25 February 2009
DAFF09/87T
Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, Tony Burke
Joe O’Brien, ABC2 Breakfast
E&OE
Subjects: R&D to reduce livestock emissions, impact of CPRS on agriculture
JOE O’BRIEN: Tony Burke is today announcing funding for a research package to look at ways to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from livestock.
Tony Burke joins us now live from Canberra. Minister, good morning.
TONY BURKE: Good morning.
JOE O’BRIEN: Now there are some pretty dire predictions about the effects of the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme on the agricultural sector – that production could be cut by $2.5 billion dollars a year by 2020. What sort of cuts in production are you expecting? Can you guarantee there won’t be any falls in production?
TONY BURKE: The report that you are referring to started with the presumption that there would be no change in behaviour from farmers. It presumed that we would come up with no technologies, that there wouldn’t be R&D, and then modelled accordingly. Of course that’s not the case. There will be adaptation.
That’s why we’ve announced the research and development dollars that we’ve announced. And that’s why we’re moving forward to marry up the methods involved in reducing emissions with the methods required to improve productivity.
JOE O’BRIEN: So there are estimates that a beef cow in northern Australia emits 1.5 tonnes of carbon gases each year. What sort of R&D initiatives do you think can be used to cut that down, and by how much can that be cut?
TONY BURKE: There’s been a limited amount of research done on this in the world so far. And that’s why the Government decided to increase our allocation for research in this area from $15 million to $46 million.
Today we’ve announced more than $20 million worth of projects which go to the livestock emissions part of it. Now, some of this goes to breeding options, some of it goes to better feed options, some of it goes to dealing with bacteria in the stomach of the animal to try to reduce the amount of methane that comes out of the mouth.
When the research is being commenced it’s the scientists who are best placed, at the end of that research, to say how far they can go. But the reason we’re funding this research in the first place is a determination to make sure that we get this matching up between reducing emissions and improving productivity.
JOE O’BRIEN: You point out that report was based on no improvements in R&D. But there will be significant costs to be borne by the agricultural sector, won’t there, like transport and fertiliser?
TONY BURKE: There is no cost-free method of dealing with this. It’s also true though, that the costs of doing nothing are much, much greater. There was a study put out by ABARE a little more than a year ago, which said what would be the hit to Australian agriculture if we did nothing.
By 2050 you were talking about an extraordinary hit in our export markets and standard commodities – in terms of domestic production – taking ten percent hits. The cost of doing nothing is much, much more than the costs of action.
Of course, there are costs involved with action: the transport costs, for example, that you referred to; issues relating to costs of farm inputs. Those costs are real. But the alternative is far, far worse.
JOE O’BRIEN: So for farmers out there, can you give them any rough indication, for example, of how much transport costs are going to increase for them, in a per cent fashion?
TONY BURKE: Certainly in terms of the fuel costs that are faced on-farm, the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme under the White Paper provides farmers initially with a rebate on extra costs to try to minimise the impact on them. But the costs of inputs will be affected.
To give precise calculations, you’ve got to take into account that there’s massive global fluctuations that have been happening over the last couple of years on input prices, far greater than what any impact will be from the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme. So to give a precise figure, in the context of those global markets, is something that you couldn’t pretend to be able to offer.
JOE O’BRIEN: That’s not much good for farmers who are really concerned this is going to send farmers to the wall.
TONY BURKE: I don’t think there’s any modelling that would suggest that. Certainly it’s the case that farmers are the most affected by climate change. They are climate dependent in so many ways. And so they’ve got the most at stake in making sure that Australia and the world get our policy approaches to this right.
The other thing that is often forgotten when we deal with emissions – emissions are another form of waste. They’re another way the farm inputs go in, and you end up with something coming out that’s not part of your productive outcome. That’s why, just like with livestock emissions, we can get better efficiency if we find ways through scientific research of reducing emissions.
Similarly, the work that the Government’s doing on soils means that you can have a reduced reliance on chemical and fertiliser, because you’re doing better at actually storing the carbon within the soil.
So, you can’t underestimate the extent to which there’s productivity-based outcomes in the research. Sadly, for a long time in Australia, very little research in this area was being done. That’s no longer the case, though.
JOE O’BRIEN: OK, Tony Burke in Canberra. Thanks very much for talking with us this morning.
TONY BURKE: Pleasure.
ENDS
© 2009 Australian Broadcasting Corporation
Copyright in the content published above belongs to the Australian Broadcasting Corporation. The ABC Content has not been reviewed, approved or endorsed by the Minister or the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry. Any opinion, statement or representation made within the ABC Content does not necessarily reflect the views of the Minister or the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry.