Page 39 - FAO-IPCC Expert meeting on climate change

Greenhouse gas fluxes from agriculture and land systems: a scoping of mitigation options
17
economic performance take precedence over GHG mitigation. In developed countries too, GHG mitigation is attractive to farmers only if it can be combined with improved animal productivity and farm efficiency. This includes improved methods of feeding, superior genetics, enhanced animal health, better fertilizer and alternative grazing practices. In New Zealand, dairy farmers have reduced emission intensity but production has outpaced those improved emissions, resulting in a net GHG increase from the sector.
It is evident that alternative innovative technologies are required to decrease net GHG emissions. Substantial research and pilot tests are being carried out by the Global Research Alliance relating to best practices for animal feed and nutrition, animal genetics and breeding and rumen modification. Substantial information is available on dietary changes to reduce methane (e.g. lipids, cereals, sugar concentration), all of which have a modestly positive effect, although the long-term effects remain unknown. The key challenge, however, verified by a small number of farmers who have adopted such measures, is the practicality and economics of the technology. To induce farmers to adopt innovative technologies with mitigation co-benefits, it is essential to demonstrate their economic benefits in the form of productivity and long-run profitability potential. Mitigation benefits in the form of reduced emissions alone are not enough to secure farmers buy in.34
There are limited options to reduce emissions from livestock in rangelands, unless animal stocks are limited which, in turn, will negatively affect household incomes, especially those of the poor. There are few options to reduce methane by the live weight gain of ruminant animals through better flock management or improved feed quality. One option
is to reduce the breeding herd overhead (i.e. number of non-producing animals needed to sustain the herd) and introduce improvements to animal health, husbandry and forage quality to bring down mortality rates and increase fertility. Another option would be to restore degraded rangelands and as such increase the availability of feed and thus livestock productivity. Such intervention would need to go hand-in-hand with incentives to keep animal numbers low. A major source of GHG emissions in rangelands of the savannah is the burning of savannah grass, a tradition that is practiced to improve the quality of the land. This practice, however, produces methane and nitrous oxide and its control has the potential to mitigate them. A change in the mix of animals is an alternative that comes with co-benefits. Replacing cattle with sheep, goats or camels, which are more adaptive to drought conditions, may provide a win-win solution for informal livelihood protection and emissions sequestration.35
34 Other potential technologies on the far horizon currently being explored include modification of the rumen environment as a means to control the microbial process within the rumen in order to reduce GHG emissions from enteric methane. Evidence shows that by using certain chemicals, the micro-organism processes that produce methane can be slowed down or eliminated. Another option is the use of a vaccine, given that animals are able to produce antibodies against the bacteria present in the rumen, suppressing their activity. Yet a further alternative is to breed low-methane animals, which takes time.
35 ICARDA produced a two volume encyclopaedia on the indigenous breeds of small ruminants that easily adapt to environmental changes.
FAO-IPCC Expert meeting on climate change, land use and food security