Methane from livestock, not the problem CO2 emissions are.

Motu Economic and Public Policy Research have published a paper which states that short lived greenhouse gases (like methane) are quite different to long-lived GHGs (like CO2)

In the report Motu say

To stabilise the climate, it is necessary to reduce the overall (net) emissions of long-lived climate forcers to zero. By contrast, emissions of short-lived climate forcers do not have to decline to zero; they only have to stop increasing.

But what Motu don’t say is that having just stated that a carbon emission produced from methane is different to a carbon emission produced from CO2, it is impossible to accurately quantify the effects of different GHGs using the one theoretical unit ‘carbon’ which fails to account for the differences.

Carbon should be carbon, and 1 tonne of carbon should have the same impact as another, otherwise it is not a credible unit as it does not have one real value. Motu confirms it is not.

It is time for the Government to take notice of the growing body of evidence that it has got it wrong on livestock emissions of methane. They do not need to be reduced, as confirmed by Motu, they only have to stop increasing.

The only way forward is to dispense with the carbon unit and treat each GHG individually. It is only then that the true effect of each GHG can be quantified and any necessary mitigation steps put in to place. In the case of enteric methane produced in a steady state the effect on global warming is zero and mitigation is not needed.

The Government also shoots us in the foot when it takes on a $36 billion commitment under the Paris agreement to reduce emissions including methane emissions it has never established need reducing and it is now confirmed in the Motu report that it does not need to be.

The Motu report is written by Michele Hollis and Suzi Kerr with Cecile de Klein, Dave Frame, Mike Harvey, Martin Manning, Andy Resinger, and Anna Robinson.