Ian Marshall (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Mr. Donnellan for his presentation which included a lot of useful information. As we all know, agriculture and transport are very often portrayed as the villains, but it is important to state at the outset of the discussion that agriculture and farming reacted to demand. Food demand stimulated growth in agriculture, to which farmers were only reacting.

Senator Daly has alluded to the period in which there was no growth and no opportunity for it in dairy production. Therefore, we have a set of figures and information that probably do not reflect the true position on the expansion of dairy production, which was explosive. The sector has been portrayed in a poor light, which is unfair.

Mr. Donnellan has mentioned what could really make a difference by way of mitigation in agriculture. On estimated breeding value, EBV, we all know that better performing and more efficient animals help our case.

An interesting concept associated with forestry has been raised a number of times at this committee. I made the point at an earlier meeting today that when forestry was mentioned to farmers, it was a little like saying to the those in attendance that if they made the windows of their houses smaller, they would be more efficient and conserve more heat. That is radical and represents a long-term, significant change. In a similar vein, planting a forest represents as radical a shift to farmers and I understand why they have difficulties with it.

Let me refer to something we sometimes miss in this debate. Reference has been made to our ability to grow grass. This is arguably the second best grass growing region in the world. Actively growing productive grass would sequester a lot of carbon. I am led to believe 15 cm of topsoil sequesters as much carbon as a tropical rainforest. In other parts of the world forest plantation can present a challenge owing to arid conditions. This is the result of carbon loading and the risk of fire. As much as planting forestry is an option, has there been enough emphasis placed on actively managing productive farmland and pasture? That, in itself, would sequester a lot of carbon. Mr. Donnellan has mentioned the impact of fertiliser and referred to making the shift from calcium ammonium nitrate to urea. I am led to believe this is subject to the pH value being right. It is not a simple switch, as sometimes portrayed. If we are to make a shift to using urea, especially urea with inhibitors, we have to manage pH values. Therefore, more lime would have to be spread on land. Is there a risk in some of these discussions that we will oversimplify solutions? Is the matter not more complex than very often portrayed?