Turning liabilities to profits
New Zealand needs to control emissions of greenhouse gases from agriculture.
New Zealand is unique in the world when it comes to agriculture and climate change, our government and farmers tell us.
No we aren’t, the United Nation’s scientists prove to us.
Globally, agriculture, forestry and other land uses account for 24 per cent of human-induced greenhouse gases. Only electricity and heat production are bigger at 25 per cent, followed by industry at 21 per cent, transport at 17 per cent, other energy at 11 per cent and buildings at 6 per cent.
All the sectors have technology and economic pathways to reduce their emissions now, and to accelerate to big cuts over coming decades. Just this week came news renewables now account for more electricity generation capacity than coal globally.
In this transformation to a lowcarbon economy, business is crucial for investing in and commercialising science and technology. For example, Toyota and Volkswagen each spend more than US$20 billion a year on R&D.
The response by countries is also gaining momentum. For example, most have included agriculture in their pledges in Paris last year to cut emissions substantially by 2030.
In this encouraging landscape New Zealand stands out as a donothing contrarian. Our government has excluded agriculture from the Emissions Trading Scheme. This relieves farmers of the need to change while dumping the financial burden of their inaction on other sectors, taxpayers and consumers.
New Zealand stands out as a do-nothing contrarian.
The government said in its ETS report last year it won’t include agriculture until ‘‘there are economically viable and practical technologies available to reduce emissions’’ and ‘‘our trading partners make more progress on tackling their emissions in general.’’
But both those conditions are being met. In denying so, the government is being deeply deceitful. It is setting New Zealand up for grave economic and reputational damage.
Existing, economically viable opportunities to begin reducing agricultural emissions were clearly laid out in the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment’s report last week, available at nz2050.com/PceAgGas.
The Commissioner, Jan Wright, said agriculture needs to be in the ETS. ‘‘Yet prolonged delay will make an abrupt transition inevitable. Such an abrupt transition occurred in New Zealand in the late 1980s when most of the government support for agriculture was removed and many farming families suffered.’’
Motu, the Wellington policy researchers, come to the same conclusions. Read this summary at nz2050.com/MotuAgGas
One example of international work is this soil carbon initiative, nz2050.com/4soilCarbon
On the second condition, China and European countries, among others, are showing how ambitious policies and strategies reduce emissions.
It is only a matter of time before they begin to penalise imports from countries that fail to act.
Once we were leaders. In 2009, we proposed a global research alliance on agricultural greenhouse gases at the Copenhagen climate negotiations. We helped get it going; our government provides its secretariat; and our scientists co-lead with Dutch colleagues on ruminant animals, one of three work streams. The other two are rice paddies and croplands, showing how global the challenges are.
In 2014, we proposed to the UN the concept of countries making their own climate pledges. This broke the deadlock over global goals, paving the way for the Paris treaty.
We must become leaders again. Agriculture is far too important. We must fully deploy our capable scientists, our innovative farmers, our collaborative skills and our strong reputation.
Yet, our government provides a miserable pittance of $20m a year for research in the global alliance. Quite simply, our government is unethical, dishonest and lazy on agricultural emissions.
Thankfully, Landcorp is one working on many of the lower carbon pathways identified. It is diversifying its farms, and managing its stock, water, land and forests more wisely. It aims to be carbon neutral by 2025. The government should champion this SOE, not nobble it.
And, referring back to last week’s column about the NZ Super Fund’s climate change policies, the Fund can turn its farms and forests into exemplars.
We can turn agriculture from our worst climate change liability into our most profitable low carbon opportunity.