Dáil debates

Wednesday, 26 May 2010

Other Questions.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions

10:30 am

Photo of John CreganJohn Cregan (Limerick West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 33: To ask the Minister for Agriculture; Fisheries and Food his views on whether there is a case for reducing livestock numbers as a solution to achieving emissions reductions here; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [21860/10]

Photo of Seán ConnickSeán Connick (Wexford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

There are compelling environmental and economic reasons why reducing Irish livestock numbers as a means of achieving emissions reductions cannot be justified. In the first instance, such a policy would be counterproductive in terms of reducing global greenhouse gas emissions. Ireland is a leading exporter of beef and dairy produce and any shortfall of Irish produce, on EU or world markets, arising from a reduction in Irish livestock numbers would be replaced with produce from countries with far less sustainable farming systems than we have here and the replacement produce would have a far greater carbon footprint than the Irish product it displaces.

Our agriculture sector will continue to play a significant role in reducing national greenhouse gas emissions. Ireland's national target under the Kyoto Protocol is to maintain emissions at a level 13% above 1990 levels, for the Kyoto commitment period 2008 to 2012. The latest projections from the EPA indicate that emissions from the agriculture sector will be, on average, 8.5% below 1990 levels over the commitment period.

Irish farmers have clearly demonstrated a willingness to embrace new technologies and farming methods that are friendly to the environment. Farmers will continue to adapt further, when new cost effective methods to reduce greenhouse gas emissions come on stream. In that context, I remain confident that dedicated research at national level and collaborative research at international level, including research into increasing the carbon sink potential of the sector, particularly the carbon sink potential of soils, will yield new effective, measurable and verifiable means to off-set greenhouse gas emissions from the sector.

The economic argument against such a proposal is also compelling. The Government's view is that not alone is the agri-food sector our most important indigenous industry but the continued success of this industry will be a key element of our economic recovery. The significance of the agri-food sector to the overall well being of the economy cannot be overstated accounting, as it does, for 6.6% of the economy's gross value added. Over 150,000 people, or some 7.5% of the total workforce, are directly employed in the industry. With a turnover of €24 billion in 2008, agri-food exports represented 10% of our total exports.

According to the United Nations, demand for food will increase by 70% over the next 40 years due to a huge increase in world population. Ireland's sustainable, low carbon, pasture based production system is well placed to contribute to that extra demand. It would be wrong to forgo these lucrative export opportunities for a short-term gain in terms of national emissions reductions targets, especially when we know that the overall effect of reducing animal numbers in Ireland will be to increase emissions elsewhere.

Photo of John CreganJohn Cregan (Limerick West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Minister of State for his reply. He has allayed some of my fears in putting down the question because I am seriously concerned about a further stock level reduction.

How can the responsibility for dealing with the emissions issue be reconciled with the fact that there is an increasing demand for food throughout the world as there are up to 1 billion people who are hungry? We are making a substantial contribution in that regard in that we have a substantial live cattle export trade and the agri-food sector which, as the Minister of State stated correctly, is hugely important. I realise we must strike a balance but I am inclined to come down in favour of positively discriminating in favour of the food sector and of continuing our stocking levels. Even the single farm payment, when we take away headage, has contributed to a decline in stocks. We should be working strongly towards ensuring that we can get the balance right and that we can support and, if possible, increase stock levels.

Photo of Seán ConnickSeán Connick (Wexford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank Deputy Cregan for raising this issue and giving us the opportunity to address some of the concerns within the agriculture sector in this regard. As he alluded to, the agri-food sector is of significant systemic importance. "Systemic" is a word used quite liberally in other sectors but in terms of the agriculture sector, this has a turnover of €24 billion and 150,000 employed within the industry.

Deputy Cregan asked about our contribution to the future demand for food. In that regard, over 1 billion people in the world today already are suffering from hunger. The United Nations projections suggest that the world population will rise from the current 6.8 billion to over 9.2 billion by 2050. In order to meet the food requirements of this increase in population, the FOA estimates that demand for food will increase by 70% in that period. It is a considerable increase in demand. We are committed to increasing the agri-food sector's production in Ireland to meet some of it.

Photo of Brendan HowlinBrendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

There are a number of Deputies offering. I call Deputy Doyle.

Photo of Andrew DoyleAndrew Doyle (Wicklow, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am glad to hear that the Minister of State, Deputy Connick, has shown a level of common sense on this. There has been a simplistic approach by some who suggest that by reducing agriculture in this country, one can deal simply with our carbon emissions. There are many factors supporting why it makes good sense to cultivate the agri-industry and the livestock numbers.

I apologise as I must go to a meeting of the Joint Committee on Climate Change and Energy Security on energy. However, an interesting presentation from those involved in anaerobic digestion, to both to the Joint Committee on Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and to the Joint Committee on the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, makes the point that-----

Photo of Brendan HowlinBrendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

A question.

Photo of Andrew DoyleAndrew Doyle (Wicklow, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I will ask the question directly. There is a Cabinet sub-committee on energy security and climate change. If the Minister encourages and incentivises and, instead of using the €50 million to purchase carbon credits as an off-set, provided some of that money as priming money to get initiatives going, one can harvest methane, do away with the nuisance element of it, have an energy source and have a better fertiliser source. Has he any input into the Cabinet sub-committee? I would urge him, on the basis of what he has stated here, to do so.

Photo of Seán ConnickSeán Connick (Wexford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank Deputy Doyle for raising the question. I will be raising the issue in one of the latter questions where we deal with the bio-mass energy. Anaerobic digestion is a part of that.

In 2006, as part of the national development programme, a commitment was given to the delivery of anaerobic digesters. In 2007, ten projects were given the go-ahead. Unfortunately, none of those projects have moved forward in that sector. I am concerned at that and I am having a look at it to see what, if anything, we can do in that regard because there is potential in that area.

Photo of Seán SherlockSeán Sherlock (Cork East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

If one's solution is to reduce the number of cattle, it is a simplistic way of looking at the problem and one is not looking at the problem of GHGs properly. That is a scientific view.

I would refer the Minister of State to TResearch, which is a Teagasc publication in this regard. Perhaps he might acknowledge that looking at the areas of animal genetics, animal management, animal nutrition and performance stimulants would be a better way to reduce GHGs like methane and that there is a scientific basis for doing that. Would he acknowledge that any proposals to implement the McCarthy report as it pertains to the scientific budget would have an impact on Teagasc's operations and on reducing methane emissions potentially in the long run? We need to take a more lateral view.

Photo of Seán ConnickSeán Connick (Wexford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am astonished Deputy Sherlock has time to read the TResearch magazine. I must try to make a little time to get going at it. At this stage, I think I will have to stay up all night.

I acknowledge the fact that there is a great deal of science going into the agri-food sector in terms of our production, something I welcome. I would be concerned to see any impact on that from a cuts perspective in an area that I have already highlighted as having considerable potential for further food production and a growing market, particularly when the agriculture sector is one of our indigenous industries. I would be keeping a close eye on that particular matter.