New Zealand’s Controversial Cuts to Methane Reduction Targets Spark Accusations of Climate Denial

Environmental groups are raising alarms over New Zealand’s new plan to reduce methane emissions. The government recently announced a lower target, aiming to cut emissions by only 14% to 24% by 2050, down from a previous goal of 24% to 47%.

Supporters, including some farmers, welcomed this change. They argued that the previous targets were too tough. However, scientists and opposition politicians expressed disappointment, calling the new goals “weak” and “unambitious.” Greenpeace New Zealand labeled the shift as “full-blown climate denial.” Amanda Larsson, a climate campaigner, criticized Prime Minister Christopher Luxon for prioritizing corporate interests over future generations.

Climate Change Minister Simon Watts defended the government’s decision, stating their commitment to both domestic and international climate targets. He reaffirmed the aim for net-zero emissions by 2050. Watts also highlighted that agriculture will play a crucial role in reaching these goals.

The government plans to review methane targets again in 2040 and has decided against taxing agricultural methane emissions. This decision was influenced by worries about potential farm closures. To support farmers, New Zealand will invest NZ$400 million (about US$230 million) in new methane-reduction technology. Watts estimated that if 30% of farmers adopt these technologies, emissions could drop by up to 14% within a decade.

However, experts are skeptical about quick solutions. Ralph Sims, a climate expert at Massey University, noted that there’s “no guarantee” that new scientific methods will quickly reduce methane emissions, especially considering the high number of livestock in New Zealand—around five million cows and 23 million sheep. Agriculture contributes nearly half of New Zealand’s greenhouse gas emissions.

Organizations like Lawyers for Climate Action warned that these relaxed targets could harm New Zealand’s reputation on the global stage. Jocelyn Turnbull, a principal scientist at a government institute, echoed this concern, stating that it might affect the country’s well-known “clean and green” image.

On the other hand, some agricultural advocates see the new targets as a breath of fresh air. Wayne Langford, the president of Federated Farmers of New Zealand, said the previous targets put a lot of pressure on farming families. He believes this change is long overdue.

As this debate continues, it’s clear that balancing environmental responsibilities with agricultural interests will remain a challenging task for New Zealand.



Source link