The UK Low Carbon Transition Plan requires that by 2020 emissions from farming are at least 11 per cent lower than the GWP100* levels currently predicted. The government's Greenhouse Gas Action Plan (GHGAP) was launched by minister for agriculture and food Jim Paice in March, setting out how the agricultural industry will reduce its GHG emissions by three million tonnes of CO2 equivalents between 2018 and 2022 without compromising domestic production.
It has pulled together bodies within the industry, like the Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board (AHDB), National Farmers' Union (NFU) and the Agricultural Industries Confederation (AIC) to work together to share best practice and work together towards reducing emissions.
By the industry taking the lead in pushing for improvement, particularly in the livestock sector where emissions from ruminants are often highlighted as being a significant contributor to emissions, it is hoped we can avoid additional regulation on farmers. That road would put an additional cost burden on both farmers and on government at a time when making cost efficiencies is a priority.
Provisional figures from the Department of Energy and Climate Change(DECC) for 2010 show emissions from the agriculture sector are estimated to have been 22 per cent lower than in 1990. Meanwhile, the third
progress report from the Committee on Climate Change(CCC) on progress towards meeting carbon budgets, published in June 2011, shows agriculture emissions fell by one per cent in 2009, which means they are on target for the three per cent reduction required by the end of the first budget period.What this demonstrates is that the work being undertaken in the sector is making an impact. More needs to be done though, and organisations like EBLEX, the beef and sheep division of AHDB, will continue to take a leading role.
EBLEX has so far produced two roadmap reports, which were key to forming the GHGAP. The beef and sheep meat production sector roadmaps –
Change in the
Airand
Testing the Water– signpost what practical measures producers and processors can take to cut their carbon footprint.
Change in the Air benchmarks the industry's environmental impact in terms of GHGs and energy use. It identifies the three main areas of breeding, feeding and management as offering opportunities to make the required reductions.
Testing the Water examines the relationship between the CO2 equivalent cost of production and profitability, as well as quantifying water usage in production, and the value of beef and sheep to the English landscape and biodiversity. It also showed unequivocally a link between profitability and environmental efficiency: the greener you are, the better the margins.
Currently, we are working on our third environmental report which we expect to publish in December, which will examine further areas where improvements can be made, update figures, and include work being undertaken with the main multiple retailers.
This work is essential because simply reducing animal numbers – as called for by some quarters through a reduction in meat consumption – rather than seeking production efficiencies will do nothing to improve environmental performance. In fact, cutting flock and herd sizes for this reason could be counter-productive. After all, 60 per cent of the countryside currently covered in grassland is effectively managed by grazing animals, with much of the land not of high enough quality to be used for producing other foodstuffs.
Consequently, our work will continue to drive greater industry efficiency and help us hit the tough targets that have been set to help our environment.
* GWP100 is a way of expressing the Global Warming Potential of a number of gases – notably CO2, methane and nitrous oxide – in one currency, namely CO2 equivalence over a fixed time period of 100 years
Nick Allen, EBLEX sector director
Throughout recess, ePolitix.com will be focusing on a different policy theme each week. This week we are featuring articles with a focus on the green agenda.