The New Zealand
Climate Science Coalition
16 September 2011FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
NZ farming remains at threat from ETS
“New Zealanders know that their prosperity relies heavily on the farm sector” says Hon Barry Brill, chairman of the New
Zealand Climate Science Coalition. “And yet the biggest threat to the future of farming is an attack by our own
Government.
“The Government’s ETS Review Panel has recommended that all individual farmers have their biological emissions taxed as
from 2015.
“No other country, anywhere in the world, has even considered imposing a climate tax on food production. The challenge
of feeding 9 billion people by 2040 is almost universally seen as a much higher priority than a purely symbolic
reduction in some animal emissions.”
“On the contrary, our major trading partners – including USA and Australia – have introduced schemes to reward farmers
for taking CO2 from the atmosphere.”
“Why is New Zealand the odd man out? This masochistic approach approach had its genesis in the 2004 ambition of then
Prime Minister Helen Clark to lead the world’s first carbon-neutral country. ‘World leadership’ became the catch cry.
“In most countries, fossil fuels make up the bulk of emissions. Because New Zealand has extremely low usage of coal and
gas, animal emissions were targeted instead. By the curious logic of climate policy our animals are to be punished
because we are world leaders in renewable energy,” said Mr Brill
“Comparably strained logic drives the decision of the Review Panel. The following specific contradictory findings speak
for themselves:
• By international standards, NZ meat and dairy products have a relatively low emissions intensity per unit of product.
• Over the last 20 years there have been reductions (yes, reductions) of around 1.3% pa in emissions per unit of
product.
• Applying the ETS to agricultural emissions could lead to carbon leakage as production in other countries becomes more
attractive.
• The impact on the average dairy farmer is estimated at $11,200pa, and sheep and beef farmer at $6,700 (excluding
indirect effects).
• Farmer levies have already funded $18 million of research into emission abatement options (taxpayers have spent
another $67 million).
• Commercial methods of mitigating methane emissions are a long way off.
• Bringing agriculture into the ETS will encourage farmers to invest in the development of abatement technologies,” Mr
Brill concluded.
Ends