Dutch dairy farmers will from next spring have access to the first of possibly two new tools that could potentially reduce methane emissions from cows by around 30%.

Next breeding season they can access semen from low methane emitting bulls, the result of an eight-year programme run by Wageningen University & Research in the Netherlands.

For the past four years researchers have collaborated with Dutch dairy company FrieslandCampina and genetics company CRV to establish breeding values for methane.

This measure alone is estimated to reduce average emissions by 1%  each year, accumulating to more than 25% by 2050.

University scientists are also working on a project to utilise rumen fluid from cows that are naturally low enteric methane producers.

This rumen fluid is fed as a probiotic to newborn calves in a five-dose course.

It has been found to permanently adjust the recipient’s microbiome, providing a further 10% reduction in methane emissions.

Scientists are by nature conservative, but the team at Wageningen are encouraged their work could make a tangible reduction in livestock methane emissions.

“I am quite optimistic,” said senior researcher Léon Šebek.

“It is quite difficult, if not impossible, to reach methane reduction goals that have been pledged without any interventions other than feeding strategies.

“It shows the need for extra interventions.

“What we have shown here is that additional interventions through breeding values and steering microbiome will become available.

“If so, most Dutch dairy farms will have a suitable intervention meaning that we can achieve an average reduction of around 30% in methane by 2050.

“If we only used feed strategies and relied on the efficiency of the herd, we will only get a 15-20% reduction.”

Significantly, these one-off interventions provide permanent gains.

The project team, led by Professor Roel Veerkamp, focused on breeding values in Holsteins, which make up 92% of the 1.6 million-cow Dutch dairy population. 

They measured emissions from 9000 cows on 100 Dutch farms and linked their methane emissions to their DNA, which confirmed heritability of the trait of around 25%.

Correlations with other desired breeding values were found to be maintained.

From this reference population they were able to estimate the first genomic breeding values for methane emissions, which will be rolled out next year.

The project will be extended and international collaboration will enable the reference population to be enlarged to increase the reliability of the breeding values.

This is at least a year ahead of New Zealand, where LIC expects to have a methane-emitting breeding value in the market by 2026.

In parallel to the genetics research, work has been underway since 2017 looking at the whether the natural development of a cow’s rumen microbiome can be manipulated to reduce enteric methane production.

Šebek said initial work established that while feed and feed efficiency are influential factors in emissions, there was still a 20-24% variation between cows when feed was accounted for.

This indicated other factors were in play.

For two years they worked with dairy farmers studying gut microbiome fluid samples, which related back to feeding and management.

From that analysis they established the role of the microbiome.

Šebek said they also established there was no link between the microbiome of a cow and her calf – in other words the environmental factors were dominant over possible genetic transfer.

They introduced to calves microbiome from low enteric methane producing cows and found five doses sufficient to permanently alter the production of methane in the gut of recipient calves.

To prove their encouraging hypothesis, they analysed 60 calves – 20 given microbiome from low methane producing cows, 20 from high producing cows and 20 as a control.

The average methane emissions of the selected microbiome donor groups was 17.2 and 24 grams methane/kg/DM for low and high methane producing cows respectively.

Satisfied the process will provide tangible benefits, Šebek said work is now focused on how to source the targeted microbiome and how and in what format to deliver it.

There is also the issue of securing public support or a social licence given the nature of the product.

Adopting the technology also has to be cost effective and provide sufficient benefits or incentives for farmers.

Programme manager Elian Verscheijden said recent meetings with some of the Netherlands’ most progressive dairy farmers who have used mainly feed and management measurements, showed they were able to achieve methane reductions of 10-15% but could not improve beyond that.

She said this research sends a message to the Netherlands government and the public that the sector is taking the issue seriously and it is making progress. 

Both research initiatives are part of an integrated approach programme launched in 2018 to address methane emissions from livestock farming.

The program is funded by the Netherlands’ Ministry for Agriculture, Fisheries, Food Security and Nature with a budget of least NZ$16 million a year.

Besides research to enteric methane, the programme also includes finding solutions to reduce methane emissions from manure, a significant issue for Dutch farmers.

The first goal of the programme is to comply with the government’s 2030 goal to reduce methane by 30% compared to 2020.

Ultimately the government has a goal of close to carbon neutrality by 2050.

More: Wallace is visiting seven countries in six weeks to report on market sentiment, a trip made possible with grants from Fonterra, Silver Fern Farms, Alliance, Beef + Lamb NZ, NZ Meat Industry Association and Rabobank.  Read more about his findings here. 

In Focus Podcast | Selling lamb to a new generation of Brits

Reporter Neal Wallace checks in from London, where he’s spent time with the Alliance Group’s UK team. They’ve hired a chef to come up with new recipes for those consumers who don’t want the traditional lamb roast and learns that a football stadium is a key part of the strategy.

The Ministry for Primary Industries is seeking research proposals to help improve New Zealand’s reporting of greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture, forestry and other land uses.

The annual funding round for the Greenhouse Gas Inventory Research (GHGIR) fund is now open, with $2.9 million of funding available for new projects in the 2024/25 financial year.

“The GHGIR focuses on improving our knowledge of New Zealand’s greenhouse gas emissions, to ensure we have the best possible data to help manage New Zealand’s emissions and inform policy decisions,” said the MPI’s director of programmes and planning, policy and trade, Stephanie Preston.

“This year we’re looking for very specific research proposals in 10 priority areas, ranging from improving liveweight estimation of sheep and beef to exploring remote sensing methods of collecting data, such as using satellite data to measure feed type and quality.

“The outcomes will inform MPI’s reporting to the New Zealand Greenhouse Gas Inventory and the United Nations under the Paris Climate Agreement.”

Applications close on  October 30 2024, with successful proposals expected to be announced by the end of February 2025.

The New Zealand Agricultural Greenhouse Gas Research Centre and AgriZeroNZ are backing biotech venture Lucidome Bio with funding as it spearheads the next phase in research to create a methane vaccine.

AgriZeroNZ is providing $8.5 million and the NZAGRC $5m to Lucidome Bio. The company’s interim chief executive, David Aitken, said the funding will allow them to build the team, carry out field trials in animals and progress development of the vaccine for farmers.

Lucidome Bio builds on research led by AgResearch’s team of globally renowned immunologists and microbiologists.

It was established by AgriZeroNZ to bring together New Zealand’s vaccine technology, intellectual property, team and funding into a compelling, investible entity and help deliver a world-first solution to market.

Prior to this, the research had received support and funding from multiple organisations including the Pastoral Greenhouse Gas Research Consortium and the New Zealand government (Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment; Ministry for Primary Industries) through the NZAGRC.

AgriZeroNZ chief executive Wayne McNee said a vaccine that reduces methane from ruminant animals would be a transformational tool for the agricultural sector “as it’s a low cost, high-impact solution which has the potential to be adopted into all farming systems”.

“We’re really pleased to be backing Lucidome Bio, alongside the NZAGRC, in a shared effort to get a vaccine to farmers sooner,” said McNee.

A successful vaccine would trigger an animal’s immune system to generate antibodies in saliva that suppress the growth and function of methane-producing microbes (methanogens) in the rumen, significantly reducing the quantity of the potent greenhouse gas it burps out.

NZAGRC executive director Naomi Parker said the reliance on antibody production in saliva and the complex nature of the rumen make the work incredibly challenging, however the progress to date gives confidence it can achieve success.

“We’re proud to be long-standing supporters of this work and help Lucidome Bio achieve a world-first by turning the vaccine’s research legacy into a safe and effective tool for farmers.

“This is no easy task, but the research team has made significant progress over the years and achieved many groundbreaking advancements which provide critical foundations to support future success.”

AgResearch will continue to be a partner, providing scientists to Lucidome Bio as well as access to research facilities. The Pastoral Greenhouse Gas Research Consortium also remains a shareholder alongside AgriZeroNZ.

The funding follows the announcement in August from the Bezos Earth Fund to provide US$9.4m ($15m) for an international consortium to build scientific evidence for a methane vaccine. 

Led by researchers at the Pirbright Institute and the Royal Veterinary College, the AgResearch scientists (now seconded to Lucidome Bio) will provide expertise in rumen microbiology and immunology.

In Focus Podcast | Sheep outlook: the future of our flock

Sheep farmers are doing it tough right now, with farmgate returns dropping back after a few good years and input costs rising. Add to that the march of pine trees across the land, and there’s talk of an existential crisis. Bryan asked AgriHQ senior analyst Mel Croad to give him the lay of the land and asked her what the sector needed to do to find prosperity again.

New Zealand farmers have done the tough part.

Our pasture-based farming system is acknowledged as efficient, having the world’s lowest carbon footprint. Our animal welfare systems are considered world class and we no longer engage in deforestation.

These are some patriotic, baseless claims. This is what global politicians, food processors and retailers say.

But what they acknowledge and what they can quantify are two different factors.

As we say, farmers have done the tough part; they now need to show that data to those who need to know.

Having crossed the first hurdle, our customers want continuous improvement.

The quest for data to prove that sustainability is being acted on is coming from multiple directions: politicians, financiers and companies who have publicly announced carbon-zero targets, non-government organisations who want faster action in climate change, and consumers.

Rules and regulations require regular reporting on meeting sustainability targets but companies are also being judged by pressure groups and their consumers on progress or lack of it.

There are benefits to farmers from meeting these requirements.

That accumulation of information will give farmers greater insight into multiple aspects of their business, but there will also be another significant benefit.

Food companies and retailers today talk about having a partnership with farmers and their processors rather than basic commercial relationship.

They certainly want quality and functionality, but as they meet reporting requirements demanded by governments, boards and consumers they will need buy-in from throughout the supply chain.

They also need confidence and trust that the data being provided is accurate and in a form that is comparable and relevant.

The world is moving fast. We have a ticket to play in the major leagues and we cannot let this slip through our fingers, exposing us to lower-paying, uncertain, price-driven customers.

But we need a process that doesn’t require the filing of duplicated data.

OSPRI, dairy and meat companies, StatsNZ, regional councils and the Ministry for Primary Industries all require data, much of which overlaps.

It must be a priority for those parties to get together and find a way that farmers can collate that relevant data in a way that is useful for all parties.

As we report this week, global agricultural trade is slowing as countries become more nationalistic and protectionist.

There has also been a deluge of rules and regulations imposed by governments such as the European Union, often under the guise of environmental protection but which some say will be at the expense of food security.

One proposal that has earned the wrath of exporters such as NZ is the EU’s deforestation policy, a blanket requirement for producers of products such as beef to prove it did result in deforestation.

Record agricultural subsidies of nearly NZ$1.4 trillion were paid by 54 wealthy and emerging countries each year between 2020 and 2022, but the trend is to start linking payment with environment outcomes.

These two factors are likely to result in lower domestic food production in places like the EU, but the demand for food is not going to slow.

NZ is ideally placed to full that void, but it will require some changes in the way we supply. We will need to quantify just how efficient and sustainable we are at producing food. 

New Zealand company Ruminant BioTech, formed in 2021, is on track to launch its methane-reducing slow-release bolus in Australia next October. 

It successfully raised equity capital of $12.2 million last year in addition to government funding of $7.8m under the Climate Emergency Response Fund for investment in research and development. More recently, it has received $4m from AgriZeroNZ and an AU$3.5m ($3.8m) grant from the Australian government’s Methane Reduction in Livestock fund.

This last grant is particularly appropriate because the faster regulatory approval process in Australia permits the earlier introduction of the product there than in this country. Tom Breen, CEO of Ruminant BioTech, says there are many different regulatory frameworks around the world that require complying with, so the slower process in New Zealand must be respected. Under the present approval scenario here, he expects to release the bolus here in another three years, but says the earlier release in Australia will provide the opportunity to scale up and iron out any teething problems.

The company’s success in obtaining the capital needed to get started is based on the positive results from the thousands of small-scale trials performed before commercial production begins. Breen is quietly confident that the 12 months of further testing before the October 2025 launch in Australia will address any outstanding issues. 

To date Ruminant BioTech has produced thousands of boluses to prove the technology’s reliability, consistency and duration. It achieves at least 75% reduction in methane emissions on pasture over 100 days.

Now it is time to complete the commercial plant and work towards the product launch, which will address an initially narrow target of weaner beef cattle before moving on to older cattle, including dairy cows. 

This will be particularly important in New Zealand, given the fact there are nearly 5 million dairy cows compared with about 3.5 million beef cattle. Breen is unable to give any idea of the cost of the bolus, but believes it will be a low-cost, high-performance solution.

DairyNZ principal scientist Jane Kay welcomes the progress being made in developing methane mitigation technology and looks forward to seeing published data from Ruminant BioTech with details of the product’s impact on greenhouse gas emissions and herd performance over time. For technologies to work well in the NZ dairy system, they need to be effective in growing and lactating cows throughout the season, while maintaining or improving feed intake, animal health, and performance (for example, production and reproduction) in NZ farming conditions. 

She makes the point that “experience with research in this area indicates that cow physiology (growing heifers vs dry vs lactating cows), pasture seasonality and supplementary feed intake, product dose, and duration of the response all have an impact on the GHG mitigation potential”.

“These factors need to be considered and evaluated in conjunction with cost and adoptability of the product to determine their potential to mitigate emissions within the NZ dairy sector.”

Beef + Lamb NZ’s GM for excellence Dan Brier is really pleased to see Ruminant BioTech’s progress with an ingenious solution to a previously intractable problem – mitigating methane emissions in a pasture-based farming system. He is keen to see the product available to New Zealand farmers as soon as possible, but recognises the need to ensure a robust approval process is followed without compromising food safety. He is also eagerly anticipating when the product is available for use in sheep, although the company’s immediate focus is to ensure the bolus does a thorough job in cattle.

The active ingredient in the product is a synthetically produced, naturally occurring compound called tribromomethane, closely related to bromoform – which is the active ingredient in asparagopsis seaweed.

Research has found bromoform, although potentially carcinogenic, if administered in low doses is not bioavailable in meat, therefore there is minimal risk of residue transfer in livestock or humans. This would possibly be more of a factor in dairy cows and milk than beef cattle.

Ruminant BioTech is not the only company intending to introduce this technology using TBM. Perth-based Rumin8 already has provisional approval from New Zealand’s Animal Compounds and Veterinary Medicines to conduct commercial trials here. The main difference between the two companies’ technologies appears to be in the delivery method: in the case of Ruminant BioTech delivery is via a slow-release bolus that sits in the cow’s stomach (ideal for pasture-raised animals), while Rumin8’s solution is administered through solid feed and water formulations. 

Also, Sydney startup Number 8 Bio has just raised AU$7m to progress product development and build a new facility to produce a range of methane reducing feed additives based on the same ingredients. This company is not as far advanced as the others in its development, although trials are being conducted in collaboration with the Queensland Animal Science Precinct and the University of New England. It is confident of being able to cut methane emissions by 90% and improve rumen productivity.

Until very recently, methane emissions reduction in a pastoral farming environment was thought to be unachievable, Bovaer being the only obvious option and more suited to feedlots and indoor feeding. But there now appear to be several options potentially available for cattle in the relatively near future and at an affordable cost, all using a similar technology. 

If even one of them turns out to be applicable to sheep, the holy grail of solving farming’s methane emissions problem may no longer be just a pipedream but a reality.

In Focus Podcast | Methane busting in the Netherlands

Reporter Neal Wallace checks in from Amsterdam and tells Bryan about his visits to Wageningen University and to a Dutch dairy farm. He says the methane research going on there is promising and NZ farmers should be aware that emissions efficiencies are improving in the EU and other key food producing countries.

Denmark will start charging farmers for agricultural greenhouse gas emissions from 2030.

A quarter of Denmark’s emissions come from livestock, and the Copenhagen Post reports the government will from 2030 charge Danish landowners a levy based on emissions from livestock, fertiliser, forestry and the disturbance of carbon-rich agricultural soils.

The effective cost to farmers will initially be $30/tonne of CO2-equivalent (CO2e) emitted, rising to $70/tonne of CO2e from 2035.

To soften the initial impact, the Danish government is subsidising 60% of the true cost, with proceeds invested back into the sector to reduce emissions.

It is part of a suite of green packages being introduced by the Danish government that includes planting 250,000 hectares of new forests by 2045 and setting aside 140,000ha of lowlands to protect carbon-rich soils by 2030.

The government will also acquire strategic agricultural lands and distribute or sell them to private and public investments to enhance nature, for the installation of renewable energy or to boost technology and measures to cut emissions.

Amsterdam-based Callum Lott, Fonterra’s manager of trade strategy, sustainability and stakeholder affairs for Europe, Middle East, Africa, said there is much interest in Denmark’s move, but he does not expect a rush of counties replicating what the Danes are doing. 

He told Farmers Weekly that Fonterra initiatives such as Farm Environment Plans have been welcomed by the market and customers.

“What Fonterra has is a credible plan and pathway to how we achieve greenhouse gas emission reductions, and it has been well received, especially the data we have.”

Other initiatives, such as AgriZero, an entity in which Fonterra is a shareholder and which invests in methane and greenhouse gas emission reduction initiatives, are also well received.

Lott said the European Union has introduced several environmental and sustainability policies,  which has obligations on companies.

These include the Green Deal, regulations proving certain food production has not resulted in deforestation, the Corporate Sustainability Reporting directive and the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence directive.

The Green Deal will restrict the use of fertiliser and chemicals while a carbon border adjustment mechanism taxes imports of high-emitting products based on their carbon footprint so as not to adversely impact domestic industry.

Agricultural products such as meat and dairy are currently excluded.

Lott said the Corporate Sustainability Reporting directive requires companies to report how they are reducing the environmental impact from within their supply chain.

That will mean questions being asked of companies such as Fonterra.

Farmers are not having to confront sustainability issues on their own.

James McVitty, Fonterra’s Chicago-based manager of trade strategy, sustainability and stakeholder affairs for the Americas, said sustainability issues transcend every level of the food industry.

In response producers, processors and retailers are working together through several industry and sector groups and bodies to find solutions.

The Sustainable Agricultural Initiative (SAI) has for 20 years promoted growing a sustainable, healthy and resilient agricultural sector while creating strong and secure supply chains.

Its 190 members are a who’s who of global dairy processors and buyers, including Danone, Mars, Nestlé, McDonald’s, Starbucks, Hershey, Synlait, Arla, FrieslandCampina, Dairy Farmers of America, Land O’Lakes, Kerry, Glanbia, Leprino and Fonterra.

McVitty said taking an industry-wide approach to these issues ensures consistent messaging for customers, public and government.

“We are trying to present our sustainability metrics on a consistent basis to buyers who want to see continuous improvement across a broad range of sustainability topics and the Sustainable Dairy Partnership grouping promotes an aligned approach.”

The global industry-focus Sustainable Dairy Partnership provides a sector focus on sustainable management systems, progress and impacts on issues particular to dairy.

Bodies such as the Global Dairy Platform, which is chaired by Fonterra chief executive Miles Hurrell, gives dairy a presence at international sustainability forums such as the United Nations Climate Change Conference and this month’s New York Climate Week conference.

The direction is clear, said McVitty.

“There is increasing customer demand for products supported by emissions and sustainability data credentials in business-to-business relationships.

“Customers are increasingly looking to suppliers to help them meet emission-reduction targets and NZ’s pasture-based farming model is a competitive advantage, but the offshore competition is catching up.”

NZ dairy farmers are fortunate to have vast farm-level data to assist with compliance.

“Farm-level data is a huge advantage for NZ.”

The International Dairy Federation is another global platform promoting sustainable dairy practices, and McVitty pointed out that NZ will host its annual summit in 2026.

More: Wallace is visiting seven countries in six weeks to report on market sentiment, a trip made possible with grants from Fonterra, Silver Fern Farms, Alliance, Beef + Lamb NZ, NZ Meat Industry Association and Rabobank.  Read more about his findings here.

Economic reality has caused some food retailers and processors to recalculate their greenhouse gas emission reduction targets, but that does not mean the issue has gone away, according to a Rabobank strategist.

Cyrille Filott, a consumer food global sector strategist based in Amsterdam in the Netherlands, told Farmers Weekly that the pace of meeting emissions targets has slowed as the dual impacts of covid and the Ukraine-Russia war have businesses focusing on recovering lost margins.

Emissions reduction targets established in 2019 or 2020 are going to be difficult to achieve, he said.

“That doesn’t mean sustainability is off the agenda, but we are seeing a readjustment and things are moving slower.”

Those cost pressures mean solutions such as switching to recyclable packaging are not currently viable, Filott said.

On average, 97% of retailers’ emissions are generated by their suppliers, and the question many retailers are facing is how are they are going to meet their 2030 targets?

“For me 2026 is a very important year because retailers will have to decide if they can make it or not.”

Suppliers and producers will eventually have to reduce their emissions as a requirement of their supply agreements but it will be a mix of carrot and stick.

“Technology doesn’t come for free so who pays for that investment?

“Farming practices will have to change but there is no idea of what that will cost or who will pay for it.”

Already companies like Nestlé and FrieslandCampina are offering incentives to suppliers who meet sustainability targets.

“Initially it will be more incentive but that is likely to change over time.”

Pressure is also coming from financiers, who by regulation have to report progress on meeting sustainability targets including that achieved by their borrowers.

Financiers such as Rabobank also offer access to low-interest loans for sustainability projects.

Filott said the European Union is changing rules to allow businesses to collaborate and use economies of scale to find solutions to resolve major sustainability challenges.

“Individual companies may have a plan but the dairy sector or the retail sector can now come together with their plans, data, pricing or incentives.”

Filott said attributes in food such as taste, price and convenience still rate high among consumers.

“It has to taste good.”

He said this reflects consumer experience with plant-based alternatives which, despite reaching price parity with animal protein, failed to resonate with consumers for taste, texture and healthiness.

At its peak, Tesco stocked 300 alternative meat protein products. Now most of those have disappeared.

“Sustainability on its own will not make you sell a product.”

But the experiment is not over, with Lido, a large German supermarket chain, trialling mince that is 70% beef and 30% pea protein.

“They claim it tastes the same, it’s priced the same as beef mince and it is convenient.”

More: Wallace is visiting seven countries in six weeks to report on market sentiment, a trip made possible with grants from Fonterra, Silver Fern Farms, Alliance, Beef + Lamb NZ, NZ Meat Industry Association and Rabobank.  Read more about his findings here.

HortNZ is urging the government to incorporate the horticulture sector into its second Emissions Reduction Plan.

The current plan, outlining actions to reduce emissions between 2026 and 2030, makes no mention of horticulture, fruits or vegetables.

“It is concerning that the Emissions Reduction Plan (ERP2) overlooks horticulture entirely,” said acting HortNZ chief executive Michelle Sands.

“The sector is crucial for meeting emissions reduction targets, and supporting land-use change to horticulture is one of the many solutions New Zealand should be leveraging.”

Sands said horticulture is already a low-emissions land use that provides food for New Zealanders and the global market, contributing $7.48 billion in value across domestic and export markets. 

“This is achieved on less than 0.1% of New Zealand’s land area while accounting for only 1.1% of the country’s greenhouse gas emissions.

“To ensure a low-risk pathway to net-zero, the government should develop a diverse portfolio of emissions reduction policies, rather than relying heavily on a few uncertain technological advances.”

The Climate Change Commission has included 14,000 hectares of land use to horticulture in its demonstration path to meet the second emissions budget.

HortNZ wants ERP2 to include clear policy direction supporting this transition. This should involve recognising diversification into horticulture as a key policy and elevating “enabling the supply of fresh fruits and vegetables” to a matter of national importance under the Resource Management Act and its replacement legislation.

ERP2 should also include the policy aim to establish a national framework for commercial vegetable production to address the challenges posed by unworkable regional regulations.

With the Government Investment in Decarbonising Industry Fund officially disestablished under ERP2, HortNZ is also calling for the creation of a new fund to reinvest Emissions Trading Scheme proceeds into greenhouse decarbonisation.

“There is an urgent need for policy mechanisms that facilitate horticultural expansion as a strategy for low-emissions food production, and that provide resources for the sector to further decarbonise,” said Sands.

“HortNZ urges the government to commit to doubling the horticulture sector’s value by 2035 as part of its emissions reduction strategy, aligning with the goals of the Aotearoa Horticulture Action Plan, a strategy co-owned by government, industry, science and Māori.”

Miraka has launched New Zealand’s first green hydrogen dual-fuel milk collection tanker as part of its kaitiakitanga objectives.

It is expected to achieve a significant reduction in milk collection transport CO2 emissions.

Reducing greenhouse gas emissions from on-farm milk collection has been a key goal for the Māori-owned, Taupō-based dairy company.  

The Miraka dairy plant already has one of the world’s lowest manufacturing carbon emissions footprints, emitting 92%less CO2 than traditional coal-fired dairy factories.

Agriculture Minister Todd McClay attended the launch ceremony, turning the key on the 700hp Volvo green hydrogen-diesel dual-fuel milk collection tanker at the Miraka dairy plant at Mokai, northwest of Taupō.

Miraka chair Bruce Scott said the introduction of the green hydrogen dual-fuel milk collection tanker marks a significant milestone for Miraka.

“This new vehicle aligns with our founders’ kaitiakitanga vision and values and our commitment to environmental care, supporting Aotearoa New Zealand’s transition to a low-carbon future.”

Miraka CEO Karl Gradon said while hydrogen-powered vehicles are still an emerging technology, he believes green hydrogen represents the most environmentally appropriate energy source for heavy freight.

“Our green hydrogen dual-fuel tanker is designed to reduce milk collection CO2 emissions by approximately 35% per vehicle, benefitting te taiao, the environment and our community.

The green hydrogen dual-fuel tanker will cover 165,000km a year. It has the capacity to haul 58 metric tonnes and requires two hydrogen refills daily. 

A year ago today Miraka, along with its milk tanker supplier, Central Transport, and Halcyon Power entered into a partnership to establish a rural hydrogen hub, which Gradon hopes one day to expand nationwide.

“Launching our first green hydrogen dual-fuel milk collection tanker one year later is a tremendous achievement which we look forward to seeing rolled out across the fleet,” he said.

Tūaropaki Trust, a cornerstone shareholder in Miraka, provides geothermal energy and steam for the Miraka dairy plant through its Mokai Power Station.

 Under a joint venture partnership with Japan’s Obayashi Corporation, Tūaropaki established Halcyon Power, New Zealand’s first commercial-scale green hydrogen plant. 

Halcyon will supply the green hydrogen for the new tanker from its facility, which is adjacent to the Miraka dairy plant.

Tūaropaki general manager of culture and legacy Tahana Tippett-Tapsell said the hub embodies the trust’s vision of a sustainable circular economy and its guiding principle “to look after the land and the land will look after you”.

“The developments here at Mokai show that our investment in geothermal energy for process heat, clean power generation and green hydrogen production can be a low-emissions contributor to our economy.  Halcyon Power is a proud supporter of this drive.

We look forward to the trust’s investment contributing to the success of our owners and their descendants,” Tippett-Tapsell said.

Farmer groups cast doubt on the wisdom of relying on mitigation technologies to cut agricultural emissions in their submissions for the government’s Second Emissions Reduction Plan 2026-2030.

Submissions on the plan, which outlines New Zealand’s climate strategy from 2026 to 2030, closed on August 25.

Federated Farmers said in its submission there is significant uncertainty around when the new technologies will come to market.

As such, agricultural emissions should not be priced until emissions targets reflect a “no further warming level”, farmers have access to cost-effective mitigation technologies, and it is established that emissions reductions do not cause emissions leakage. 

DairyNZ, the Meat Industry Association (MIA) and Beef+Lamb NZ (BLNZ) in their submissions were more sceptical about mitigation technologies.

DairyNZ urged a cautious approach to making assumptions about technology availability, efficacy and uptake from 2026-2030.

“The projections for the second emissions reduction plan cannot be based on overly optimistic assumptions that have not been grounded in dairy farm systems analysis. 

“Such assumptions must also consider the likely availability of the technology, the extent of regulatory hurdles that must be overcome, the practicality of implementing the technology in any given farm system, and what incentive structures are in place to support farmers,” it said.

The MIA and BLNZ, which wrote a joint submission, were more blunt, questioning assumptions that by 2030 major advances in methane reducing technology will be commercialised and implemented at scale. 

“We consider this unlikely. As well as some of the technology being untested in New Zealand conditions, there is no discussion as to the costs of these technologies and the trade-offs that would have to be made in farming systems to adopt them. 

“The adoption costs of introducing technologies are not zero or minor – we would strongly encourage that specific, funded pathways be developed for technology adoption at scale.”

The submission pointed to the assumption made that the uptake of low-methane sheep genetics of 10% of the national flock by 2030 will result in a reduction of 0.3 MtCO2-e in the second budget period. 

“An uptake of even this magnitude requires significant funding and extension support. Expert external reports indicate that it would take up to 14 years to achieve ‘peak adoption’ covering 63% of the flock.”

The submission outlined the difficulties the sector has in accessing capital and said that the role of government cannot be underestimated. It could offer tax breaks or co-funding to adopt technology – to assist with initial capital costs that can be daunting. 

Ring-fencing funds for the specific purpose of mitigation would assist with funding a technology adoption pathway, much like the Climate Emissions Reduction Fund, they said.

“While we are not calling for subsidies for low-emissions production, we would like to see consideration of an incentives approach for uptake that would lessen the risk borne by farmers in emissions management.”

Federated Farmers said the plan also misaligns with the government’s goal of doubling export earnings by 2050. 

In order to double export revenue, it is likely that significant increases in agricultural production will be required. While this could be achieved by new government policies such as new technology and increasing water storage, each of these could also lead to increases in stock numbers and greenhouse gas emissions, it said.

However, none of this is considered in the base assumptions used in the draft plan.

Instead, it assumes agricultural emissions reduce 10% by 2030 because of projected downward trends in animal numbers, which Federated Farmers called “highly concerning”.

BLNZ and the MIA also said pricing agricultural emissions by 2030 was not an effective or efficient solution.

They said the sector has already reduced its methane emissions by more than 6.5% on 2017 levels as a result of the reduction in stock numbers driven by the conversion of sheep and beef farms into forestry in the past couple of years. 

“If there were a further conversion of 120,000 hectares of sheep and beef farms into forestry between now and 2030, the sector would reduce its methane emissions by more than 10% on 2017 levels by 2030.”