using RMMS to Track the Implementation of Watershed-based Plans
New York’s Chesapeake Bay WIP
Transaction Costs for Nonpoint Source Water Quality Trading Credits: Implications for the Chesapeake Bay Kurt Stephenson & Gwen DeBoe Department of Agricultural.
Transaction costs of nonpoint source water quality credits:
Department of Environmental Quality
Mark Dubin Agricultural Technical Coordinator
Test Drive Results and Revisions of the New Stream Restoration Crediting Protocols Bill Stack & Lisa Fraley-McNeal December 2, 2013.
WIP Regional Meetings Jason Keppler
Chesapeake Bay Program Partnership’s Citizens Advisory Committee
Department of Environmental Quality
Building a Phase III WIP for Wastewater, Stormwater & Septic Systems
Chesapeake Bay Program
Watershed Implementation Plan
Water Quality Programs – OAWP’s Role
GIS Data Management for SHA’s Bay Restoration Program
Water Quality Credit Trading
Annual Agriculture Progress Reports Tar-Pamlico / Neuse / Falls Lake
Annual Agriculture Progress Reports Neuse & Tar-Pamlico River Basins
Developing a Water Quality Trading Framework
Klamath Tracking and Accounting Program
Nutrient Trading for NPDES Permittees
Water Quality Trading Advisory Committee MDA Headquarters
Maryland Water Quality Trading Committee
Agricultural Credit Generation
Annual Agriculture Progress Reports Neuse & Tar-Pamlico River Basins
Agriculture WIP Phase III Development Update
“Phase 6 Septic vs Local/State Data”
Chesapeake Bay TMDL Milestones, Progress, Mid-point Assessment
Water Quality Trading Advisory Committee MDA Headquarters
Jim Edward Acting Director Chesapeake Bay Program Office May 23,2018 EPA’s Draft Final Phase III WIP Expectations.
James Davis-Martin Chesapeake Bay Program Manager
Best Management Practices (BMPs)
Nutrient Trading for NPDES Permittees
Maryland Water Quality Trading Committee
Components of a Nutrient Management Plan
Maryland’s Draft Phase III WIP for the Chesapeake Bay
2018 BMP Verification Assessment
Presentation transcript:

Agricultural Credit Generation Susan Payne Maryland Department of Agriculture January 21, 2016

AGRICULTURAL NONPOINT SOURCE TRADING Fundamental Principles To be eligible to trade, a generator of agricultural nonpoint source credits must meet a numeric baseline level of nutrient and sediment reduction which is the more stringent of either the applicable Chesapeake Bay or local TMDL as calculated on the entire farm in aggregate. Credit generators must be in compliance with all applicable local, state, and federal laws, regulations, and programs. BMPs funded by federal or state cost share or county mitigation banking programs cannot be used to generate credits during the lifespan specified in the cost-share contract.

AGRICULTURAL NONPOINT SOURCE TRADING Fundamental Principles Continued Credits cannot be generated by taking whole or substantial portions of farms out of production for the sole purpose of generating credits. To ensure that a net decrease in loads is achieved, 10% of the credits sold in a trade will be retired and applied toward TMDL goals. An agricultural practice can generate credits only when it is installed and verified or placed in operation.

HOW TO GENERATE CREDITS Tradable credits can be generated from any planned agronomic, land conversion, or structural practice. Some practices (such as setbacks, fencing, manure incorporation) are excluded because they are required by nutrient management regulations.

PROGRAM STRUCTURE Voluntary Market-driven Performance-based Uses an online suite of tools (based on NutrientNet): Calculator Registry Marketplace Administrative module Interactive mapping feature Site-specific, farm-scale calculation tool (Chesapeake Bay Nutrient Trading/Tracking Tool or CBNTT) State-specific tools for MD (MNTT), VA, and PA

NUTRIENT TRADING TOOL DEVELOPMENT Original tool based on World Resources Institute (WRI) NutrientNet platform as modified to reflect the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Model land use loads, calculations, and BMP efficiencies Maryland tool revised to incorporate USDA/NRCS Nutrient Tracking Tool (NTT) WRI used the Maryland version to create a new multi-state platform, the Chesapeake Bay Nutrient Trading/ Tool or CBNTT, that incorporates state-specific tools for MD (MNTT), VA, and PA

Chesapeake Bay Nutrient Trading Tool Load Calculations Chesapeake Bay Watershed Model Management Info NTT Spatial Info NTT Output (Edge of Farm) Nutrient Tracking Tool Trading Eligibility Adj. Factor CBNTT Operations Current Load (EOS) TMDL Baseline (EOS) Structural BMPs Chesapeake Bay Watershed Model

NUTRIENT TRACKING TOOL(NTT) NTT was created by USDA from APEX to provide user- friendly access to environmental outcomes, such as changes in nutrients, sediment, and yields at the field scale NTT calculates the change in N, P, sediment, and yield based upon an initial condition and the adoption of agronomic conservation practices Agronomic options include application methods and type of fertilizer, planting method, harvesting method, cover crops, tillage, irrigation, drainage, etc. NTT applies parameters (weather, evapotranspiration, crop growth models, temperature, slope, soils) to inputs

CBNTT OPERATIONS CBNTT is an interface that links NTT to the Bay Model CBNTT applies BMPs to the NTT model utilizing discounted Bay Model efficiencies Determines eligibility and credit generation capacity Can process alternative credit generating activiities

CALIBRATION Edge of field nutrient estimates were cross-walked with Chesapeake Bay Model for validation To calibrate, WRI ran NTT on every soil in Maryland and created average values to compare; performed various scenario runs, composed values, and developed multipliers between NTT and Bay Model Calibration work was performed in conjunction with Chesapeake Bay Program (CBP) modelers; ongoing calibration workgroups at USDA and CBP WRI and CBP modelers continue to evaluate the performance of NTT and CBNTT

DIFFERENCES Fifty years of weather data Ten years of weather data NTT Bay Model Field/farm scale loads Basin-scale average Actual field nutrient inputs Extension recommendations Actual application (time and Fixed sequence of application placement) and timing Actual animals (type, number, 2012 Census county data and grazing time) Actual yields 2012 Census regional data Actual field soil types/slope No soil types/slope Actual residual “P” No soil “P” residuals Actual size and annual Average BMPs numbers of BMPs Fifty years of weather data Ten years of weather data

BASELINE AND CREDIT CALCULATION EXAMPLE Total N/ac 5lbs N/ac +133lbs N/ac 138lbs N/ac 24lbs N/ac 20lbs N/ac -11.5lbs N/ac 8.5lbs N/ac 2.5lbs N/ac 0.5lbs N/ac 8lbs N/ac

WWW.MDNUTRIENTTRADING.COM

Chester River (Middle) BAY TMDL vs. LOCAL TMDL Eastern Shore Bay TMDL Nitrogen Chester River (Middle) Local TMDL Raw 29.96 lbs/acre TMDL 11.70 lbs/acre 6.91 lbs/acre % Reduction 61% 77% Phosphorus 2.01 lbs/acre 1.03 lbs/acre 0.49 lbs/acre 49% 73%

AGRICULTRAL PROJECT WORKSHEET N LOAD INFORMATION Baseline N load fields (EOS) 2,310.00 lbs/yr Delivery Ratio 1.0 Current N load fields (EOS) 1,210.00 lbs/yr Total Reductions 438.00 Future N load fields (EOS) 772.00 lbs/yr Credits 438 P LOAD INFORMATION Baseline P load fields (EOS) 180.00 lbs/yr Delivery Ratio 1.0 Current N load fields (EOS) 75.00 lbs/yr Total Reductions 29.50 Future P load fields (EOS 45.50 lbs/yr Credits 30 SEDIMENT LOAD INFORMATION Baseline TSS load fields (EOS) 32,600.00 lbs/yr (16.32 t/yr) Delivery Ratio 1.0 Current TSS load fields (EOS) 5,430.00 lbs/yr (2.72 t/yr) Total Reductions 2,830.00 (1.40) Future TSS load fields (EOS) 2,600.00 lbs/yr (1.31 t/yr) Credits: 1

Application of Trading Ratios Delivery Ratio Example Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Eligible Reductions 1,000 Delivery Ratio X 0.58 X 0.80 Credits Available to Sell 580 800 Retirement Ratio Example Credits Sold 500 Retirement Ratio (10%) 50 Total Credits Needed 550

CERTIFICATION Submission of Credit Registration and Certification form and accompanying documents to MDA for review Site visit REQUIRED to verify baseline conditions and appropriateness and effectiveness of credit generation proposal

VERIFICATION Practices subject to verification three additional times: 1. For credits certified pending implementation, after installation to assure standards and specs are met and is fully operational 2. Annual inspection of baseline and credit generating practices by independent, third party 3. Random spot checks by MDA on 10% of all traded credits Certified verifiers for initial visits and annual inspections Certified Nutrient Management Planner Qualified USDA /NRCS Conservation Planner, Level II Demonstrated competence in use of online assessment tool

REGISTRATION number and entered in the online Registry available Approved credits are given a unique registration number and entered in the online Registry available to public. Registry lists owner of credits, quantity, type of pollutant, year, state ,county, and basin location, and duration. When credits are posted to the Registry, all supporting documents and worksheets become subject to public inspection. These items will also be part of the documentation for permits as well. Owner of credits can post them to the marketplace, where buyers can also post credit needs.

MDA is a member of the National Network on Water Quality Trading Susan Payne Coordinator of Ecosystem Markets 410-841-5897 susan.payne@maryland.gov www.mdnutrienttrading.com MDA is a member of the National Network on Water Quality Trading Follow MDA on Twitter @MdAgDept Follow MDA on Facebook www.facebook.com/MdAgDept