New methane targets here to stay?

Groundswell co-founder Bryce McKenzie says it’s great to see methane targets “now aligning more with the science”.

“But if it were to be based on not adding to global warming, then of course the target should be zero,” he told Rural News.

He adds that it’s always a worry that a new Government will change everything “because of ideology rather than science”.

Beef + Lamb NZ chair Kate Acland says the revised targets better reflect the science around the different warming impact of short- and long-lived gases.

The Coalition Government has set a new range of 14–24% below 2017 levels by 2050, reflecting the findings of the independent Methane Science Review released in 2024. The previous target, set by Labour, was 24-47%.

Acland told Rural News that meeting the 24% target will be challenging for the red meat sector.

Read More:

• Government invests $8 million in LIC methane research to reduce dairy emissions
• Revised methane targets more achievable - farmers
• Nestle reportedly withdraws from methane accord

“The revised target doesn’t mean we’re getting let off the hook: meeting the upper end of the target will be really challenging.”

Acland adds farmer groups including B+LNZ have been talking to politicians across the spectrum so everyone to understand the science and science-based solutions to reducing emissions.

“The revised targets better reflect the science around the different warming impact of short- and long-lived gases. Methane should only be asked to do what is expected of other gases, which is to achieve no additional warming. New Zealand’s red meat is already among the most climate-efficient in the world, thanks to our pasture-based farming systems.”

Labour’s agriculture spokesperson Jo Luxton isn’t happy with the revised targets but concedes a Labour-led government wouldn’t go back to past ways of working.

“We didn’t always get it right in our last term of Government – we certainly wouldn’t go back to that way of working towards targets which is why we’ve indicated we would be open to bipartisan discussions to ensure consistency long term,” she told Rural News.

“Christopher Luxon rejected Labour’s request – which would have made parliamentary majority – to allow for infighting from Act and New Zealand First instead. We need to see the advice the Government based this decision on.

“By lowering our climate target, the Government is giving up on the export opportunities that come from leading the world on sustainable production.

“Instead of backing our strengths, they’re moving the goal posts. I’m disappointed this short-term thinking will weaken New Zealand’s climate targets - it’s bad news for Kiwi exporters and for New Zealand’s future.”

Meat processors describe the revised targets as sensible and more achievable.

Meat Industry Association chair Nathan Guy says the new targets are grounded in science and strike the right balance between lowering emissions and maintaining food production.

“Importantly, they give our international customers confidence that New Zealand remains committed to doing its part on climate change.”

The Government has also ruled out a tax on agricultural methane emissions.

Agriculture Minister Todd McClay says the Government approach is clear.

“Technology and partnership, not taxes, will deliver the reductions that we need. By investing in new tools and giving farmers practical support, we can cut emissions without cutting production or profitability.”