'Know your number', tackling the carbon confusion

The director of the Primary Industries Climate Challenges Centre at Melbourne University pointed out that the rumen evolved to dispose of carbon dioxide and hydrogen using methane about 50 million years ago.

"Thirty years ago, we decided this was a problem, and we're going to fundamentally alter 50 million years of stable evolution in three-year funding rounds," Prof Eckard said.

Along with NSW DPI's senior research scientist, Aaron Simmons, the pair discussed emission reduction strategies, their risks and benefits, and what emissions accounting tools dairy farmers could use to achieve a low-carbon future at Sydney University, Camden, in November.

The carbon conversation is constantly evolving, and following the Paris Climate Change Agreement in 2015, Prof Eckard said large companies' focus shifted to include scope-three emissions (inherited on-farm emissions).

Companies such as Nestle, SunRice, and Cargill responded by setting a net-zero target by 2050.

But he said the conversation was no longer just about targets.

"Companies realise they need a partnership with farmers to get there," Prof Eckard said.

"It's been a reality check. This is a shared journey.

"Of the 100 largest economies in the world, 69 are companies, not countries.

"Because Australia is about 70 per cent export-focused, what supply chains want in the future is more material to us than domestic policy."

Mr Simmons ultimately sees the pressure from consumers and shareholders on large corporations to set net-zero targets as a critical driver.

"They realise they must do something about this because it's a market access issue. It's about retaining the consumers who buy your products," he said.

"Shareholders want corporations to be good global citizens.

"They're knocking on the doors and asking them to demonstrate what they are doing."

Prof Eckard said farmers faced a conundrum when seeking carbon management advice.

In an attempt to circumvent this, Prof Eckard and his team at Melbourne University launched a short course in carbon farming, attracting enormous interest, and has been completed by 5000 people.

The course is designed to equip farmers with practical skills and a deeper understanding of conducting a carbon audit, identifying offset methods, and reducing farm emissions.

"The only people you can go to are self-interested salespeople who want to sell your carbon project," he said.

Mr Simmons said it was essential to understand "greenwashing".

The ACCC's 2022 sweep of online environmental claims made by 247 businesses found that 57 per cent of those businesses were making potentially misleading claims.

The ACCC submitted its findings to the Senate Environment and Communications References Committee inquiry into greenwashing.

There are ways farmers can identify companies that misrepresent their environmental claims or "greenwashing".

"Look for accreditation. If a scheme has industry support, you're pretty good," Mr Simmons said.

"When it comes to reducing emissions, if something sounds too good to be true, the chances are it is.

"Ask for evidence. If someone comes to you and says this is what you should do, and they're not willing to give you the evidence, what are they saying?

"And if they give you evidence, get independent advice based on robust peer-reviewed scientific research and data science."

Prof Eckard led the agricultural part of the net-zero Australia plan, working alongside Princeton University and the University of Queensland, tracking the pathway for every industry to achieve their net-zero targets.

"We reconciled how each industry on known trajectories of technology and previous performance," Prof Eckard said.

"It showed that if agriculture keeps all its soil and tree carbon within the farm, it will still struggle to get to net zero by 2050.

"So this notion there are all these surplus carbon credits for agriculture to generate and feed the fossil fuel industry is quite a furphy."

Prof Eckard sees a shift from offsetting to insetting carbon credits by 2030.

"It will be realised that keeping your carbon in your own system is more important to access your supply chain than selling it off for short-term gain," he said.

"If you think about carbon sequestration, you store carbon in your soil, and then you sell that to a power station and generate the Australian carbon credit units. It's gone.

"You'll never be able to use that again as part of your supply chain target. You will never be able to use that as your farm carbon balance.

"We need to realise we can't sell carbon credits and claim to be low-carbon. You can't do both.

"I recently spoke with a farmer who had spent more than $1 million generating soil carbon credits that they don't know what to do with now because they can't sell them; otherwise, they will never be low-carbon again.

"Be careful, don't sell soil and tree carbon - you might need it to demonstrate you are low carbon by 2030."

Prof Eckard said analysis suggested the average dairy farmer could reduce carbon emissions by 50pc overnight if required, but many of the options were not yet cost-effective.

"We can be guilty of disempowering farmers, saying you need to be net zero, and yet they've got no tools to get there," Prof Eckard said.

"It is just best practice - better calving rates, weaning rates, fertiliser use, better replacement rates, getting rid of inefficient animals, it's about being more judicious with your whole farming system.

"It empowers farmers to say best practice matters today, and it will get you ahead of the queue - that's important.

"Start with the 'do now' strategies, and that's the basis for what supply chains will be asking from us."

Both Prof Eckard and Mr Simmons said it was vital to "know your number" and investigate how to shift it, which is achieved by doing a greenhouse gas account (GHG).

Mr Simmons likened a GHG to a financial report with outgoings, incomings and a final balance.

"You've got greenhouse gases that you emit, sequestration, and then a balance at the end," he said.

"When you look at a GHG account, you can see where your emissions are coming from.

"It's not just about how much you produce; it's your total or net emissions.

"It's also about emission intensities, and then you can break down where that's coming from, so you can make some decisions around this.

"This is all part of knowing your number."

GHG accounting tools include:

"One of the benefits, particularly in grazing and cropping enterprises, is that some of those commercial options tap into the back of the farm data software, so you don't do anything additional, streamlining the process," Mr Simmons said.

"There are tools out there; you don't have to pay somebody to do this. If you're confident, you can do it yourself."

Mr Simmons said it was essential to use robust, internationally recognised calculations.

"Make sure the calculations are relevant to Australia and remain consistent," he said.

Data requirements for annual or quarterly reports include animal numbers, animal weights, animal sales/purchases, milk production, milk fat and protein content, electricity consumption, purchase feed and fertiliser use.

"Theoretically, the better the data, the more robust the results," Mr Simmons said.