We have been indoctrinated with the lie that CO2 is bad for the environment and that we need to reduce our emissions down to zero if we want to save the planet from burning up.
This is the biggest lie of all and if by some chance we were ever able to get the emissions down to zero that would be the day that life on earth would stop.
Achieving zero emissions of CO2 would be the equivalent of finding a Unicorn.
Impossible; particularly in light of the fact that we need CO2 to allow plants to grow and without a supply of that gas we will see all plant life die and animal life including humans will very soon follow.
The Coalition Government committed to reducing New Zealand’s net greenhouse gas emissions to between 51% and 55% below its 2005 gross emissions by 2035.
The Climate Change Minister stated that meeting that 2035 target would mean New Zealand was doing “our fair share towards reducing the impact of climate change”.
The Coalition Government has also implied that man-made global warming cause’s adverse weather events and they remain committed to the economically destructive goal of net zero by 2050.
In fact our Prime Minister, Christopher Luxon recently stated in an interview with Mike Hoskings, that he firmly believed that we could and would meet that target.
The Government has invested $450 million into research on how to reduce the production of methane from agriculture in pursuit of this target.
New Zealand has a minor emissions footprint of just 0.017% of global emissions with the biggest source of CO2 emissions being road transport but even so, the government set a goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture as part of its overall effort to reduce New Zealand’s emissions.
New Zealand has the lowest carbon footprint of any food producer in the world. Our agricultural industries produce and export enough food to feed 40 million people around the world.
Our farming methods are unique in that we use more greenhouse gas than we emit and we urgently need a government to go into to bat for our food producers, in international forums.
Particularly in light of the fact that Article 2 (b) of the Paris Agreement that NZ signed said clearly; no government should take steps that “threaten food production”.
NZ’s goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture threatens our ability to continue producing the current levels of food production and looks more like symbolic compliance than a move with real-world impact.
CO2 is the gas of life, and we should celebrate CO2 rather than denigrate it, as is the fashion today."
It is a naturally occurring chemical compound that is present in the atmosphere which exists at a concentration of approximately 0.04 percent (400 parts per million) by volume.
Depending on the estimates anywhere from 3.6% to 5% is produced by humans.
That is actually 3.6% to 5% of that 0.04 per cent in the atmosphere.
If we take the top estimate of 5% that means that human emissions add up to 0.002% of the atmosphere.
Agriculture/food production produces carbon dioxide through what is known as a “biogenic carbon cycle” where plants absorb and sequester carbon.
In plain English it means that plants have the unique ability to remove carbon dioxide (CO₂) from the atmosphere and deposit that carbon into plant leaves, roots, and stems while oxygen is released back into the atmosphere.
The argument from the IPCC (International Panel on Climate Change) has always been that the methane produced by livestock digestion is more ‘dangerous’ than carbon dioxide by a factor of twenty-eight - even though methane is part of a natural biogenic cycle that can be traced back to the dinosaurs.
However, it now turns out those climate change ‘experts’ were wrong, and that the actual figure is only seven, not twenty-eight.
The IPCC admitted the mistake in their Sixth Assessment Report, explaining at page 1016 of Chapter 7, “…expressing methane emissions as CO2 equivalent of 28, overstates the effect on global surface temperature by a factor of 3-4”.
Thus, it is highly likely that the total emissions calculated for New Zealand globally are overstated on a global warming basis. The oft quoted figure of 50% of emissions coming from agriculture is only correct if the wrong figures are used (methane emissions calculated as CO2 equivalent of 28).
This mistake by the IPCC has never been acknowledged or corrected by New Zealand Government officials and in fact those false assumptions from the IPCC have continued to underpin the Net Zero policy agenda.
According to a paper published called Phase 3 Multivariate analysis of Greenhouse Gas emissions from sheep and beef farms – April 2020 it takes up to 7 tonnes of CO2 to grow a hectare of grass on the farm. https://www.nzagrc.org.nz/assets/Publications/Multivariate-analysis-of-GHG-from-sheep-and-beef-farms_April-2020.pdf
It’s called photosynthesis (if you can’t remember your college science.) Plants use CO2, sunlight, water and mineral salts.
The farm turns those 7 tonnes of CO2 per hectare into enough feed for 10 ewes. Those 10 ewes each emit about 20 – 22 grams of methane a day which means they produce in total 80 kgs of methane per year. It is accepted that methane is a more potent greenhouse gas than CO2 – generally regarded as 7 times stronger. If we multiply our ewe’s 80 kgs of methane by 7 we get 560 kgs of CO2 equivalent.
The farm is therefore, using approximately 12 times more CO2 than it emits.
Emissions from agriculture are usually measured as CO2 equivalents and reducing emissions is done by way of fixing carbon in the vegetation and soils of the farming operations (known as ‘Carbon Sequestration’).
National data on net carbon sequestration by trees within farms equates to 29% of the total on-farm GHG emissions.
To recognise and encourage carbon sequestration on farmland, an accurate and comprehensive estimate of net emissions and removals from vegetation and soils on farmland is required.
Across the whole of the agricultural sector including all types of pastoral farming there is no account taken of the ability for grass pasture to sequester carbon.
The carbon sequestration from pastoral farming is currently ignored and surely this must mean that the basis for analysis of the GHG emissions from farming is based on flawed science and therefore gives an incorrect measure of the actual emissions from farming.
The magnitude of these climate errors is huge – and the consequences are potentially so horrendously expensive and far reaching, that they will impact on the lives of all New Zealanders for many decades into the future.
The world needs agriculture in all its different forms to ensure the population can be fed so any discussion should be based on science and include all of the relevant information that gives a realistic starting point when discussing rules around agriculture.
Farming is being asked to lower its carbon footprint to comply with New Zealand’s Paris agreement requirements when in fact if the true picture is used which includes the total carbon sequestration from all forms of on farm vegetation (including grass pastures), then the farming industry will be seen to be nowhere near as bad as it has been portrayed in discussions up to now.
The scale of the requirements on farming in relation to GHG emissions will only have the effect of endangering our country’s economy, our farmer’s economic survival and security of our food supply.
Given that carbon sequestration from grass pasture is measured at 12 times above the current level of emissions from the same operation yet this is not currently being taken into account, the agricultural industry can rightly feel aggrieved by the proposed reductions in their levels of emissions.
If we also were to take into account the differences between short lived GHG’s (Methane) & long lived GHG’s (Carbon Dioxide) and recognise that farming mainly produces methane, we can see even more clearly how poorly the farming industry has been treated by government through their total ignorance of the offsetting from on farm vegetation sequestering carbon.
The major problem is that for most NZ citizens climate change is like a fog you see in the distance. They know it is there and they know that it may have an effect on them but until it actually does create that effect they are too busy worrying about how to pay their bills, put food on their table and keep the roof over their heads to give it any serious consideration.
All of the above requirements around climate change are only going to add to the costs of living for the average Kiwi.
Yet our government and its bureaucracy seem intent on “Chasing Unicorns” in the name of climate change.
.svg){kind=logo}
By Andy Loader, Poke the Bear