New research published by Teagasc has shown that it will be “very challenging” for the agriculture sector to meet its greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction target of 25% by 2030.
The study found that the adoption of measures contained in the Teagasc Marginal Abatement Cost Curve (MACC) is “critical to achieving such a target”.
The research was carried out by Teagasc as part of the carbon budget analysis conducted by the Carbon Budget Working Group (CBWG) of the Climate Change Advisory Council (CCAC) in 2023 and 2024.
The CBWG was charged with providing an evidence base, including modelling and analytical support, for the CCAC to assist it in developing its second programme of carbon budgets.
Emissions
Teagasc were requested by the working group to model a number of scenarios to 2050, including a business as usual – no policy change – scenario, as well as scenarios with lower and higher animal numbers and activity levels.
For each of these scenarios, two MACC measure adoption pathways were projected.
The projected level of agricultural GHG emissions under these three scenarios, in the absence of technical measures to reduce such emissions, were then determined.
The Teagasc GHG MACC was then used to assess the amount of agriculture GHG emissions that could be mitigated using technical measures under each of these three agricultural activity scenarios.
In order to do this, two technology adoption pathways, based on differing levels of mitigation technology adoption, were investigated.
Research
Teagasc noted that GHG emissions from agriculture are in the form of methane, nitrous oxide and carbon dioxide (CO2); collectively such emissions are expressed in carbon dioxide equivalents.
For the three gases in aggregate the mitigation potential in carbon dioxide equivalents by 2050 relative to 2018 ranged from 15% to 48% across the scenarios explored.
The research also reported on the impact on emissions of these gases individually. Across the scenarios, the reduction in methane ranged from 7% to 42% and the reduction in nitrous oxide ranged from 49% to 77%.
The largest reduction in carbon dioxide equivalent emissions of 48% was modelled under Scenario 2 (lower agricultural activity) combined with Pathway 2 (very ambitious rate of mitigation technology adoption).
This combination delivered a 42% and 77% reduction in methane and nitrous oxide gases respectively.
Scenario 2 (lower agricultural activity) was based on assuming much less favourable economic prospects for dairy and beef production, which resulted in a projection of lower animal numbers.
Teagasc noted that this scenario is not a forecast of anticipated animal numbers, adding that the CCAC requested it to model such a scenario to demonstrate the effect that lower animal numbers would have on emission levels.
The report stated that “no policy (or other) mechanisms to reduce animal numbers and activity levels are proposed in the Teagasc analysis”.
The research stated that it is possible that different combinations of agricultural activity levels, to those projected under Scenario 2, could deliver equivalent reductions in agricultural GHG emissions.
“There remains an urgent need for incentives and policies to support the MACC implementation to 2030 and beyond.
“Further investment is needed in research to develop and test technologies to reduce emissions and provide viable options for farm diversification,” the study stated.