Conservation Comment: Curbing methane has to happen

Scientific consensus says methane is the new "dirty coal". Photo / 123rf

By Brit Bunkley
More than 10 years ago a New Scientist article projected that by 2100 we'd see "alligators basking off the English coast; a vast Brazilian desert; the mythical lost cities of Saigon, New Orleans, Venice and Mumbai; and 90 per cent of humanity vanished".

New Zealand would expect to see millions of climate refugees at our doorstep with the population of New Zealand reaching well over 100,000,000.

Fortunately, we have a chance of avoiding that scenario, assuming that the world's pledges are actual and not aspirational.

The OECD website published an article in 2017, Environmental pressures rising in New Zealand, stating that "New Zealand has the second-highest level of emissions per GDP unit in the OECD and the fifth-highest emissions per capita". These OECD scientists suggested that "the use of environmentally related taxes, charges and prices should be expanded".

The New York Times recently wrote that the average greenhouse gas impact (in kilograms of CO2) of getting 50 grams of protein from cattle is on average 17.7kg per 50 grams of protein. The greenhouse gas impact is 5.4kg from cheese, 3.8kg from pork ... and 1kg from tofu. These are averages and New Zealand does better than most but the impact is still high. These numbers may actually underestimate the impact of deforestation associated with farming and ranching.

Yet, several times a week I read an opinion piece from the cattle farming industry railing against the conservative new levies proposed for selected cattle farming greenhouses.

The current cattle lobby mantra is that we "only pollute .0.17" of the world's emissions. In reality, we have a far smaller populace at .063 of the world's population. Would they say the same if we were the second worse at reading, or had the second worse rate of murder … that our small population allows us to contribute a tiny amount of the world's murders and illiteracy?

They say that developing nations unhindered by current regulations will "take up the slack" with higher polluting herds. The Brooking Institute writes, that starting from a very low base the "least developed countries need a just sustainable transition". Wealthy governments and other donors need to invest more to reduce agriculture's carbon emissions.

In my opinion, the cattle lobbies plant fear that we will "go broke" in spite of New Zealand surviving and thriving after a number of far worse shocks including the unduly harsh wiping out of farming subsidies by Act founder Roger Douglas.

Going broke? The New York Times recently wrote that the effects of climate change can be expected to "shave 11 per cent to 14 per cent off global economic output by 2050".

And the cattle industry has been telling us that scientists have been saying that the current method of measuring methane is overblown. These scientists are in fact a small minority. Many are linked to beef and dairy lobbies. In reality, most scientists now suggest that methane is "much worse than CO2".

Drew Shindell of Duke University in North Carolina suggests that "curbing methane is the most important thing we can do for the near term".

Indeed, the new scientific consensus seems to point to the emission from the cattle industry as being the "new dirty coal" due to its unexpectedly high greenhouse emissions. It appears to also have the same level of denial as coal mine owners of West Virginia.

Unlike other business sectors, the cattle industry has had little greenhouse accountability in NZ. To save our future economy and lives we need to act soon.