The climate Bill.

johndeere6920s

Well-Known Member
I'm surprised there isn't more talk about this.
What are peoples opinions on what could be coming down the tracks for agriculture?
 

Seedsower

Well-Known Member
Nothing of any good that's for sure.
The only good thing I heard lately is that there won't be mandatory reductions in herds.
There will be pressure on in other ways though
 

Seedsower

Well-Known Member
Two terms we will be hearing more about
LU/LUCF
Change from net carbon to net net carbon method of measuring carbon
 

muckymanor

Well-Known Member
What do people want to see? I'll be happy enough to see reduction in cattle numbers. I think suckler cow numbers are going to continue to fall for the next few years anyway. But suckler farmers should not have to take all of the brunt.

If cattle numbers are going to fall I want to see us compensated with a proper environmental scheme with limited numbers which has a proper attainable payment of in excess of 10k per and I want to see a scheme that will pay for work or measures carried out, not for things already in place.

I also want to see us given credit for hedgerows, grassland and plantations already in farms.

Finally I want to see something proper put into place that will bring the full value of carbon credits for farmland direct to the farmer that is farming it.
 

Claas Grass

Well-Known Member
What do people want to see? I'll be happy enough to see reduction in cattle numbers. I think suckler cow numbers are going to continue to fall for the next few years anyway. But suckler farmers should not have to take all of the brunt.

If cattle numbers are going to fall I want to see us compensated with a proper environmental scheme with limited numbers which has a proper attainable payment of in excess of 10k per and I want to see a scheme that will pay for work or measures carried out, not for things already in place.

I also want to see us given credit for hedgerows, grassland and plantations already in farms.

Finally I want to see something proper put into place that will bring the full value of carbon credits for farmland direct to the farmer that is farming it.
Why aren't they pushing the AD plants here and offer suckler farmers etc an alternative, the crowd in charge are great at being the real good boys and girls of Europe and will happily agree to give up and reduce anything they're asked (apart from the low corporate rate) but never seem to have a properly organised alternative in place. The big push for electric cars at the moment and if a large number made that switch quick enough they would probably all be grounded as we haven't enough electricity capacity to power them.
 

Seedsower

Well-Known Member
@muckymanor admirable sentiments and very similar to my own.
Up to recently I thought that a worth while environmental scheme or schemes would be coming but it's not looking likely I'm afraid.Part of your sfp(25% I think,) is being moved aside and to get it back you will have to carry out measures.
The eu have stated that farmers won't make money from environment schemes.
I attended 2 national Ifa meetings on this in the last week and didn't come away smiling.the new teagasc director gave us a presentation yesterday,no magic solution to make it all go away, improvement in technology hoping to achieve the requirement for reduction,I have my doubts on it being enough though
 

muckymanor

Well-Known Member
Why aren't they pushing the AD plants here and offer suckler farmers etc an alternative, the crowd in charge are great at being the real good boys and girls of Europe and will happily agree to give up and reduce anything they're asked (apart from the low corporate rate) but never seem to have a properly organised alternative in place. The big push for electric cars at the moment and if a large number made that switch quick enough they would probably all be grounded as we haven't enough electricity capacity to power them.
The vast majority of suckler farms in this country are on land that isn't suitable for any other type of farming bar sheep. AD plants need to be fed specific feeds such as maize and high quality silage. In reality, AD plants are only suitable for good land. Couple that with the fact that the gas pipelines were strategically built to serve areas of good land with the future view that AD plants would be able to fees into them.

The viable alternative is to limit dairy expansion and work towards getting the 30% reduction in emissions by reducing suckler cow numbers. Use some of the carbon tax money earmarked for agriculture to compensate those that reduce their cattle numbers by paying them for environmental measures. Use more of the carbon tax money to fund AD plants in tillage areas to give an outlet for tillage farms to grow crops for AD. There are a lot of bumps in this road. Some suckler farmers want to continue to farm (myself included). Dairy farmers want to expand and farm organisations are fighting hard to get them a share of the carbon tax earmarked for agriculture. Tillage farmers want to grow a variety of crops and don't want to be tied to supplying AD.

At the end of the day, agriculture is attributed to causing a large proportion of emissions that cause climate change. What governments and NGOs fail to recognise is that agriculture is responsible for 100% of the co2 that is removed from the atmosphere (the majority of which is produced by transport and electrical generation.) Farmers need to be credited for caring for the soil which is responsible for storing co2 and growing plants which remove it because we are doing it on behalf of all of the other non farmers in the world and they should be paying us to do it for them.

Money talks at the end of the day. If the alternatives to cattle farming pay enough money, there'll be no problem getting people to change their systems.
 

Cows&biscuits

Active Member
Problem is CAP is viewed as the tool for our "just transition" and there was no more money put in. The rest of Europe got more money in that fund per head of population than we did, with Germany and France receiving multiples of our figure afaik.
Personally the milk out the gate pays my bills, not the CAP, so any reduction will put me and my business in trouble
 

muckymanor

Well-Known Member
@muckymanor admirable sentiments and very similar to my own.
Up to recently I thought that a worth while environmental scheme or schemes would be coming but it's not looking likely I'm afraid.Part of your sfp(25% I think,) is being moved aside and to get it back you will have to carry out measures.
The eu have stated that farmers won't make money from environment schemes.
I attended 2 national Ifa meetings on this in the last week and didn't come away smiling.the new teagasc director gave us a presentation yesterday,no magic solution to make it all go away, improvement in technology hoping to achieve the requirement for reduction,I have my doubts on it being enough though
Sentiments exactly.


Give it a couple of weeks more. The back benchers are starting to rumble. Rural TDs are starting to get flack from constituents and being told that if they support a reduction in the national herd, then they won't get a vote next time. It takes a few weeks for that message to spread through to the top, but the greens won't get their way with Irish agriculture.

Am I wrong to think that this is a bad thing? There probably won't be any worthwhile environmental scheme, it'll be over subscribed and the rates will be low. We will just kick the can down the road and we will face an even bigger problem.

I feel that a good environmental scheme would give the government a reason to cut cattle numbers or at least prevent expansion. The beef market could do with a reduction in numbers.

I suppose time will tell.
 

Paw

Well-Known Member
... and I want to see a scheme that will pay for work or measures carried out, not for things already in place.
That penalises those ahead of the game who have already made "green"" climate friendly" changes to their systems.
 

muckymanor

Well-Known Member
That penalises those ahead of the game who have already made "green"" climate friendly" changes to their systems.
I have no issue with a lad ahead of the game getting paid for a measure that they carried out without funding.
What I mean is that if a lad got compensated to put up a fence on a river in Reps 1, 2, 3 and 4 and then got paid again for the same fence in Glass, then he shouldn't get paid for the same fence again.

Everyone got a chance to join these schemes and get funded for these measures already. I think that measures in the next scheme need to be new to that farm or not already paid for as a measure in a previous scheme.
 

Paw

Well-Known Member
What I mean is that if a lad got compensated to put up a fence on a river in Reps 1, 2, 3 and 4 and then got paid again for the same fence in Glass, then he shouldn't get paid for the same fence again.

Everyone got a chance to join these schemes and get funded for these measures already. I think that measures in the next scheme need to be new to that farm or not already paid for as a measure in a previous scheme.
Ah that's fair enough if they've already been paid to do things. I was thinking of folk that have done things paid for out of their own pocket should also get something back if it becomes mandatory.
 

muckymanor

Well-Known Member
Here's one for debate.
Reduce the slaughter age for all cattle. eg. Give a good bonus for slaughtering animals under 26 months and no bonus for animals over 30 months. Surely it could go half way to reducing cattle numbers by 30%???
 

Rusty Spade

Well-Known Member
The vast majority of suckler farms in this country are on land that isn't suitable for any other type of farming bar sheep. AD plants need to be fed specific feeds such as maize and high quality silage. In reality, AD plants are only suitable for good land. Couple that with the fact that the gas pipelines were strategically built to serve areas of good land with the future view that AD plants would be able to fees into them.

The viable alternative is to limit dairy expansion and work towards getting the 30% reduction in emissions by reducing suckler cow numbers. Use some of the carbon tax money earmarked for agriculture to compensate those that reduce their cattle numbers by paying them for environmental measures. Use more of the carbon tax money to fund AD plants in tillage areas to give an outlet for tillage farms to grow crops for AD. There are a lot of bumps in this road. Some suckler farmers want to continue to farm (myself included). Dairy farmers want to expand and farm organisations are fighting hard to get them a share of the carbon tax earmarked for agriculture. Tillage farmers want to grow a variety of crops and don't want to be tied to supplying AD.

At the end of the day, agriculture is attributed to causing a large proportion of emissions that cause climate change. What governments and NGOs fail to recognise is that agriculture is responsible for 100% of the co2 that is removed from the atmosphere (the majority of which is produced by transport and electrical generation.) Farmers need to be credited for caring for the soil which is responsible for storing co2 and growing plants which remove it because we are doing it on behalf of all of the other non farmers in the world and they should be paying us to do it for them.

Money talks at the end of the day. If the alternatives to cattle farming pay enough money, there'll be no problem getting people to change their systems.
Promises of funding are soon forgotten.

€49m of money due to Agriculture has been reallocated to fund heating/insulation initiatives.

The more things change, the more they stay the same.
 

jcb411abuser

Well-Known Member
I'd like to see the government back the hell off private industry altogether. Climate change will still be a complaint 50 years from now. Listen to what they are suggesting.....CHANGING THE CLIMATE!
It's not possible and they know it. Its just a new form of currency to overtake the dollar, which now that China has capability for nukes in space that noone can detect and can strike anywhere on earth undetected I think the US EU and NATO need to get their priorities straight instead of worrying about fly larva in waterways and wild flowers.
 

Claas Grass

Well-Known Member
The vast majority of suckler farms in this country are on land that isn't suitable for any other type of farming bar sheep. AD plants need to be fed specific feeds such as maize and high quality silage. In reality, AD plants are only suitable for good land. Couple that with the fact that the gas pipelines were strategically built to serve areas of good land with the future view that AD plants would be able to fees into them.

The viable alternative is to limit dairy expansion and work towards getting the 30% reduction in emissions by reducing suckler cow numbers. Use some of the carbon tax money earmarked for agriculture to compensate those that reduce their cattle numbers by paying them for environmental measures. Use more of the carbon tax money to fund AD plants in tillage areas to give an outlet for tillage farms to grow crops for AD. There are a lot of bumps in this road. Some suckler farmers want to continue to farm (myself included). Dairy farmers want to expand and farm organisations are fighting hard to get them a share of the carbon tax earmarked for agriculture. Tillage farmers want to grow a variety of crops and don't want to be tied to supplying AD.
I know what it requires to feed an AD plant and maybe I'm only looking at my own area, but around here the land could grow anything but there's still a lot of sucklers, if lads here had an alternative and could grow a mixture of high quality silage or maize/beet under a contract I couldn't see why they wouldn't and leave suckler farming to areas where there isn't an alternative and let the lads like yourself continue on what you are doing.
 

Masseyrk662

Well-Known Member
AD digesters are a brilliant option I used to work with them everyday in Germany I cannot understand why they are not in 🤦🏻‍♂️
 

jcb411abuser

Well-Known Member
You'll get 3-4kwh of electric from 1litre of oil. So a large 1MW AD plant makes 24MWh a day which is the equivalent of 7-8000 litres of oil burnt. One lorry load of oil is worth 3-4 large AD plants.
It's futile to think we are going to be able to do anything worthwhile with AD tech.
 
Top