Milk processors and emissions
OPINION: Reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions – especially scope 3 emissions that occur on the farm – has been on the agenda of leading dairy companies for many years.
To date, it has sucked in over $200 million of industry and government money into its vortex, but – as is the case with black holes – nothing has come out. Most of that funding will be lost forever and if the agricultural industry does not start providing more critical oversight of emissions research spending, many hundreds of millions more will disappear into oblivion.
The consensus now is that solutions to ruminant methane emissions will not be market-ready any time soon; certainly not in time to help offset the Government’s proposed tax on farm emissions due to roll out in 2025. This has only prompted the black hole to expand. The Minister for Agriculture has recently announced another $338.7 million over the next four years to disappear, and the National Party is right behind them with big plans to drive further R&D investment.
The researchers behind these technologies have made bold claims about their potential: Bovaer has been shown to reduce emissions by 30% in Europe and AgResearch has identified a 12% variance between low and high methane breeding lines.
Finding a technology with potential is a relatively low bar. However, turning that potential into a market-ready emissions mitigation tool, which works and does not adversely affect the farm system is a different ball game.
The Bovaer feed additive works well in a barn system because cows can ingest some with every bite. NZ’s pasture-based system does not provide that luxury. Large quantities of fresh grass will flush out any Bovaer you managed to feed your cow through finished feeding. Experts in this space believe it could take decades to solve this dilemma.
Fonterra is leading the research on Bovaer and was approached for comment on their progress. After initially agreeing to answer questions, they then backtracked and directed me to wait for an impending announcement on the MPI website. No announcement has been made at the time of writing, but reading between the lines, Fonterra has given up on Bovaer.
The low methane sheep breeding program is being carried out by AgResearch on behalf of the NZAGRC. After 15 years of research there is still no evidence that these sheep will perform in a farm system over time in the same way they do in a controlled 3-month trial. There is good reason to believe they won’t. Low methane sheep have smaller rumens, carry less body fat and tend to have different grazing habits, some research has indicated they are selective grazers. These traits do not endear a sheep to a tough winter where feed is in short supply and of low quality.
Without doing longterm trials to assess the performance of the low methane flock over their lifecycle, we are still essentially at the concept stage. No verifiable claims about the emissions reductions of these genetics can be made. Any drop in lambing percentage, growth rates or survivability has a direct and negative effect on emissions.
Farmers’ money continues to flow into this program unabated, but answers and trial data remain scarce. The NZAGRC’s Harry Clark declared himself unavailable for comment.
After Bovaer and sheep genetics, the outlook for the remaining mitigation technology contenders looks even more bleak. The vaccine does not work, the seaweed feed additive leaves toxic compounds in the milk and would require a large area of New Zealand’s coastline be turned into a seaweed farm to source enough product. No dairy farmer will ever be talked into spraying out half their farm to replace it with low emitting plantain. Most of these research programs should have been stopped before they even started.
Farmers and politicians are being hoodwinked by researchers who see a bonanza of research grants coming their way – so long as they can keep the dream of methane mitigations alive. The potential of these technologies is being magnified, while the impracticalities ignored. Why investigate the drawbacks if it could upset the flow of funding? An independent audit of all emissions mitigation research is urgently required before this river of wasteful spending turns into a raging torrent. There is a place for emissions mitigation research, but often the best solutions are the simple ones.
There are significant emissions reductions available for farmers who get sheep and beef to target weights earlier, this can be achieved through improved management and breeding and can dramatically improve the efficiency of the farm system in the process. The early slaughter concept has not received one cent of industry funding.
I have one message for farmers, don’t get sucked in.
Steven Cranston is a Waikatobased agricultural and environmental consultant and formerly Groundswell’s spokesman on farm emissions.
