Thread by @AndrewLRJackson

Understanding @teagasc’s role in Ireland’s failure to reduce GHG emissions is important & requires delving into the history books.

This line - “We were always wondering when the whistle would blow on climate change” - is best understood in its historical context. THREAD/1/

https://twitter.com/irishwildlife/status/1201849120371154944

In 1991, @teagasc (w/UCD) prepared the ‘Agriculture’ chapter for an influential report: “Climate change: studies on the implications for Ireland”

The key conclusion? Irish agri production would be *enhanced* by climate change, “perhaps even to a disproportionate extent”. 2/

This report informed Ireland’s first national climate strategy in 1993, which included as the very first bullet point in Ch 1 under the implications of climate change for Ireland...

...“broadly beneficial effects for the agricultural sector” 3/

NB. Ireland’s aim in 1993 was not to reduce GHG emissions but to limit growth in emissions to +20% b/w 1990 & 2000!

So we had a national goal that allowed emissions to increase rapidly & an official narrative from the top down that this would *benefit* Irish agriculture. 4/

The idea that Irish ag would benefit from climate change influenced & arguably continues to influence the views of prominent figures in Irish ag.

E.g. See this 2008 opinion piece in @farmersjournal arguing that “Ireland would benefit considerably” from a 2-3C increase. 5/

This was AFTER the IPCC’s AR4 report had advised that countries like Ireland should reduce their emissions by 25-40% b/w 1990 and 2020 & by 80-95% by 2050 to stay below 2C and help avert danger.

And THAT was before the temp limit was lowered by the Paris Agreement. 6/

Consider also the record on climate of Matt Dempsey, former editor of @farmersjournal and current chair of The Agricultural Trust, which owns the Farmers’ Journal: thinkorswim.ie/irish-farmers-… 7/

That 2017 article came AFTER the IPCC’s AR5 report had explained clearly the near-linear relationship between cumulative emissions & temperature increase, and the relationship with severe climate risks. 8/

The IPCC’s assessment of risks was of course updated in its 2018 report on 1.5C.

The bad news: things get highly risky at even lower temperature increases than previously understood. 9/

Perhaps most striking of all is this from a recent paper in @nature, which shows how the IPCC’s understanding of the risks of triggering tipping points (“abrupt and irreversible changes in the climate system”) has changed over time. We’re at >1C currently. 10/

So our scientific understanding of the severe risks of climate breakdown is ever clearer.

How has Teagasc responded?

In its own words, by “wondering when the whistle would blow”.

Perhaps you consider this unfair? 11/

If so, please consider @teagasc’s response to peat use by Ireland’s mushroom industry.

🇮🇪 is a major player internationally in mushroom production. Access to unregulated peat - no planning permission, no EIA - naturally gives producers here a competitive advantage. 12/

In 2013, Teagasc (w/AFBI & UCD) published research on peat alternatives. Conclusions:

• there are alternatives;
• these are more expensive;
• anyway Irish producers aren’t under pressure to stop using peat;
• but *British consumers*(!) might apply pressure in future. 13/

The addition of Teagasc 2 yrs later as an ex officio member of Ireland’s Climate Change Advisory Council was controversial at the time (though not with IFA).

The original ex officio members proposed were @EPAIreland & @SEAI_ie. The FG-Labour coalition added Teagasc & ESRI. 14/

We now have a Climate Change Advisory Council dominated by male economists: 8 of the 11 are primarily economists; just 2 of the 11 are female.

Had a much better earlier climate law proposal been adopted instead of our Climate Act, things would have been different -see pics. 15/

The @EPAIreland has long since tackled the notion that climate change (breakdown) might be beneficial for Irish agriculture - e.g. pic1 from 2017 report.

Any silo focus on purported agri ‘benefits’ misses entirely the full shocking risks (pics 2-4)

16/

Maintaining that Irish ag will somehow benefit from climate breakdown in spite of the evidence & despite the obvious interconnectedness of the world is worse than wishful thinking: it’s to stand in a future dystopia, pointing at the grass growing. 17/

To anyone whose instinctive response is to dismiss this thread for one reason or another, please simply read this recent, short article in Nature (“Climate tipping points: too risky to bet against”): nature.com/articles/d4158… 18/

Its authors are leading scientists and they conclude as follows, with stark clarity (in one of the world’s very top peer-reviewed scientific journals):

19/

“We are in a state of planetary emergency”: we are in danger & need urgent, evidence-based advice & action at national & international levels to secure rapid and deep emissions reductions consistent with the science.

We need, in short, advisers who will blow the whistle.

20/

Yet marginal efficiency gains = plan A for agriculture at present.

This is precisely what the head of the @EUEnvironment Agency warned against this week: euractiv.com/section/energy…

The whistle is only going to get louder as the crisis deepens.

21/END/

@think_or_swim @boucherhayes @IrishEnvNet @Env_Pillar