Methane Matters - And So Do Metrics

Press Release: New Report Challenges "No Additional Warming" Methane Target Ahead of Government Review

28 November 2024

“In response to calls from agricultural industry lobby groups, in June 2024 the Government appointed an independent panel to recommend what is likely to be a significantly weaker methane emissions target consistent with ‘no additional warming’ above 2017 levels”, says Kristen Green, Director of Kapiti Climate Insights.

“However, this would effectively allow New Zealand to maintain its current share of warming from methane into the future, rather than seeking the deep reductions in emissions that the IPCC has made clear are needed now.”

In a report released today, Kapiti Climate Insights criticises the potential adoption of a ‘no additional warming’ based methane target, assessing the factors the Government has excluded from the scope of its independent panel’s review.

“Our methane target matters because methane is responsible for around 48 per cent of our total emissions and two-thirds of our warming to date, and methane is a powerful greenhouse gas with 80 times the heating power of carbon dioxide over its first 20 years,” says Green.

Why a ‘no additional warming’ target is of concern

The report highlights that reducing methane emissions represents New Zealand’s greatest opportunity to limit warming.

“Current global pathways for limiting warming to 1.5°C require reductions of all greenhouse gas emissions as rapidly as possible”.

“However, a ‘no additional warming’ target would allow New Zealand to grandfather its share of contributed warming from historical emissions into the future. This approach is self-serving for New Zealand and unfair to others - shifting the burden of reductions in greenhouse gas emissions to other sectors and other countries”, says Green.

“A ‘no additional warming’ methane target will privilege countries with developed agricultural sectors and penalise low-income nations who are still developing their food systems in the face of increasing food security challenges – which is not very consistent with the principle that New Zealand should take the lead in emissions reductions as a developed country”.

“As New Zealand’s domestic budgets and NDCs are set based on all gases combined, a reduction in ambition for biogenic methane will likely necessitate greater reductions for other gases. No analysis has been undertaken on the impacts of this burden placed elsewhere within the economy - in fact, the terms of reference appear to bar the panel from doing this analysis”.  

“Reducing our ambition risks disrupting trade arrangements (including the NZ/EU FTA), and damaging New Zealand's reputation for sustainable agricultural exports.  We would be the first country in the world to adopt such a principle - and it may ultimately backfire as an agricultural protection measure as it will harm New Zealand’s brand and disadvantage exporters competing against housed farming systems for contracts where climate requirements are part of terms of supply”.

“It is entirely possible for New Zealand to make meaningful reductions in biogenic methane emissions. Several developed countries have already achieved reductions in biogenic methane sufficient to constrain or decrease their warming since 2000, while sustaining an internationally competitive agricultural sector. The choice to limit ambition to maintaining warming at 2017 levels is arbitrary and misaligned with what has been achieved by peer countries with advanced agricultural sectors, and risks disincentivising possible methane emissions reduction measures”, says Green.

Why Lawyers for Climate Action supported the work

New Zealand’s current 2050 target under the Climate Change Response Act 2002 is for New Zealand to reduce methane emissions by 24-47 per cent below 2017 emissions by 2050.

“The 2050 target is a critical component of the Climate Change Response Act”, says Jessica Palairet, Executive Director at Lawyers for Climate Action NZ Inc, who supported the report. “In many ways, the 2050 target is the lodestone of that Act, determining the level of ambition in our 5-yearly emissions budgets and emissions reduction plans.”

“However, the terms of reference for this independent panel review are unduly narrow, excluding several critical considerations for whether ‘no additional warming’ is an appropriate way to approach New Zealand’s methane targets. For instance, the terms of reference prevent the panel from considering the impacts of any new proposed target on New Zealand’s wider climate strategy or on burden-sharing between different sectors or countries.”

“This means that the Government risks making a decision that may be perceived as being consistent with climate science and our international obligations without squarely considering whether this is the case,” says Palairet. 

“In no small part, this is the natural result of the Government’s decision to establish an independent process, rather than making changes to the 2050 target only on the recommendation of the Climate Change Commission and if specific statutory criteria are met, as contemplated by the Climate Change Response Act. These safeguards underscore the critical importance of the 2050 target”.

For media inquiries, please contact:
Kristen Green, Director, Kapiti Climate Insights, kristen@kapiticlimate.com 

Jessica Palairet, Executive Director, Lawyers for Climate Action NZ Inc, jessica@lawyersforclimateaction.nz