The bigger picture

One of the sticking points for the goals of the Climate Change Commission, in its recent draft report, resides around the reduction of methane emissions through to 2035. With respect to agriculture, achieving this through herdsize reduction is likely to meet resistance unless farmers can see the economic benefits. What is needed for farmers is a framework in which the aspiration for mitigating greenhouse gas emissions by 2035 is interwoven with environmental and economic goals for the industry.

This is not adequately addressed in the report or in the Zero Carbon Act and a number of important questions need to be addressed. For instance, in the dairy sector, what percentage of total revenue from exports is expected to accrue from high-value milk products by 2035? Are scientists who are developing mitigation strategies and technologies conveying the possible competitive advantage afforded by these tools to productivity and more marketable milk products?

Farmers might be much more willing to climb on board by reducing herd size if they can see a strategy that would boost their earnings per kilo of milk solids. The key research and development investment opportunity is around whether emission-mitigation tools can enhance export value while also providing an extra benefit in reducing methane emissions.

Doug Mountfort

(Nelson)

DIRTY BEACHES

With more than 50 Auckland beaches recently declared unfit for swimming as a result of human faecal contamination, maybe it’s time for politicians and the media to acknowledge that the environmental go-to catchcry “dirty dairying” is simply a convenient smoke screen to shift the focus away from