Opinion editor's note: Star Tribune Opinion publishes a mix of national and local commentaries online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.
•••
The passage of the Inflation Reduction Act marked the most significant achievement ever by Congress to respond to the climate crisis. As the Star Tribune Editorial Board wrote on Aug. 13, it re-establishes the U.S. as a leader on mitigating climate change.
With this legislation, federal lawmakers have dedicated $369 billion toward addressing climate change over the next 10 years. In the Editorial Board's words, "the bill and additional efforts by other national, state and local government entities could cut greenhouse gases by 40% by the end of the decade." This is a major accomplishment of the IRA, but the editorial fails to note the role that Minnesota leaders can and must play in addressing climate change.
Minnesota is one of the fastest warming states in the nation. Climate change is already having an enormous impact on our waters, lands, wildlife and residents. Yet the state has failed to meet its past emissions reductions goals and is still not back on track. To avoid the worst impacts of climate change, we need to reduce emissions by at least 50% by 2030.
Congress may have reasserted its credibility on climate, but our state leaders cannot yet say the same. Minnesota should seize this opportunity to pass ambitious climate legislation and demonstrate what it means for a state to lead on climate mitigation.
Minnesota's natural and working lands — like forests, pastures and croplands — can sequester roughly 20% of our carbon emissions. The IRA recognizes the potential of natural climate solutions and dedicates $20 billion to climate-smart agriculture to help producers reduce greenhouse gas emissions on their farms.
State legislators approved $500,000 for a soil health assistance program in 2022, a welcome step that acknowledges the role farmers play in managing large swaths of Minnesota's land area, and therefore our climate. But with about half the land in the state in agricultural production, the Legislature's investment — even with the addition of new federal funding — won't be sufficient.