The last technical review of the ETS focussed strongly on the question of whether agriculture should be brought into the scheme. Photo / File
The last technical review of the ETS focussed strongly on the question of whether agriculture should be brought into the scheme. Photo / File
We can expect renewed scrutiny this year over whether agricultural emissions should remain outside the Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS).
The Government had been largely focussing on negotiations around the next international agreement rather than tinkering with this country's ETS.
This, however, changed briefly when the Prime Minister found himself underattack from opposition parties and media after the election for appearing to give agriculture a free pass on its emissions.
I would expect this to get worse with the Government looking to embark on two sets of work that are expected to be undertaken this year.
The first piece of work is a technical review of the ETS. Required under the Climate Change Response Act 2002, the technical review is intended as a regular check on whether the scheme is working as well as it should, and whether there is need for any adjustments.
Five years ago, the last technical review of the ETS focussed strongly on the question of whether agriculture should be brought into the scheme, and we successfully pushed hard against that suggestion.
The challenge this time around will be to not only ensure biological agricultural emissions remain outside the ETS, but that adjustments are made to the ETS to take a more holistic appreciation of the sequestration and other efforts undertaken on farms throughout the country, whether for climate change or farm productivity reasons.
The second piece of work will be far more involved and centres on the question of what emissions reduction target New Zealand should commit to achieve by 2030. The Government is looking to undertake this work to inform whatever target the country offers up as its commitment to the next international climate agreement.
With negotiations on the next international agreement, suggesting we could be looking at something quite different to the Kyoto Protocol, it appears the work on a 2030 target will be 'a free for all', with every sector and interest group pushing their own wishlists.
While Federated Farmers is an influential organisation, even we would struggle to get our message across in the churn of everyone else effectively screaming at the top of their lungs at the same time. Essentially, rattling out the same old lines will be less successful this time around.
The challenge the agriculture sector faces is one of showing what we are achieving on our farms. The improvements in farm productivity and farm management, the emissions sequestered in plantings outside the rigid definitions of the Kyoto Protocol, and the investment in science that improves our understanding of emissions from soil and livestock with the tools to reduce the waste and inefficiency those emissions represent to farm production.
We have started work on building that story along with other pastoral sector organisations, and we remain determined to achieve the best outcome for farming in what will be a challenging year.
