A Primary Industries Ministry public consultation meeting in Christchurch debated the policy linked to the Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS), a closed, government-managed carbon credit market that’s changing agricultural land use.
Attendees discussed the best way to incentivise farmers to reduce on-farm emissions and whether the pros of pricing emissions outweigh the cons, compared with the price at a processor level.
The Action on Agricultural Emissions roadshow meetings are fronted by MPI and Ministry for the Environment officials.
The meeting considered a chart, Projected Global Temperature Rise, showing the worst-case scenario for a failure to curb greenhouse gas emissions in time. A red ribbon on the graphic billowed to an irreparable 4-6C temperature rise by the end of the 21st century.
Mid Canterbury arable farmer Andrew Luddington, a keen planter of natives at Rakaia, said pricing emissions in the ETS could have unintended consequences if unit prices rise from $25/tonne now to about $100/tonne, as some commentators predict.
“Native bush is going to be destroyed, trampled by the big money men planting radiata pine.
“The last thing we want is a bloody great, green desert of radiata pine.”
MPI regional economic development and partnership manager George Strachan said government policy has to be well-considered.
“You don’t have to look far to see the impact of government policy creating unintended consequences.
“The worst thing we can do is rush and get it wrong because we’ll spend the next century undoing it and we don’t have that time.”
The Government proposes two interim options to bring certainty and encourage further action to reduce emissions in the meantime, he said.
One is pricing livestock and fertiliser emissions at processor level through the ETS.
The Government will cover 95% of farmers’ ETS liability and use the money from charges to help farmers cut emissions in readiness for an emissions price at farm level.
A second option is a joint industry-Government agreement and plan to cut on-farm emissions and introduce an emissions price at farm level.
North Canterbury livestock farmer Daniel Maxwell said farmers are world-class when it comes to emissions efficiency.
Strachan said the Government is prepared to cover most of the emissions for agriculture for that very reason.
New Zealand’s livestock emissions have risen 13% since 1990 but the increase would be 40% if not for efficiency gains, he said.
“There is an awful lot to be said for just good farming.”
The Agricultural Greenhouse Gas Research Centre is also leading international efforts to curb farm emissions with methane inhibitors a couple of years away from market.
But a lot more work is needed for the sector to meet emissions targets, Strachan said.
“It’s a good thing that the farm-level scale (policy) is six years away because there’s a heck of a lot to do if we’re going to deliver this well.”
Retired plant scientist Dick Lucas, a renowned clover guru, called for a renewed focus on nitrogen-fixing legumes.
“If we’re going to be serious about this it’s by not using urea, which has an enormous energy cost to make the stuff.”
Former North Canterbury Federated Farmers president Chris Sundstrum, a longtime mohair grower, wants war on waste plastic, which is ending up at sea and inhibiting a natural carbon sink.
Banks Peninsula farmer Pam Richardson said emissions policy should recognise biodiversity planting as an offset.
The Interim Climate Change Committee recently released its report on reducing agricultural emissions. The Government aims to pass law based on the report’s recommendations and public feedback by the end of the year.
