Despite growing awareness and calls for action over reducing methane in the atmosphere, many barriers stand in the way of studies, according to researchers.
Reducing methane has become a focal point for environmental policy, with the greenhouse gas (GHG) over 80 times more powerful than carbon dioxide, and agriculture a predominant source of its production.
Methane associated with ruminant livestock production accounts for two-thirds (68%) of Irish agricultural GHG emissions, according to Teagasc, and much research is ongoing in the area.
Experts hosted at the Science Media Centre (SMC) UK and a Pilot SMC for Ireland recently explained the science behind reduction techniques, which includes genetic breeding approaches, vaccine candidates, and ways to alter the ruminant microbiome as well as the feed additives.
Senior researcher in host microbiome interactions at University of Galway, Dr. Sinead Waters spoke about Ireland’s efforts in reducing methane emissions from livestock through feed additives.
The only approved feed additive for reducing methane in Ireland so far is Bovaer (3-NOP), which is used in dairy animals by stopping the last step of methanogenesis (methane production).
Dr. Waters said that the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) approval is “rigorous and comprehensive”, slowing down the work on implementing more feed additives.
While technologies have proven effective so far, they come with high upfront expenses and high costs for farmers to invest in when there may be no financial reward.
“The feed additive is going to cost the farmer so unless there is a carrot and stick approach, or policy driving this where farmers will get paid to use a feed additive, it’s very difficult to expect them to use it for no reason other than they’re helping the climate,” Dr. Waters said.
Methane and social media
Another major barrier highlighted in Ireland and across the UK is communication with the public, with reference made to the “social media storm” after an announcement by Arla Foods in 2021 that it was trialling a new animal feed additive called Bovaer.
The additive is scientifically proven to reduce methane in farm animals, and was cleared for use by health authorities in the UK, but led to widespread misinformation online.
Social media was flooded with health scares and conspiracy theories at the time, with some users sharing videos of themselves pouring milk down the drain.
Bovaer is now approved in 68 countries and served to over 200,000 cows. It feeds just one-quarter of a teaspoon per head per day, reducing emissions by an average of 30% for dairy cattle and up to 45% for beef cattle.
Dr. Waters said that following this social media reaction, it was important for researchers to note that “communication is key”.
She said that there needs to be more communication with consumers, as well as stakeholders who are directly involved, such as farmers, in order to show how additives are “safe”.
Director of research at the Pirbright Institute in the UK, Prof. John Hammond said that the scientific evidence can be “complex” and “difficult to communicate”.
While studies have been ongoing for many years, the information being spread about Bovaer last year may have been completely new for some people, according to Hammond.
“When you consider the research efforts that have been going on for decades across different areas, the benefits have not been communicated in the fact that this needs to happen one way or another.
“And the benefits on the climate generally have not been communicated accurately with some of the detail on how it may affect your food or your day-to-day life, and that it will be different in different regions around the world,” Hammond said.
He said that people on social media had felt “it snuck up on them a little bit” and gave rise to questions on how it would impact their food, which needs to be communicated more clearly going forward.
