Mr. Paul Price:

I am afraid that we have had lots of carbon markets over the years, in America, Australia and other parts of the world, through the clean development mechanism and so forth. We have repeatedly seen carbon credits being gained, but usually is the small farmers who lose out.

Big landowners and corporations are all over this. That is surely against the family farm, if you like. That is the evidence. I am not advocating one way or the other. I am trying to report to the committee what I see in the research. I am trying to accept what is in the science and to give my best, fair review of the science. I am not advocating for any particular vision. I am trying to report to the committee the evidence as it pertains to the subject of this discussion.

It is misleading to describe methane as a short-lived gas in the sense of climate targets. It does not matter if it is a short-term gas. If you maintain it, it will maintain roughly the same temperature contribution, and that can be large. In Ireland, the temperature contribution of methane is large. Right now, when it is sustained, it is large even compared to the total emissions from pre-industrial CO2 in Ireland. The methane contribution is large. Cutting methane presents a huge mitigation opportunity. That is what you see in the CCAC’s Paris test. There would be a big hit in terms of a mitigation opportunity from that reduction so maybe, as was said, that says that we as society should pay for that reduction. I would also point out that we would then pay for what has been a big increase in methane emissions. We could start paying from when we get back. However, it seems a bit odd that we have committed to a system. As I said, it is not the farmers’ fault. Policy has been directed to do this. It has resulted in this big increase in methane emissions. The public directed all of its energies and supports for doing that and it is now being told that it has to pay for it when it is on the way down again. That seems to be an odd way go about that policy. However, as was said, maybe we are in a situation where we have to do that. I am not advocating for what we have to do. That is up to politicians, to society and to discussion to work out.