Professor Gerry Boyle:

I thank Deputy Leddin for a very comprehensive set of questions. I will hand most of them over to Dr. O'Mara in a moment.

Regarding the comments the Deputy made previously on the trajectory of the dairy herd and the beef herd, the introduction of the quota in the first instance and then its removal are responsible for a lot of those trends, in my opinion - historians will differ, I am sure. However, when the quota was brought in, dairy farmers expanded their suckling numbers. At the time there were a lot of coupled subsidies available. Teagasc's predecessor, An Chomhairle Oiliúna Talmhaíochta, ACOT, supported these at the time as farmers were scrambling to find viable alternatives. Then when we came up to the post-quota period there was a lot of pent-up demand for young farmers in particular to get into dairy production.

This was for the very simple reason that relative to other enterprises, it was quite profitable on reasonably small amounts of land and animal numbers. That is what is behind the expansion. We will get to the detailed figures in respect of the trends. Deputy Leddin referred to our roadmap publication a number of months ago. It is something we do every few years, and we make an honest attempt and give our best estimate in respect of where the sector is going and what are the critical driving technical factors. Nonetheless, if we were to combine the dairy and beef herds into the national herd up to 2027, as in the roadmap, and even beyond that to 2030, overall the trends would be consistent with what we call the stable herd. In other words, there would be rough balancing out between the two herds.

This underlying assumption was critical to the publication of the set of targets in the previous climate action Bill, introduced two years ago by Deputy Bruton, when he was the Minister. We presented our marginal abatement cost curves on the assumption that if the technical measures were implemented, and on the assumption of a stable national herd up to 2030, we would be able to sustain a decrease of between 10% and 15% in greenhouse gas emissions by 2030. It was based from 2005. This was the calculation, based on the very same figures underlying the estimates that were in the roadmap publication.

I absolutely agree with Deputy Leddin's comments on food security globally and the threat of climate change. I do not know whether the Deputy is aware that for a number of years we have been working very closely with Irish Aid, the Department of Foreign Affairs and NGOs on the international agricultural development agenda. We have been doing a lot of work in Irish Aid countries. We are very familiar with the challenges because of climate change in respect of agricultural production in many of these countries. It is a fact that we are an exporting country and where it is more efficient for countries to import food at reasonable prices we certainly can support the alleviation of the worst implications of climate change. Of course, it is equally desirable that countries themselves are able to produce to their optimum. This is where our technical support work comes in.

It has to be borne in mind that there is a vast difference with regard to sustainability between an exporting sector that is dependent on technologies such as grass fed systems to those dependent on feed lots and the feeding of concentrate animal feed. This harks back to the earlier discussion in respect of the importance of a low carbon footprint and sustainability.

Before Dr. O'Mara picks up on the biogenic methane issue, I have a comment in respect of the points made on hedgerows. What we are saying is we have to do the research here in respect of the potential carbon sequestration that hedgerows can provide and their potential in future. One of the issues we are concerned about, given the length of hedgerows in the country, is their management.

Our biodiversity specialists are concerned about the typical management practices, which are not as conducive to enhancing biodiversity or dealing with emissions as they could be. The initial work has to be done in quantifying the biomass involved. Based on that, we will be in a better position to estimate the level of sequestration. It will depend on the multiplicity of species and so on.

The Deputy rightly put his finger on the importance of verification. This issue does not just extend to hedgerows, but to all other potential sources of sequestration. That is why we embarked on the signpost farm programme. Among other considerations, it will examine rigorously quantifying emissions and sequestration. The regulatory regime needs to be worked out into the future, and I am sure that will happen. Being optimistic, we hope it will lay the basis for carbon farming, as it is called. Whatever way the regulatory environment takes shape, there is no doubt in our minds that it will have to be based on rigorous scientific measurement and verification if it is to have value in the marketplace. We hope that, as time moves on and the regulatory regime sharpens up, the measures we are laying in place now in terms of protocols will be consistent with whatever regime emerges.