Thursday, 31 March 2022 09:55

A Bugger's Muddle

Written by  Jock Alliso
Jock Allison claims the proposed ag emissions pricing schemes will leg-rope agriculture and have no effect other than reducing NZ’s standard of living. Jock Allison claims the proposed ag emissions pricing schemes will leg-rope agriculture and have no effect other than reducing NZ’s standard of living.

OPINION: Jacqueline Rowarth opined in Rural News, January 19, "Confusion abounds about agricultural greenhouse gases (GHGs) and misinformation is rife".

Correct, but unfortunately the explanations given re the inclusion of agriculture in the Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS), the 'split-gas approach' and the confusion about the appropriate metric for methane, GWP 100 or GWP, do little to stem the flow of confusion.

The basis of the global warming mantra is not based on fact. Similarly, the alarm about methane and nitrous oxide is also not based on fact. To be fair, there has been a huge agricultural press about methane and the ETS. However, the industry is totally confused, not that this will be acknowledged by industry leaders in Federated Farmers, Beef + Lamb, Fonterra and many others.

Rowarth notes that, "Agriculture is already in the ETS but has been given a 100% free allocation until 2025. After that, it will be included at 95%, decreasing 1% per year until 2030 - and by 2050 will be entirely included".

I am not sure what this actually means. But it is pretty clear the Climate Change Minister James Shaw is not enthralled by the suggestions made by the working group on agricultural emissions (HWEN), which have been reported as delivering less than 1% reductions in GHG emissions. The very suggestion of such a "lukewarm" response apparently has the Greens rank and file up in arms.

However, I believe that agricultural GHGs should not be taxed/levied at all.

Much has been written about the split-gas approach, which allows the short-lived gas methane to be treated differently from long-lived gases, CO2 and nitrous oxide. The problem is that CO2 is a short-lived gas also, although this is not accepted by the IPCC.

Much has been written in the farming press and the scientific literature about methane's effectiveness as a GHG. Professor David Frame from Victoria University has consulted widely with industry about a new metrc GWP* to replace GWP (the Global Warmin Potential) for methane, stated by the IPCC to be about 28 times as effective as a GHG than CO2.

Our work published in 2017 in the NZ Institute of Primary Industry Management Journal based on the work of two American Professors is still correct - although no one seems interested? See; the contribution of methane and nitrous oxide to warming is negligible. Water vapour (as noted by the IPCC) is the main GHG, and CO2 has a minor effect only.

The GWP* metrict, widely promoted to industry, although through questionable science, if adopted would assess the effect of methane probably as a quarter or one fifth of the present estimates.

However, the metric is unsuitable anyway, for on-farm estimates of methane effects. My efforts to get a simple figure, say 20 or 25%, from the proponents Myles Allen and Professor Frame have been ignored. NZ officials and Minister James Shaw have no intention of promoting the new metrict to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change anyway, so all of this discussion is moot.

Meanwhile Article 2b of the Paris Agreement states it aims to strengthen the global response to the threat of climate change, "(b) Increasing the ability to adapt to the adverse impacts of climate change and foster climate resilience and low greenhouse gas emissions development, in a manner that does not threaten food production".

Our COP climate negotiators, our government and our industry leaders all seem totally deaf to this definition. Yes, our agriculture is producing food for the world, Government policies are reducing food production, whille the effect of methane on climate is negligible, and CO2 is a short-term gas.

Yes, it is time to do the math, but the assumptions for that math need to be credible. We seem to be in a complete 'Buggers Muddle' intent on leg-roping billions of dollars which will have no effect other than reducing out standard of living.

Dr Jock Allison, ONZM, FNZIPM, was previously director of the Invermay Research Centre.

More like this

Cow cull coming?

Farmers are happy to play their part in reducing greenhouse gas emissions but the Government has to come to the party.

Red seaweed 

Farmers in Australia are experimenting with adding seaweed to cattle feed in order to stop cows producing as much methane.


FMD scare puts NZ on watch

A recent outbreak of Foot and Mouth disease (FMD) in Indonesia has the NZ agriculture sector and its officials on…

Public round up on glyphosate

The country's environmental regulator agency has released the public feedback it has received on the glyphosate weed killer - commonly…

New bee Guy!

Former Agriculture Minister Nathan Guy will take over as the independent chair of Apiculture New Zealand (ApiNZ).

Machinery & Products

A new approach to apprenticeships

By taking a new approach to its apprenticeship programme, agricultural equipment supplier Norwood says it is ensuring farmers’ machinery will…

Buck-Rake does the job

With many self-propelled forage harvester manufacturers offering machines hitting 1000hp, the bottleneck in any harvesting system is always likely to…

» The RNG Weather Report

» Latest Print Issues Online

The Hound

Yeah, right!

OPINION: Your old mate reckons recent ‘research’ carried out by consultants PWC – claiming that ‘actively managed carbon forestry’ creates…

All Claas!

OPINION: Your canine crusader - like many in the sector probably would have - raised an eyebrow when he heard…

» Connect with Rural News

» eNewsletter

Subscribe to our weekly newsletter