By Rowena Hume, GM of insights and communications at Beef + Lamb New Zealand
The government’s recent announcement of an independent review of the methane targets was a relief for many farmers.
Most farmers acknowledge they have a role to play in addressing climate change.
But for many years farmers and organisations like Beef + Lamb New Zealand have been drawing attention to the fact that NZ’s current methane targets are too high and that the targets are asking agriculture to do more to address climate change than what is being asked of carbon dioxide emitters.
The government’s recent announcement that the review will consider the current methane targets’ consistency with “no additional warming” finally recognises the valid arguments about fairness farmers have been making.
Because every unit of carbon dioxide lasts for thousands of years, this means every unit of carbon emitted adds to warming.
It’s only when carbon dioxide gets to “net zero” that it is adding “no additional warming”. NZ’s current target is to get to “no additional warming” from carbon dioxide by 2050.
Because methane is a short-lived gas, the science shows only modest reductions in methane are needed annually for it not to be adding additional warming.
The IPCC stated in a major report in 2021 that methane only needs to reduce by about 0.3% annually for it to not be adding any more warming.
The report recognised that if methane is reducing by more than 0.3% per year, it is actually reversing previous warming: “negative” net zero or having a cooling effect.
But the report also acknowledged that if methane was increasing it was significantly increasing warming as it is a powerful but short-lived gas.
NZ’s current methane targets of a 10% reduction by 2030 and a 24-47% percent reduction by 2050 require far greater reductions in methane than 0.3% each year.
It is therefore entirely appropriate that the government review the methane targets.
But there are also a wider fairness issues at stake.
Some climate scientists have said because methane in NZ has made such a significant contribution to warming to date, it needs to do more than just stop adding additional warming to the atmosphere – it needs to reverse some of its previous warming.
They argue that aiming for “no additional warming” from methane is “grandfathering” – in other words, that it maintains that prior emissions increase future emission entitlements. Yes, methane is responsible for about 60% of NZ’s total contribution to warming of the atmosphere to date.
But in nearly every other developed country, carbon dioxide is the dominant gas and has contributed 70-90% of warming to date in those countries.
Most developed countries have set a target of getting to “net zero” for carbon dioxide by 2050, or “no additional warming” by 2050.
In all of those countries, therefore, the dominant gas will continue adding significant amounts of new warming out to 2050 when it finally gets to “net zero”.
If people are concerned about taking account of previous warming contributions, why are they not raising concerns about “net zero” targets for carbon dioxide?
If the grandfathering argument were applied to carbon dioxide, we should also be asking carbon dioxide emitters to pay for this year’s emissions, and their previous emissions, which are continuing to warm the atmosphere.
Research by internationally respected United Kingdom climate scientists Myles Allen and Michelle Cain found that if other countries meet their existing emissions reduction commitments, then a 15% reduction in methane would see NZ methane contribute no additional warming from 2020 levels.
This is more ambitious from a climate perspective than what is being asked of carbon dioxide in NZ (net zero by 2050).
We would also note that achieving NZ’s net zero target for carbon dioxide relies heavily on significant amounts of new plantings of pines, which is mostly happening on productive sheep and beef farms.
Farmers are willing to play their part to address climate change. What they are looking for is a fair approach.
We do not want agriculture to be a political football on climate change.
If we can get fair and equitable targets and the right policies in place, we can move on, focus on achieving these goals and playing our part alongside every New Zealander in tackling climate change.
