DEAR SIR: There is a discussion currently going on in New Zealand which has the potential to completely change how people view agricultural emissions. The Irish industry should watch with interest as the opportunities for your industry are also significant.

Due to long-held misconceptions about methane emissions, the general public is not yet aware that stable stock numbers do not cause warming. This is evidenced by regular media articles promoting the idea that milk and meat consumption must be cut back to save the planet. This is fundamentally incorrect.

Methane decays on average every 12 years so if the inflow is kept stable over time, it will not change atmospheric CH4 concentration, which indecently is how the UN defines climate change. The existing method of accounting is called the GWP100 – this metric reflects the expected warming from a pulse of methane looking forward over the next 100 years but critically, it does not factor in the methane decay rate so has no correlation to actual warming.

Here in New Zealand we are midway through a submission process for our Zero Carbon Bill which will help define what direction we take. Our government has accepted the need to look at methane differently and may be the first government in the world to formally recognise that if stock numbers are stabilised over time, their methane emissions will be warming-neutral. Yes, N2O emissions are still a factor (maybe 20% of total) but advances in methane mitigation technologies may soon offset this too. The concept of selling “warming-neutral” products may not be far off.

This thinking is simply aligning methane with CO2 emissions which are also calculated on an inflow versus outflow basis.

Scientific approach

By taking a more scientific approach to agricultural emissions, New Zealand has opened the door for other countries to follow suit. The EU may not yet have policies in place to manage agricultural emissions but I would expect it’s coming.

Perhaps the greatest opportunity for Irish farmers is to front-foot this issue and control the narrative. Your industry could simply develop its own voluntary emissions scheme to better inform consumers of the true warming impact of your products and set targets and strategies for becoming warming-neutral.

I believe all agricultural industries can work together to meet the rapidly developing challenge from synthetic proteins. These synthetic protein companies are likely to be a major competitor within 10 years and already use climate change as a reason not to buy natural products.

We can all benefit from helping change popular misconceptions about agricultural products.

The opportunity has been created – it’s now up to your farmers and farming leaders if you decide to take it.