I mentioned in previous articles that there is an emerging realisation post COP26, across global media at least, of both the huge challenge of decarbonising economies across all sectors and the need for a more balanced communication with consumers about all aspects of climate and environmental challenges.
Recent communications from Green Party spokespersons / activists have illustrated, in my view, how this need for informed communication is best delivered and how it is not best delivered.
To begin with, the recent announcement by Environment Minister, Eamon Ryan, signalling that the government would give the green light for several gas-fired power plants to be built over the next decade, is surely an example of how a very clear programme of replacing fossil fuel-based energy generation plants with ever increasing renewable energy capability, has to be tempered with informed pragmatism.
It may have come as a surprise (or even a betrayal) to some environmental purists, and indeed An Taisce may try to block the planning process for these plants.
However, most people would accept that government must base policies and investments on a real assessment of increasing energy demand and thus supplement supply from what can be volatile, renewable sources, with more predictable energy sources.
While these sources might be fossil fuel-based, they emit fewer greenhouse gases than existing coal and other fossil fuel plants.
Short-term actions and anti-agri ‘woke-ism’
This is not the first, nor will it be the last, example of short-term actions seeming to be out of sync with long-term goals.
The pragmatism associated with this move by the Green Party Minister for Environment resonates in the Irish agriculture sector as being, not only pragmatic in terms of continuous energy supply challenges, but directly comparable, I would suggest, to the concept of avoiding or creating carbon leakage.
Analysis of possible increased regulatory constraints in Ireland and the EU, including EU Green Deal impacts, in studies by the EU, United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the OECD/FAO, have all highlighted how the suppression of Irish / EU regulated, low-emitting milk and meat production, will only lead to higher demand for non-regulated or higher-emitting production of beef from Brazil, or milk from India and Pakistan.
This in turn would lead to higher global emissions and increasing deforestation.
Applying the pragmatic energy generation approach to food production, would recognise this reality – that suppression of Irish agricultural output is an aberration in a global emissions context.
Balanced approach to climate?
So can we have the same balanced approach to Irish agriculture as per energy generation?
Not if we look at the second example of Green Party communication in recent weeks relating to letters supposedly sent by Ciaran Cuffe MEP to Irish banks.
He was highlighting his concerns that banks giving loans to young farmers to increase herd sizes, would mean investing in a carbon intensive sector.
What this farcical, and ultimately nonsensical, view of not just agriculture, but global climate challenges illustrates yet again, is just how narrow minded the anti-agri view of some in the Green Party really is.
It seems to me that this perversion of reality, while largely driven by an anti livestock farming agenda, is also based on the reality that our ‘woke’ friends can’t pontificate about Irish coal or oil.
Not least because a major challenge for our economy throughout the 20th century was that we did not have any substantial indigenous sources of coal, oil or gas, or the heavy industries associated with these natural resources such as mining, steel manufacturing and shipbuilding.
So the saviours of the universe / guardians of the galaxy are reduced to fighting the global existential battle for continuing planetary existence by demonising Irish cows.
Furthermore, under agreed climate accounting protocol, Ireland’s past of having no coal, gas or oil meant that while we did not contribute to the build up in global emissions over the last 200 years as a result, we didn’t get any carbon credits for closing them down or offshoring them, unlike our neighbours across Europe and the UK.
Which is hugely important in explaining the reality as to why Irish agricultural emissions constitute such a large percentage of Irish economy emissions.
To be clear, this is not to suggest that Irish agriculture wants to, or should, avoid its climate action obligations, but the national conversation needs to embrace a more grown up, fact and science-based demeanour.
A balanced adult conversation with Irish consumers and voters, like the energy continuity reality, would do several things.
It would recognise the reality that suppressing Ireland’s low carbon production capability would be an aberration leading to an increase in global emissions.
It would also emphasise the truth that the size of Ireland’s agricultural target reflects the reality of our past industrial development structure, in combination with a perverse accounting approach where the polluter does not pay.