Richard Bruton (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

45. To ask the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine the progress since 2018 in the uptake in measures from the Teagasc list of cost-effective ways of reducing CO2-equivalent emissions from agriculture and if new measures are planned to accelerate take-up. [25753/24]

Richard Bruton (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is reported that agriculture is substantially off target for its carbon budget and that it would have to achieve cuts of 8% per annum to stay within budget in the remaining years. I would like to understand from the Minister how successful we have been in terms of the take-up of all the measures in the Teagasc list and if we can do more to enhance that.

Charlie McConalogue (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Deputy Bruton for the question and for the significant work and the path he carved out as a previous Minister for Communications, Climate Action and Environment in climate and energy and making real progress in reducing emissions in the wider economy.

The Teagasc marginal abatement cost curve, MACC, published in 2018, has undoubtedly been the foundation for what agricultural climate measures are now included in the agricultural chapter of the Climate Action Plan 2024. We are making progress. The agriculture sector reduced emissions in 2022 and further reductions are projected for last year, 2023.

The sustained reduction of chemical nitrogen sales over the past two years in particular is an excellent example of progress since 2018, with a reduction of 14% in 2022 being followed by an additional 18% reduction in 2023. Research will be key to producing the scientific and technological advancements necessary to achieve our targets. My Department has provided funding of €8 million to 12 methane-related research projects in the past five years. For example, METH-ABATE, is a research project looking at the development and validation of novel feed technologies to reduce methane emissions from pasture-based Irish agricultural systems.

Building on the 2018 MACC, the 2023 marginal abatement cost curve reflects new developments in technology, research and global market conditions.

The 33 measures set out in the 2023 MACC now need to be considered together with stakeholders for them to be turned into actions in the climate action plan for 2025. Achieving our climate ambition in the agrifood sector in Ireland requires new and innovative approaches by everyone in the industry and beyond. Funded by the European Commission through the European Institute of Technology, EIT Climate-KIC is Europe’s leading innovation community working to support the delivery of a climate-resilient economy and society. My Department has partnered with it to work with public and private stakeholders in the Irish agrifood sector and help the sector deliver an accelerated pathway of climate action. This targeted and multifaceted approach is setting the agricultural sector in Ireland on a positive trajectory to achieving our climate targets.

Richard Bruton (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I agree with the Minister that we need new approaches and we need research, but we do have known measures that could be implemented. My interest is in how successful we have been. We have slurry spreading, clover planting, protected urea, multi-species sward, incorporation of straw and afforestation cover in winter. Many of these things are not new and do not need research; it is a question of encouraging the take-up. My concern is that the price of fertiliser was a big driver of the progress and the risk is that we will slide back if that price corrects itself.

I have specific questions. Is it the ambition of Teagasc that by 2030 it will have reached just 50,000 farmers with the Signpost programme? Is that ambitious enough? If we are falling down on this, it indicates that most farmers do not know the number of the emissions related to their particular activity. What instruments could the Minister introduce to accelerate these known changes that could be made at farm level?

Charlie McConalogue (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Teagasc has an important role to play and it is playing it. One of the key tools that will be very helpful to farmers is the launch of the AgNav online application which enables farmers to be clear on the numbers for their own farms, to see how that is evolving and to suggest steps to them which can reduce their emissions and measure that as they go. People have to know where they are at to be able to improve. This will help to give farmers that clarity.

We have seen significant progress. The Deputy referred to the 30% reduction in the use of chemical fertiliser, which is phenomenal progress and we are holding that progress to a significant degree. The Deputy is right that, as we saw with moving away from cash to increased tap-and-go in how we paid for things during Covid, the increase in fertiliser costs due to the Ukraine war and the impact on supply chains have accelerated a change and an adaptation which was already under way at farm level. It has been held to a significant degree because it is underpinned by changing farm practice. I expect us to continue the progress we have been making in reducing the use of chemical fertiliser.

Richard Bruton (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I worry that there is no sense that, because we are now off target, we need to take some pretty sharp corrective action. It seems to me that farmers respond to financial incentives. They cut their nitrogen because the price went up. If there were more rewards for the plan that would reduce their emissions numbers, I think we would see farmers responding much more quickly. I go back to the old theme. We do not have the incentives in place that will give the signal to know what your emissions are and then pay for the reduction you plan to deliver. We have to start to embrace that sort of approach rather than hoping for research or hoping there will be spontaneous take-up of opportunities.

Charlie McConalogue (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I agree that farmers respond. I agree that farmers' ability to have clarity in terms of where they are at with their own farms is important in empowering them to take steps which will further reduce emissions at farm level. I also agree it is important we incentivise this. Some of the steps we have taken, for example, the soil sampling scheme, have had a very significant uptake among farmers. The multi-species sward grant aid has seen very significant uptake, and more than 44,000 farmers applied for the liming scheme I introduced last year. We have also seen a significant change in the utilisation of organic slurry by virtue of the fact we have been investing significantly through 60% grants for farmers purchasing low emissions slurry spreading equipment. That has been a significant driver behind the move from chemical fertiliser through better usage and utilisation of organic manure. Those are all things that show that wherever we incentivise activity, farmers push forward with it. That is something we have to continue with, particularly through helping the process by empowering them to know their situation at farm level and then helping them to step forward with measures.