Scientists accuse New Zealand and Ireland of trying to cover up livestock emissions

Stay in view of the free updates

Simply subscribe to Climate Myft Digest – it is delivered directly to your inbox.

Political climate scientists in New Zealand and Ireland have accused of using a “accounting trick” to support their sheep and livestock industries, warning against their support for methane that can undermine global efforts to fight Climate.

in Open message She participated with Financial Times, 26 climate scientists warned from all over the world that the new methane proposed in New Zealand are targeting risk under a dangerous precedent. Scientists have sparked separate concerns about Ireland’s approach.

Governments with large livestock sectors, including those in Ireland and New Zealand, use a new way to calculate the effect of methane on climate change, whose contribution to warming is estimated based on how to change emissions in relation to the basis.

This differs from the long -established approach, which compares the effect of the total warming of a certain block of methane with the same CO₂ mass over 100 years.

Supporters argue that the latest method, known as the potential star of global warming (GWP*), better reflects the short nature of methane in the atmosphere compared to the long -term effects of CO₂.

But scientists warn that some governments are controlled by justifying the “no additional heating” goals, which allow emissions to survive flat instead of decline – which may enable high levels of methane emissions and climate damage to continue.

“I am pouring 100 barrels of pollution in this river, as it kills life,” said Paul Burns, a global professor of environmental change at Oxford University and signing the thesis.

Drew Shendel, a professor of climate science at Duke University and other sites, said that the evaluation of future emissions is purely in terms of teams of current levels can reach the “accounting trick” when abusing it.

He said, “It allows you to get out of the hook, and” grandparents in “any emissions already occur.”

New Zealand and Ireland are among the highest levels of per capita agricultural methane, due to the meat and dairy industries that focus on export.

In New Zealand, agriculture represents nearly half of the total greenhouse gas emissions, especially from livestock. The agricultural sector in Ireland is the largest emitter, as the cows of methane produce much more than the cow.

The scholars ’speech argues that the approach preferred by Dublin Wellington can put a precedent, allowing other countries to justify the minimum. Global methane pledgeWhich was launched in 2021.

Paul Price, a researcher in climate change at Dublin City University, said that Ireland needs sharp discounts in the short term in the agricultural methane to get any opportunity to reduce warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, as required by the Paris Agreement. Instead, he said, the country is working to expand production – “opposite” exactly what is required.

While the herd sizes have decreased elsewhere in Europe, the number of dairy cows in Ireland has increased over the past fifteen years, according to the country’s agricultural research agency in the country.

New Zealand is expected to pressure the goals of the new methane later this year, following a review by the government, indicating that discounts from 14 to 24 percent by 2050 may be sufficient according to the goal of “not warming”.

This is less than 35-47 percent discounts recommended by the Climate Change Committee in the country.

Ireland and New Zealand governments did not respond to a comment request.

Miles Allen, professor of geological system science at the Department of Physics at the University of Oxford and one of the scientists behind GWP*, said that governments – not scientists – must decide whether farmers should back away from warming from the growth of the herd.

He has supported separate goals for methane and CO₂, describing the oldest approach “Drotheel Speed”, which is exaggerated in emissions and was slow in contrast to real changes.

But the scientists behind the message said that the weaker methane goal could serve as a tool for justifying the richer countries and the highest intuitive emission in leading the road to reducing emissions.

“If you are a rich farmer that coincides with a lot of cows, you can keep these cows forever.” This approach “punishes anyone who is not really a big player in agriculture”, including “the poor farmers in Africa who are trying to feed an increasing number of population.”