Federated farmer's Vice president and climate change spokesman Anders Crofoot is of the opinion that greenhouse gas (methane gas and nitrous oxide) generation in New Zealand by farmers/food producers should not be taxed alongside enrgy greenouse gas emission and the reason is that the latter is more permanent in the atmosphere than the former.
As part of the Paris climate change meeting that represents an opportunity for the
world to agree the terms for the next global effort to reduce emissions, He has called for the recognition of farmers effort in climate change mitigation and food production.
Negotiations have continued for a number of years and, with the Kyoto
Protocol having effectively lapsed at the end of 2012, farmers are
hopeful of an agreement which better recognises the services we provide
civil society.
For better or worse, the Kyoto Protocol bundled biological emissions
from food production together with fossil fuel emissions from industry,
energy and transport. With agricultural emissions representing a
relatively minor proportion of national emissions among most countries,
the focus naturally remains on other sources.
(In this series, being run to coincide with the Paris climate change talks, we will publish opinion pieces from Greenpeace, Sanford, the Motor Industry Association, 350 Aotearoa, Mainfreight, Straterra, Federated Farmers and the Environmental Defence Society. Air New Zealand, Fonterra, Holcim and Genesis Energy were invited to contribute, but declined.)
This has to change if food production is to continue to meet the
nutritional needs of growing populations to come. There needs to be some
recognition that the "all sectors, all gases" approach puts too much
pressure to reduce biological emissions which can not be substituted,
and largely cycle; the focus should instead rest with fossil fuel
emissions which are persistent in the atmosphere. On this basis a case
can be made for different treatment of biological emissions to fossil
fuel emissions.
This is important because the rhetoric around reaching zero emissions
falls flat when zero emissions from agriculture leads to zero food
production. The same cannot be said for energy, where alternatives exist
in the form of renewables such as wind and solar.
This is not so much a call from farmers to be left alone and to be
allowed to continue to do nothing as it is one seeking recognition that
fossil fuel and biological emissions are intrinsically different and
that farmers are participating.
The reality is that New Zealand farmers have made huge gains in
emissions efficiency of their production since before the Kyoto Protocol
came into being. Since the removal of subsidies in the 1980s, New
Zealand has improved the emissions intensity of farm production by an
average 1.3 percent every year. This can only improve with the
considerable investment that farmers and the sector more broadly put
into science and research to reduce methane and nitrous oxide emissions.
Since the Pastoral Greenhouse Gas Research Consortium was established
in the early 2000s, that investment by farmers and sector bodies has
increased to better target potential methods for reducing methane from
livestock and nitrous oxide emissions from farmed soils.
The sector has done all this without the pressure of its livestock
and farmed soils being in the emissions trading scheme, because it makes
good business sense for our farms to be more productive and efficient
in the way they produce the food and fibre we export throughout the
world.
Very informative. Thanks
ReplyDelete