Almost a dozen North Dakota agricultural groups signed a letter to the state's congressional delegation decrying a bill that's heading to the U.S. House.

Producers sent the letter against the American Clean Energy and Security Act as discussion began in the U.S. House Committee on Energy and Commerce May 18.

The committee passed the bill Thursday after nearly a week of debate and revision.

It seeks to reduce the country's greenhouse gas emissions through a number of efforts, including a cap and trade program.

Producers would be taxed for exceeding the limit of carbon emissions. They also would be able trade in carbon-capture credits against taxation, or could sell these offset credits to carbon emitters in other industries.

Carbon capture credits could be gained through committing to practices that put carbon back in the soil.

The letter's writers are worried regulation could choke North Dakota's biggest industry by raising costs and making its crops less competetive in the international market.

"We're already seeing a decline in agricultural prices," said Byron Richard, president of the North Dakota Grain Growers Association, which signed the letter. "And now looking at putting input costs up … you're going to run into some red ink there, Ipresume."

Agricultural Commissioner Doug Goehring said the North Dakota Department of Agriculture may request an economic impact study to determine how energy taxes passed on to producers might affect the industry.

"The problem is in our industry, you cannot pass on any extra expenses," he said. "We're at the mercy of the market."

Goehring also is skeptical of making money from carbon offsets in a government program.

"That money's got to come from somewhere in the system," he said.

The state's largest farm group, the North Dakota Farmers Union, did not sign the letter. Its officials see potential in the bill, which was introduced by Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., and Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass.

"I would not say the Waxman-Markey bill and some things in it are going to be perfect, but it could provide an opportunity for farmers and ranchers to be a part of this (emission reduction) if it is structured right," said Dale Enerson, National Farmers Union Carbon Credit Program director from Jamestown.

Some producers are voluntarily signing legal contracts to offset carbon emissions by reducing tilling, intensely grazing cattle on rotated plots and planting grass and trees on farmland.

Through the Farmers Union, they sell the credits to businesses hoping to offset their own emissions in the Chicago Climate Exchange. The Farmers Union program began in 2006.

Revenue made selling offsets could help make up for the potentially higher energy and fuel costs the letter's writers fear, Enerson said, and taking up the new practices could reduce their need for fuel as well. For example, tilling less would knock down fuel demand.

One thing the Farmers Union and the letter-signers agree on is reluctance to be regulated by the Environmental Protection Agency. Both camps said they would prefer oversight from the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

"We never want to get into an adversarial relationship with any agency," said Dan Wogsland, North Dakota Grain Growers Association executive director. "We just want to make sure the decision makers in those agencies understand how North Dakota agriculture operates."

The Farmers Union hopes if the bill becomes law, the final draft will include a grandfather clause for producers already tied into five-year contracts with the Chicago Climate Exchange. It also wants "stackable" offset credits that could both claim government incentives and be sold.

The bill will proceed to the full House for more debate.

Rep. Earl Pomeroy, D-N.D., said he wouldn't vote for any draft that won't protect North Dakota's interests, but also said inaction on climate change is not an acceptable long-term strategy.

"It's an overwhelming scientific consensus," he said. "More importantly, there is a political consesus that something is going on with the climate that ought to be responded to. Now, how you respond to it is about as difficult as any legislation I've seen."

(Reach reporter Rachel Albin at 250-8253 or rachel.albin@;bismarcktribune.com.)