Limited solutions for farmers

This comes after a stocktake of the mitigation options undertaken by the New Zealand Agricultural Greenhouse Research Centre (NZAGRC) and the Pastoral Greenhouse Gas Research Consortium (PGgRc) - an organisation funded by the likes of Beef+Lamb NZ, DairyNZ, AgResearch, Fertiliser Research and Fonterra and supported by several government agencies.

PGgRc general manager Mark Aspin told the Massey University-run Farmed Landscape Research Centre (FLRC) workshop that as of June last year there weren't a lot of options that farmers could use right now to reduce their methane or nitrous oxide emissions. But he says there are opportunities in development.

Aspin's presentation was timely, given the fact that the pricing options for agricultural GHG is currently being consulted with farmers through the Primary Sector Climate Action Partnership (He Waka Eke Noa) participants B+LNZ and DairyNZ.

Aspin says, as part of the stocktake, they produced a "roadmap or paddock map" which identifies all the options that are being researched. He says the evaluation process of assessing these optins was very thorough and included drawing on the expertise of scientists, industry commercial players, government and farmers. The objective was to evaluate options from discovery to proof of concept and then through to commercialisation.

"New Zealand is at the forefront of ruminant-based research globally, developing options for methane and nitrous oxide, with the work being undertaken through PGgRc and NZARC and supported through the Global Research Alliance," he says.

"Our country has certainly stood up to the plate through the Government and farming industry commitments and partnerships with science since 2003.

"Despite that effort, there are few technologies deliverable to farmers that can make the progress required towards the 2030 and 2050 targets being contemplated by the nation."

Aspin says, at the moment, without cost effective mitigation solutions, the only way farmers can realistically reduce their emissions is to shrink their businesses.

He says the stock take singled our urease inhibitors - a coating on urea fertiliser that could help reduce nitrous oxide - as the only confirmed option in the national GHG inventory.

Meanwhile, for methane there is Dutch company Royal DSM's 3-NOP - or Bovaer as it is commercially known - advancing globally, but not yet available in NZ.

The Breeding Option

Mark Aspin says some excellent work has been done on breeding sheep that produce less methane and it's being introduced to the sector.

He's also hopeful that over time the same can be done with cattle.

He points out that the critical thing that drives emissions in sheep, cattle and deer is what they eat and that 85% of these emissions can be attributed to feed intake. With most of our ruminants being fed pastures, there has been a lot of effort to find grazing feeds that could lower emissions, but few options have been discovered.

"We have seen some annual crops, for example brassica rape where trials have confirmed promise, while there is some interesting research happening with plantain that is still in progress and is not yet proven," Aspin explains.

"Globally at the moment, the opportunities from feed additives are the leading mitigaton options being developed. For NZ this would involve feeding supplements, most likely to cows in the dairy industry."

But Aspin concedes that has its challenges because of our largely pasture-based systems. He says in the northern hemisphere and countries where animals are intensively fed and housed, it is much easier to incorporate feed additives in the total mixed ration that animals receive in a feedlot. In the case of NZ, the best option is in the cow shed - probably twice a day but perhaps not for the entire year.

Other options in development are additives that can fit into rumen boluses or capsules, but Aspin says such solutions are likely to be five to seven years away from being on the market.

The Regulatory Issue

Finding a solution to reduce emissions is in itself not enough.

Aspin says any mitigation technology needs to meet regulatory requirements for all our markets and this also looms as a must-have.

He says looking at the regulatory requiremens, including food safety aspects was a critical element of the stocktake process.

He adds that now and in the future any mitigation products will not get approved unless they support and comply with the strict food safety regulations that New Zealand exports demand.

In NZ, 48% of GHG emissions come from agricultue. A country with something of a similar problem is Ireland where the figure is 32%. Aspin says significant research into greenhouse gas emissions is being done in both countries and, while there is some collaboration, there's always room for more.

He believes there is a greater chance of finding a solution if there is more international collaboration.

The mitigation technology stocktake is timely and while it indicates few options are available currently, it gives policy makers and politicians some quality scientific evidence on which to base future policy. It will also give farmers, who are crying out for quality information, some answers.

"The takeaway message here is we have done a stocktake of the technologies that we know; some have been tried in NZ system and this knowledge has been leading into the development of an R&D plan for the industry, based on good science," Aspin says.

"Collectively industry, research and government are developing that R&D plan for the future with a great deal more ambition and defining an enhanced approach that can rapidly deliver solutions that farmers can readily adopt."