First-Ever Triple GGG - Excellent - Green Rating for Carbon Forestry Potential Awarded to Worsfold Property in Northland, New Zealand

First-ever Triple GGG (Excellent) Green Rating for Carbon Forestry Potential awarded to Worsfold property at 528 Carruth Road, Poroti, Whangarei, Northland, New Zealand. See listing at:

https://www.greenxperts.co.nz/xlist

Property is for sale at Bayleys https://www.bayleys.co.nz/1050531

Methane emissions from farm animals a 'green herring' in New Zealand

Photograph: Cattle belch monitoring, Moorepark, Ireland 2010

A recent article in The Guardian reports that climate change denial is changing tack from outright denial to a clever 'deflection' campaign.  This focuses on making individuals feel guilty about their food and travel choices, and then descends into 'doomism', which leads to hopelessness and inaction.  In this way, society is misled into failing to deal with the main cause of climate change - fossil fuel use.

Global greenhouse gas (GHG) sources are usually quoted at around 70% from fossil fuel use (energy production), agriculture 24%, industry, buildings and waste disposal the remaining 6%.  

New Zealand's GHG profile is quite different from the global profile, with energy production 41%, agriculture 48% (sourced mainly from animals belching methane), industry and waste 11%.

Recently the issue of methane emissions from farm animals has been controversial in New Zealand. The Agriculture sector has pointed out that methane is a short-lived GHG (about 14 years), while others have countered that it has a high Global Warming Potential (GWP), 25 times stronger than carbon dioxide.  The New Zealand Government has agreed to the sector's proposal to leave agriculture out of the New Zealand Emissions Trading Scheme until 2025, giving the sector until 2022 to come up with methods for reducing farm emissions.  

One way to reduce farm emissions is to reduce the number of animals farmed.  Leaving aside land use stocking and water quality issues, it would seem extraordinary that a food producing nation would be asked to consider reducing its production levels in a world that needs more food, not less.  And this from a pasture-based farming system in New Zealand that has a much lower overall environmental footprint (GHG plus everything else) and animal welfare footprint than barn-based intensive stock feeding regimes overseas.

So are methane emissions from farm animals really a problem locally or globally, compared to fossil fuel emissions?  Take a quick look across the latest science and we find:

• Globally methane is 16% of all GHG;
• Methane disappears from the atmosphere in about 14 years;
• Modelling of methane's global warming effects from 1900 show a small decline relative to carbon dioxide;
• World methane emissions have increased about 25% from 2005-2018.  This is thought to be from frozen wetlands melting (as the northern hemisphere warms), natural gas production, and livestock, although the global cattle population has increased only 0.6% in that time;
• Fossil-fuel sourced carbon dioxide is about 80% of all GHG;
• Carbon dioxide takes 20-200+ years to transit out of the atmosphere;
• Recent studies show fossil-fuel sourced carbon dioxide is now about 86-87% of global carbon dioxide emissions; 
• World fossil-fuel sourced carbon dioxide increased 50% from 1990-2015, increases in India (7.2%), Russia (3.5%), China  (2.9%) and the USA (1.5%); and,  
• Emissions from New Zealand Agriculture 1990-2017 rose 13.5%, due to a near doubling of the dairy herd and 650% increase in use of nitrogen fertiliser. New Zealand's cattle population is about 0.1% of the global cattle population. 

There are some significant changes to note:

(1) Fossil-fuel sourced carbon dioxide sources have increased to 87% of global carbon emissions in the last ten years, so that they almost completely dominate the global GHG cycle;

(2) Global methane emissions over time have had no impact compared to fossil-fuel sourced carbon dioxide (so far);

(3) Global methane emissions are recently up from permafrost melting and natural gas production;

(4) Globally, New Zealand's cattle populations and their emissions do not register at all on any statistic; and,

(5) Local increases in New Zealand's dairy herd and their emissions have impact in New Zealand alone.

And so what to conclude?

Methane emissions from pasture-based farm animals are a "green herring" in New Zealand, and most probably globally.  

The reduction and reversal of global warming depends almost entirely upon reducing fossil fuel use.  Switch away from fossil fuels and the job is mostly done.  Reducing animal farming in New Zealand will make absolutely no difference to world GHG levels, and would be a pointless exercise in climate guilt.  Another 'deflection' away from dealing with the real problem.

Because of the structure of the Paris Climate Agreement and New Zealand's unusual GHG profile, the nation could be held fiscally responsible for methane emissions that are just a very few cattle breaths in reality, with no global impact.  There could, however, be a very high impact on the nation's pocket if the situation isn't shrewdly managed.  

And one wonders...how many more green herrings are out there?

The Mysterious Case of Disappearing Pipi at Mair Bank, and Potential Impacts on Marsden Point’s Stability

First published in the Whangarei Heads Newsletter, Feb-March 2015

 

Source: Pawley 2014

Massive reduction in pipi numbers since 2005

The latest scientific reports from the Northland Regional Council (NRC) and the Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) show a massive 99.3% drop in both pipi biomass (by tonne) and abundance (by numbers), and two successive ‘recruitment failures’ (juveniles not achieving breeding age) on Mair Bank over the past ten years.  Only 63 individual pipi of any size were found in 140 sample sites during the February 2014 survey.  These grim findings led MPI to impose a total ban on pipi harvesting from October 2014 onward.

Potential impacts upon Marsden Point’s stability

It has been acknowledged by authorities for over 30 years that the layers of old pipi shells and live pipis on Mair Bank armour and stabilise the Whangarei Harbour entrance and Marsden Point.  In 1983 it was estimated that the pipi banks were equivalent to at least $4 billion (2014 value) in harbour works.  Should the pipi banks be compromised, then there could be impacts upon the stability of Marsden Point and its associated facilities.

Possible causes of pipi disappearance

Possible causes of pipi disappearance could include: climate change (changes in currents and water acidity); Mair Bank movement (reducing habitable area); contaminants in the water and/or sediment (causing pipi to depart Mair Bank and perish in deeper colder waters, and/or recruitment failure); and selective removal of the breeding population (the larger pipi) by pipi pickers.  There is probably a combination of causes, but at present there is insufficient evidence to determine what has happened.  The latest scientific reports comment that the available information has not been collected in a consistent or comprehensive manner, making it difficult for scientists to pin down causes, assess risks, or propose remedies.

What the authorities are doing

NRC is the coastal marine area authority, and MPI the fisheries authority.  Several reports have been commissioned and discussed with stakeholders by both NRC and MPI.  Currently there seems to be a hiatus in activity following the sobering results of the 2014 survey and the institution of the total ban. 

Questions that need answering

A number of important questions need answering.  What has happened since 2005 to cause the pipi to die?  Can pipi die-out be remedied?  Will the disappearance of the pipi endanger the stability of Marsden Point, and if so, when, under what conditions, and what can be done about it?  Will the total ban on pipi picking rebuild the pipi population, or is more action needed?  What effects will Northport’s proposed deepening of the harbour channel have upon the integrity of Mair Bank and Marsden Bank?

The Whangarei Harbour and Marsden Point are valuable national assets worth billions of dollars.  The disappearance of the pipi that stabilise the harbour entrance is a national issue that affects us all, and one that must be addressed competently.  Current information is patchy, incomplete and inconclusive.  A properly scoped and adequately funded Mair Bank Sustainable Management and Recovery Plan needs to be commissioned immediately by MPI as lead authority, supported by all the stakeholders involved.  It will be interesting to see what the next steps will be by the authorities responsible for the sustainable management of the Whangarei Harbour and its priceless pipi.

Susan Harris BSc(Hons)

Principal Scientist

GreenXperts Limited

Mobile: +64 22 1544 958

Email: susan.harris@greenxperts.co.nz

www.greenxperts.co.nz

Pollution at Wellington Dive platform off the scale - Project Blue could have warned the public within hours

Pollution at Wellington dive platform off the scale

Project Blue technology can warn people within hours of these types of public health risks - and quickly trace the source of contamination. There is no need these days, with Project Blue technology, to expose the public to this type of danger.

Live water quality reports available with Project Blue technology

A recent news article here reports that water quality is the New Zealand public's greatest environmental concern.  But the public lacks access to accurate, current, and easy-to-understand water quality information about their local stream, river, lake or beach.

A group of Kiwi scientists and computer engineers working with GreenXperts has solved this problem by inventing smart-phone based technology that provides accurate water quality reporting live, on-line, anywhere in New Zealand (indeed, anywhere in the world).  We call it Project Blue.

Project Blue's public Facebook module is running live on Facebook at Project Blue Global and Project Blue New Zealand.  Other pages have been set up for popular water spots throughout New Zealand - just search by region or beach name.  Anyone can post a water observation and have it analysed for free by our scientists. Project Blue North Pacific is providing support for Ivan Macfayden in his work to help fix the "broken ocean".

Project Blue's enterprise module ADAAR (Automated Data Analysis And Reporting) is available as a high tech "bolt-on" to existing water monitoring systems for a few dollars per person, or as a stand-alone for a few dollars more.  Customised packages for industry and other water users are also available - especially useful for legal cases.  ADAAR is not yet available to the New Zealand public - we hope it will be by next summer.

Look out for fakes and unauthorised copies - we know they're being worked on.

Just to let you know the technology exists, and you can use it on Facebook from any smartphone or personal computer anywhere.

Merry Christmas!

Emission trading not dead - EU Parliament supports carbon prices

Last week the European Parliament approved measures to support carbon prices in the EU Emissions Trading System.  Click here for more detail.

Europe is still focused on dealing with climate change.  Carbon Neutral, or even better, Carbon Negative products will sell well in Europe.

Go to Green Tick Certification for information on Carbon Neutral and Carbon Negative certification for products targeted at EU customers.

Here we go again...more millions to be wasted on water quality wallowing...

On 21 November, the latest and most authoritative report on water quality in New Zealand from the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment, Dr Jan Wright, elegantly and pointedly describes New Zealand's most pressing environmental and economic issue - increasing pollution of our waterways from intensification of land use for agriculture.  Dr Wright politely says water managers and industry are not doing enough to prevent the continuing degradation in water quality, and that the situation is just going to get worse.

Unsurprisingly, the Ministers for Primary Industry and Environment immediately released a press statement saying, "No worries, we're on it..."

Well, they're not.

The latest effort on national fresh water management "reform" has been through the Government-sponsored Land and Water Forum, a multi-party collaborative group.  After three years of work and millions of dollars, the Forum informs us in their third and final report of 15 November that their considered recommendation is to "call for community decisions at catchment level – within national frameworks and bottom lines from central Government.”

What?  This is nothing new.  This mantra was trotted out to me when I first joined the Northland Catchment Commission (now Regional Council) 26 years ago.  And the message hasn't changed.  And it's not wrong.  And scientifically sound water quality standards were set all those years ago by perfectly competent scientists and engineers, culminating in the Australian and New Zealand Guidelines for Fresh and Marine Water Quality published in the year 2000 - 13 years ago.

What has happened since?  Well, briefly, communities have been arguing about water quality standards and enforcement of them ever since.  The science has been ignored and manipulated and mocked, sensible and safe water quality limits have not been respected or enforced, and the basis of more than half of New Zealand's wealth continues to literally go down the drain.

It looks like we're set to go around the mountain again, and waste millions more of taxpayers' and ratepayers' money on rediagnoses of the problem, endless ruminations and court cases on what water quality limits should be set in what rivers, legal and political pressure by powerful vested interests to push large land and water development projects and consents through, ditto for those Councils who want to take more water and discharge more poorly treated waste, sporadic and passionate protests about it all from iwi, green groups and the tourism industry, and continued accelerating worsening of land and water quality nationwide.

I understand from the grapevine that Fonterra is putting pressure on farmers to go to two cows an acre.  If true, this is utter madness.  The land can't take it, the water can't take it, and the farmers are exhausted enough without doubling their worries.  It may create work for another generation of scientists, engineers, lawyers, and corporate managers, but New Zealand doesn't have the technology or carrying capacity to handle it.  Are we going to cover the country in cows?  Fonterra already has a major problem trying to deal with over $700 million in exposure to no less than three food safety scares in the past five years, and a $1.1 billion climate change charge (production loss from drought) imposed by Mother Nature.  Fonterra shareholders must be bouncing off the walls.  Imagine what would happen if just European and Asian customers, for example, decided to no longer buy Anchor butter and other Fonterra products because of dirty water issues, especially if a "green" competitor came along and offered genuinely 'clean green' dairy products?  To be sure...the opposition is working on it.

Similarly so for the meat companies.  Silver Fern Farms' recently reported latest annual loss is $28.6 million, slightly better than the previous year's $31.1 million loss.  Beef margins have reportedly halved, and livestock numbers are down because of drought (climate change charges again).  Total debt between Silver Fern Farms, Alliance Meats and AFFCO is running around $700 million, so there must be very grumpy shareholders in the meat sector too.  What will happen there when the 'clean green' mirage finally disappears and our high margin buyers in Europe go off to buy their meat from genuinely 'greener' pastures? No customer is fooled by unsupported green claims, superficial green labelling, and cynical self-accreditation schemes, especially when their buyers come out here and have an unpleasant water experience...

Happily, there are a few organisations that understand that being more efficient, facing up to reality, and cleaning up your own mess are the same thing....examples of good practice are out there....land and water care groups soldier on and make a difference in small local examples.  The Whangarei District Council has wisely planned for less water in future by putting in more storage, and for years it has been tertiary-treating its effluent through a wetland. Occasionally the forest industry puts its hand up to say, "hey, don't forget about us, we can do more..."

But what to expect now?  Well, expect the eminent Dr Jan Wright to be replaced by an apologist for dirty water policy sometime next year; expect agricultural companies run by Boards with their brains hardwired into the 19th Century to continue to run interference and use delaying tactics and behind the scenes politics to keep the status quo; expect a myopic central government and emasculated local government (bar a few exceptions) to continue to waste your money by reinvestigating and relitigating the obvious; and expect the clean green mirage to disappear completely soon, with most of the huge cost of this (in export losses) to come out of your taxpayer pocket.

Do we have solutions?  Yes, we do, and we have done for over 20 years.  But we need attitudinal change at grassroots level, 19th Century-based Board members and politicians removed, and a major redirection of our science, engineering and marketing skills away from the lethal and lazy mirage of volume-based "more production, more production, low margin" policy into efficiency-based "high quality, genuinely green products for a premium price" policy.

Then we can be price-makers, like we used to be; not price-takers, like we are.

And maybe in 10 years' time it'll be safe to have a Christmas Day swim in the swimming hole at my brother-in-law's place on the Kerikeri River....Dreams are free...