Reposted from CENTRIST, your hub for New Zealand news
Shortly
- Newsroom suggests a political agenda on methane emissions targets is undermining New Zealand's net zero targets.
- Climate scientist Kevin Trenberth challenges the methane emissions narrative, arguing that New Zealand's stable livestock populations have effectively reached net zero since 2010.
- Climate scientist David Frame suspects that drastic reductions in meat and dairy consumption would have a negligible effect on global warming.
Is Newsroom's response to methane emissions targets justified?
The Newsroom website has inadvertently significantly weakened the credibility of attempts to blame farmers for New Zealand's greenhouse gas emissions, with one of the world's top climate scientists dismissing a Newsroom methane story as “absurd”.
According to Newsroom's Marc Daalder, the government's decision to conduct an independent review of methane emissions targets from agriculture, regardless of the Climate Commission's recommendations, suggests a political maneuver to undermine New Zealand's net zero targets.
Daalder argues that the government's approach risks prioritizing short-term policy goals over long-term climate action. By potentially watering down methane targets without significant new scientific evidence, Daalder fears New Zealand's commitments to combat climate change could be jeopardized.
Enter Kevin Trenberth
However, climate scientist Kevin Trenberth questions the scientific basis for strict methane reduction targets and challenges the widespread belief that these emissions contribute significantly to global warming. Commenting on the Newsroom article, he says the moral panic surrounding New Zealand's emissions, particularly around methane, is scientifically unfounded.
No. These guys aren't destroying the earth.
In his response to Daalder's analysis, Trenberth claims New Zealand's agricultural methane emissions have already reached a state where the impact on climate change is net zero.
Trenberth's argument is based on the idea that methane emissions from livestock are part of a natural cycle. He explains that the methane emitted by livestock and land use is essentially a re-release of carbon dioxide that has been temporarily stored in short-term grasses.
This cyclical process does not result in a net impact on New Zealand's carbon dioxide targets, according to Trenberth.
“The problem is that methane is so short-lived that New Zealand is actually already at net zero (in terms of) methane. The livestock population has been so stable since 2010 that the amounts emitted are completely offset by the amounts oxidized to carbon dioxide.
“Because the methane was created as carbon dioxide in the atmosphere before being absorbed into grass and then eaten by livestock, the process is circular. The main problem with methane is fossil methane from mining operations,” he says.
Trenberth describes the Newsroom analysis as “absurd” and that New Zealand's stable livestock populations since 2010 have led to an equilibrium where methane emitted is balanced by the amount oxidized to carbon dioxide. Trenberth rightly points out that there are fewer farm animals today than back then, further supporting the argument that New Zealand's methane emissions are already at net zero.
Will drastically reducing meat and dairy consumption have an impact on global warming?
Trenberth isn't the only one who thinks the effects of methane have been overstated. According to climate scientist David Frame, the effect would be negligible if there were a drastic reduction in meat and dairy consumption, as envisaged by the government's net zero policy.
Like this:
Is loading…
