Agriculture faces financial risk on three fronts in the battle to reduce emissions and improve water quality, according to emeritus professor of environmental policy at UCD, Frank Convery.

Convery sat on the stakeholder committee that developed the Food Vision 2030 strategy and spoke recently at a UCD Earth Institute seminar on the policies needed for the dairy sector to meet climate and water quality.

The seminar heard that lost market revenue, higher farm operating costs and national emissions fines are the financial risks which lie in store if the sector’s sustainability goals are not met.

He maintains that carbon footprinting is becoming an increasingly important consideration for consumers overseas when they compare the products offered to them on shelves.

“The point really is that there is a new force now in our food markets – proactive emissions-focused policies that reduce emissions and improve footprint,” he said.

“The world is changing out there and my proposition is that we have to change to match whatever we are going to be encountering in marketplaces.”

Convery said that there will be premium prices to be reaped for those who supply low carbon food to the marketplace and Ireland’s progress must stay ahead of that made by international competitors if Irish agri-food exports are to stay top of the class.

He stated that the Irish dairy sector is already reaping the benefits of a green image among global consumers, with Convery referencing a 42% markup on Kerrygold butter over local competitors in mid-September.

“My proposition is that the rest of the world we are competing with is driven largely by very smart policy, reducing carbon footprint dramatically, and that number is going to be a really important number in the marketplace,” the academic said.

“It tells consumers this is the amount of CO2 divided by the butter.

“This is what it means in terms of climate impact. And we basically have to change what we are doing and how we are doing it to be globally competitive,” Convery said.

He did recognise that there is a challenge to putting a carbon footprint on dairy product placed on shelves when there are varying levels of environmental action undertaken on supplier farms, if those making a bigger contribution to cutting emissions do not see their work proportionally rewarded in the market.

The loss of the nitrates derogation and a push down to 170kg nitrogen/ha stocking rates is the cost risk associated with inadequately addressing water quality challenges, the academic continued.

He said that clear rewards must be outlined to incentivise farmers or co-ops making a positive contribution towards water quality trends, suggesting that this could take the form of allowing areas of ‘good’ water quality status a 250kg N/ha stocking rate and retaining the 220kg N/ha stocking rate for those consistently making significant progress towards ‘good’ status.

“If we get the carbon footprint competition wrong, there will be a price problem. If we lose the derogation, there will be a cost problem.

“The third one is interesting in that there is quite a bit of thinking on what will it cost us if we don’t comply with the EU Effort Sharing regulation.

“Most of our emissions in agriculture are in the Effort Sharing regulation basket and it turns out that the costs we will have to pay for missing them are high.”

The reason it is interesting is that it can measure actual methane emissions and concentrations

Convery stated that these fines for 2030’s emissions targets are projected to amount to €4.3bn if it is just existing policies and measures that are rolled out, with no tightening of regulations or new initiatives between now and then. He suggested that these figures be used to justify higher Government investment in farm sustainability measures.

Convery singled out the approach taken on emissions in California as a region taking a prudent approach to supporting agriculture to reducing greenhouse gas emissions while providing support to farmers in the process.

Schemes operated at state level there see dairy farmers receive payments for farm management strategies that reduce methane emissions, such as for sending slurry to anaerobic digesters.

However, many of the practices employed by Californian livestock farmers are “perfectly suited to indoor, containment-type farming” and are “not suited to our grass-fed farming”, attendees heard.

Convery also insists that the US is ahead of the emissions curve on research, pointing to a new satellite technology under development as one of the developments, which poses a significant opportunity to climate efforts by taking real-time measurements of methane emissions with “granular detail”.

Actual emissions

“The reason it is interesting is that it can measure actual methane emissions and concentrations. It’s not going to be based on algorithms and secondly, it will be able to aggregate both small sources and identify big sources by geography.

“That is a new environmental initiative that could completely transform the evidence and recordkeeping.”

Key seminar messages