Net Position Report 2009

• Executive Summary
• 1 New Zealand’s Emissions Profile 1990–2007
• 2 Kyoto Protocol Compliance Equation
• 3 Projections of Emissions and Removals
• 4 Projections Uncertainty
• 5 Reconciliation Against Previous Projections
• References
• Appendix A: Agriculture Emission Projections provided by the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry
• Appendix B: Projected Balance of Emissions for the Energy, Transport and Industrial Processes Sectors for the Kyoto Commitment Period, 2008–2012
• Appendix C: Land Use, Land-use Change and Forestry Sector provided by the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry
• Appendix D: Projected Waste Sector Emissions for the First Commitment Period of the Kyoto Protocol

Appendix A: Agriculture Emission Projections provided by the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry

Summary

The most likely value of total emissions from the agricultural sector over the five years of the First Commitment Period (CP1) (2008–2012) of the Kyoto Protocol is projected to be 184.0 million tonnes carbon dioxide equivalents (Mt CO₂-e). The range is projected to lie between 166.0 Mt CO₂-e to 204.8 Mt CO₂-e.

Projected annual emissions during CP1 under the most likely, lower and upper scenarios are presented in Table A1 below.

Table A1: Summary of annual emission projection scenarios for the First Commitment Period in million tonnes carbon dioxide equivalents (Mt CO₂-e)

Calendar year	Annual emission projections
	Lower	Most likely	Upper
20081	33.97	34.86	35.77
20092	32.49	36.10	40.17
20102	32.68	37.02	42.11
20112	33.13	37.66	43.08
20122	33.70	38.40	43.67
Total	165.98	184.02	204.81

1 Estimated emissions

2 Projected emissions from the Inventory model

The assigned amount for CP1 is 162.5 (based on the 1990 agricultural emissions baseline of 32.5 Mt CO₂-e, (as confirmed in New Zealand’s assigned amount)). The most likely projections for CP1 of 184.0 Mt CO₂-e exceeds the assigned amount by 21.5 Mt CO₂-e. This ranges from an excess of 3.5 Mt CO₂-e to 42.3 Mt CO₂-e under the lower and upper scenarios.

The most likely value for total emissions over CP1 (of 184.0 Mt CO₂-e) is 14.4 Mt CO₂-e lower than was projected in 2008. Major contributions to this reduction are the decline of animal numbers and performance due to the 2008 drought, and the incorporation of new emission factors. Although this is a large difference, the most likely value is within the range of total emissions for CP1 projected in 2008.

Projected future agriculture greenhouse gas emissions are influenced significantly by prevailing conditions. All biological systems are greatly affected by climate, and agriculture is also subject to changing economic conditions, including changing international commodity prices and the New Zealand dollar exchange rate. Every effort has been made to provide projections based on the most up-to-date information as at March 2009, however, future adjustments are inevitable.

Introduction

Our projections are based on:

1. the methodologies used in the National Greenhouse Gas Inventory submitted to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) annually, and
2. econometric and physical models developed by the New Zealand Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry (MAF). The inventory methodology conforms to the Good Practice Guidance methodologies developed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and adopted by the UNFCCC.

Projections are driven by future estimates of:

• annual animal numbers and animal performance data (milk yield, weights) by species (beef cattle, dairy cattle, deer and sheep) obtained from the MAF’s Pastoral Supply Response Model (PSRM)

• annual nitrogen fertiliser use obtained from MAF’s Nitrogen Demand Model

• annual emissions estimated using the agriculture GHG tier two inventory model.

Two further scenarios of projected emissions for each year in First Commitment Period (hereafter CP1) have also been produced that represent the upper and lower bounds of projected emissions. These present emission estimates using the 95 per cent confidence intervals for the upper and lower bounds of animal numbers, animal performance, and nitrogen fertiliser use.

Changes in methodology since last year’s assessment

There have been several significant improvements in the methodology used in this year’s projections. They consist of the improvement of the PSRM which was used to forecast animal numbers and performance data, the incorporation of the agriculture GHG tier two inventory model (hereafter inventory model) (Clark et al, 2003) which is currently used to estimate New Zealand’s emissions for the National Inventory reported to the UNFCCC. Emission factors have been updated to reflect improved understanding of agricultural ammonia (NH3), nitric oxide and nitrogen dioxide (collectively referred to as NOx) emissions under New Zealand conditions. These gases influence measured agricultural emissions as they are an indirect route for nitrous oxide (N₂O) formation.

MAF’s PSRM has been improved to include a land-use forecast component as well as new variables that feed into the inventory model (eg, milk yield, liveweights). The key outputs of the model are forecasts of animal numbers (which are driven by changes in land use and stocking rates) and animal performance, which are subsequently used as inputs into the inventory model. Animal performance projections are driven by past performances, weather conditions as well as farm-gate prices. The new land-use component allows for simulations of movements between different land-use categories under a constrained total land capacity. It also allows for the inclusion of some land-use assumptions used in the Land Use, Land-use Change and Forestry (LULUCF) sector. Exogenous shocks to the model are farm-gate prices, net farm incomes, and weather conditions. MAF’s Nitrogen Demand Model has also been updated.

Use of the inventory model is the second major methodological change. The ability of the PRSM to predict both animal population and performance makes it possible to use the full inventory model to obtain projections. In the past, the PSRM projected animal numbers only and these were combined with projections of GHG emissions per animal. These projections were obtained from regression analysis of the time series of emissions per animal from 1990 to the present. Values reported in the net position report are now consistent with how they are derived in New Zealand’s National Inventory. Also, estimates for every year of CP1 can now be obtained rather than projecting the 2010 emissions and multiplying by 5 to obtain the total emissions over the 2008–2012 period.

The use of the inventory model to forecast emissions for every year in CP1 enables the most up to date information available to be incorporated into the projection, reducing the uncertainty bounds determined for the 2008 emissions forecast. Preliminary data from the 2008 agricultural production survey were used for animal population numbers. This data relates to the last half of 2007 and the first half of 2008 and therefore only animal numbers for the last six months of 2008 needed to be forecast. Without this data, the entire year plus six months of 2007 would need to be forecast. Estimates of animal performance for the 2008/09 production season were made using production data up to January 2009. Therefore, the estimates on performance data for the calendar year 2008 were based on actual data rather than forecasts.

Nitrous oxide is one of the six greenhouse gases whose emissions are estimated for New Zealand’s National Inventory. It is produced by both direct emissions from nitrogen (N) and indirectly where other N forms are first formed before being converting to N₂O. One such indirect path is where NH3 gas and other NOx are first produced. These gases are then re-deposited on land surfaces elsewhere before being converted to N₂O. The major source of New Zealand’s N₂O emissions comes from N excreted by livestock. In order to estimate the indirect contribution to N₂O of N excreted by livestock via NH3 and NOx gases, a factor called Fracgasm is used. This represents the proportion of N which is excreted by livestock and is released into the atmosphere as NH3 and NOx. Currently New Zealand uses the IPCC default value of 0.2 for Fracgasm. A MAF-contracted report (Sherlock et al, 2008) reviewed the relevant studies on Fracgasm from livestock excreted-N, and found that New Zealand could halve the Fracgasm value to 0.1. This report was internationally peer reviewed. The lower values for Fracgasm have been used and this accounts for 3.8 Mt CO₂-e.

Reduction of nitrous oxide emissions due to application of a nitrification inhibitor has also been incorporated and accounts for a further 0.3 Mt CO₂-e. The application of the nitrification inhibitor dicyandiamide (DCD) to dairy pastures has been shown to reduce nitrous oxide emissions from fertiliser and animal-excreted nitrogen on pasture over a five-month period in winter. Nitrate leaching is also reduced. A report contracted by MAF on the use of DCD (Clough et al, 2008) developed the methodology for the quantification of the reduced nitrous oxide emissions.

Development of the most likely scenario

Projected animal numbers and nitrogen fertiliser use forecasts

Agricultural commodity prices

Future numbers of dairy cattle, beef cattle, sheep and deer are driven by changes in land use and stocking rates. Land-use changes are modelled using expected changes in farm incomes. Stocking rates are modelled using expected changes in farm-gate prices, animal performance, and weather conditions. MAF estimates key farm-gate prices based on international price movements and the Treasury’s assumptions on the future exchange rate and inflation, as published in its 2008 December fiscal and economic update. Figure A1 illustrates MAF’s current expectations for key farm-gate prices to 2012 in real terms.

In spring 2008, the global financial crisis unfolded. The crisis has seen international prices for many commodities receding from their previous high levels and the New Zealand dollar depreciating rapidly against all major trading partners. The New Zealand trade weighted index fell 28 per cent for February 2009, year on year. The significant currency depreciation means New Zealand dollar farm-gate prices will increase unless there is a severe fall in international price, as is the case with dairy prices (see Figure A1).

New Zealand dairy prices fell quite spectacularly with very rapid falls in international dairy prices from the peaks of the dairy boom (since August 2008). The average milk-solid payout is expected to significantly decline from the peak in the 2007/08 season, leading to slower growth in the dairy sector over CP1.

International meat prices followed a different trajectory to dairy; meat prices were poor during the commodity boom but have recently improved due to specific supply constraints. New Zealand meat prices are expected to strengthen over CP1, encouraging a partial recovery in sheep and beef numbers from the drought induced de-stocking of 2008.

Figure A1: Past and expected changes to key inflation adjusted farm-gate prices

Text description for figure A1

Animal number forecasts

Since the 2008 net position report, the scale and consequences of the 2008 nationwide drought has become more apparent. The preliminary agricultural production survey results, released on 10 February 2009, provide a comprehensive quantitative description of the drought’s impact. Sheep numbers fell by 12 per cent, beef numbers fell by 6 per cent, and deer numbers fell by 13 per cent. Dairy numbers increased by 6 per cent.

Over CP1, dairy numbers are expected to be lower than last year’s forecasts due to lower payouts. Projections of sheep and beef numbers, on the other hand, improved from last year’s forecasts due to higher prices at the farm gate.

Table A2: Animal numbers projections for most likely scenario (000)

Year end 30 June	Beef cattle	Dairy cattle	Deer	Sheep
1990	4593	3441	976	57852
20081	4119	5563	1213	33894
20092	4213	5582	1371	35589
20102	4367	5645	1432	36330
20112	4377	5713	1386	36920
20122	4402	5746	1385	37243

1 2008 is provisional data from the Agricultural Production Survey

2 Projected numbers from MAF’s PSRM

Nitrogen fertiliser usage forecasts

The application of nitrogen fertiliser rises in line with improvements in farm-gate pastoral output prices, especially the milk-solids price, and tends to fall with increases in the price of the fertiliser itself (see Austin et al, 2006). The most likely forecast for nitrogen fertiliser use for 2010 is 317,844 tonnes, which is lower than the 2008 forecast of 396,967 tonnes. This difference is largely attributed to lower dairy payouts and higher fertiliser prices over CP1.

Table A3: Projections of nitrogen fertiliser usage for most likely scenario (tonnes)

Year end 30 June	N fertiliser use
1990	59265
20081	349157
20092	349993
20102	317844
20112	297418
20122	330418

1 2008 is provisional data from FertResearch

2 Projected data from MAF’s Nitrogen Demand Model

Animal performance forecasts

With genetic improvement and better pasture utilisation, productivity of New Zealand sheep, cattle and deer has increased. This has resulted in increasing amounts of pasture per animal being consumed and consequently more methane and nitrogen in urine and dung being produced. While animal performance typically dips in years of drought, such as 2008/09, the underlying upwards trend is robust and expected to continue in the foreseeable future. In MAF’s PSRM model, animal performance is modelled as a function of a linear trend of past performance, days of soil moisture deficit and, where statistically significant, farm-gate price. Table A4 shows four examples of the performance statistics that are obtained from the PSRM.

Table A4: Example of some of the animal performance data obtained from the Pastoral Supply Response Model

30 June year end	Annual milk production per cow and heifer in milk (litres/year)	Beef bull slaughter weight (kg)	Lamb slaughter weights (kg)	Breeding stag slaughter weight (kg)
1990	2746	275.1	14.1	51.5
20081	3538	299.3	16.5	56.8
20092	3744	308.7	17.6	58.4
20102	3872	313.3	18.0	59.9
20112	3934	319.6	18.0	61.0
20122	3996	321.5	18.2	61.3

1 2008 is data from LIC New Zealand Dairy Stats, and estimate of slaughter weight using MAF slaughter stats

2 Projected data from MAF’s Pastoral Supply Response Model

Development of greenhouse gas emission projections: most likely scenario

Projections of enteric methane emissions

Projections of enteric methane emissions for beef, dairy, deer and sheep for each year in CP1 were calculated by running actual data and forecast data from MAF’s PSRM through the agriculture GHG tier two inventory model.

The inventory model determines animal feed intakes in monthly time steps for different age classes of each animal species. These are based on the mean national animal performance data derived from national statistics relevant to each species. For example, dairy cattle inputs include: animal liveweight, total milk production and milk fat and protein percentages. For each animal species, an empirical relationship has been derived for the amount of enteric methane produced per unit of feed intake. These relationships have been developed in New Zealand for deer, beef and dairy cattle, and sheep, using the sulphur hexafluoride (SF₆) technique that enables estimation of methane emissions under practical farming situations. The estimated annual methane emissions per animal take into account changes in animal performance over time. Since individual animal performance has been increasing over time (eg, milk yields per cow have risen by approximately 25 per cent since 1990), feed intake and methane emissions per animal have also increased.

Figure A2: Model for deriving ruminant methane emissions (Clark et al, 2003)

Text description for figure A2

* GEI = Gross energy intake.

Carbon dioxide equivalents from this enteric methane emission from each main source are shown in Table A5. Methane emissions from enteric fermentation on a per animal basis are shown in Table A6. An overview of the inventory model is shown in Figure A2.

Table A5: Projections of enteric methane emissions from each main source for the most likely scenario and the 1990 baseline (reported in Mt CO₂-e)

Beef cattle	Dairy cattle	Deer	Sheep	Total enteric methane emissions*
1990 baseline**	4.89	5.01	0.38	11.28	21.82
20081	4.93	9.08	0.58	7.95	22.60
20092	5.1	9.42	0.64	8.19	23.41
20102	5.37	9.6	0.68	8.49	24.19
20112	5.5	9.78	0.67	8.71	24.72
20122	5.56	9.92	0.67	8.89	25.11

* Total enteric methane emissions also include emissions from other animal species (goats, horses, pigs, and poultry) for which projections are discussed later.

** 1990 values include all new science and methodologies and therefore are not identical to the 1990 assigned amount

1 Estimated emissions

2 Projected emissions using the inventory model

Table A6: Methane emissions from enteric fermentation per animal for 1990 baseline, 2008 estimate and projected most likely scenario values for 2009–2012 (kg CH₄/head/annum)

Calendar year	Beef cattle	Dairy cattle	Deer	Sheep
1990 baseline*	50.74	69.35	18.76	9.28
20081	56.97	77.73	22.72	11.17
20092	57.62	80.36	22.07	10.96
20102	58.55	80.96	22.61	11.12
20112	59.83	81.48	23.12	11.24
20122	60.19	82.19	23.13	11.37

* 1990 values include all new science and methodologies and therefore are not identical to the 1990 assigned amount

1 Estimated emissions

2 Projected emissions using the inventory model

Methane emissions from ruminant animal waste

Methane emissions also arise from animal faecal material. This includes material deposited on pasture and, in the case of lactating dairy cows, from animal faecal material collected and treated in waste management systems. The projected waste methane emissions for beef, dairy, deer, and sheep for each year in CP1 were derived by running actual data and forecast data from MAF’s PSRM through the agriculture GHG tier two inventory model. Carbon dioxide equivalents from animal waste methane emission from each main source are shown in Table A7. Methane emissions from animal waste on a per animal basis are shown in Table A8.

Table A7: Projections of animal waste methane emissions for the most likely scenario and the 1990 baseline (reported in Mt CO₂-e)

Calendar year	Beef cattle	Dairy cattle	Deer	Sheep	Total waste methane emissions*
1990 baseline**	0.06	0.21	0.004	0.11	0.58
20081	0.06	0.39	0.01	0.08	0.53
20092	0.06	0.4	0.01	0.08	0.55
20102	0.07	0.41	0.01	0.08	0.56
20112	0.07	0.41	0.01	0.09	0.57
20122	0.07	0.42	0.01	0.09	0.58

* Total waste methane emissions also include emissions from other animal species (goats, horses, pigs, and poultry) for which projections are discussed later.

** 1990 values include all new science and methodologies and therefore are not identical to the 1990 assigned amount

1 Estimated emissions

2 Projected emissions using the inventory model

Table A8: Methane emissions from waste per animal for 1990 baseline, 2008 estimate and projected most likely scenario values for 2009–2012 in kg CH₄/head/annum

Calendar year	Beef cattle	Dairy cattle	Deer	Sheep
1990 baseline*	0.62	2.89	0.17	0.09
20081	0.70	3.32	0.21	0.11
20092	0.71	3.41	0.20	0.11
20102	0.72	3.43	0.21	0.11
20112	0.73	3.45	0.21	0.11
20122	0.73	3.49	0.21	0.11

* 1990 values include all new science and methodologies and therefore are not identical to the 1990 assigned amount

1 Estimated emissions

2 Projected emissions using the inventory model

Projections of nitrous oxide emissions

Nitrous oxide emissions are derived from animal nitrogen output and synthetic nitrogen fertiliser use. Animal nitrogen output is a function of animal feed intake and the nitrogen content of the diet minus any nitrogen stored in animal product (meat, milk etc). Models developed by Clark et al (2003) for estimating monthly feed intake also estimate nitrogen output per animal. Projections of nitrous oxide emissions for beef, dairy, deer and sheep for each year in CP1 were derived by running actual data and forecast data from MAF’s PSRM through the agriculture GHG tier two inventory model. Projections of emissions from nitrogen fertiliser use were projected using forecasts of nitrogen use and emission factors that are currently used in National Inventory calculations (table A9).

Table A9: Projections of nitrous oxide emissions for each major nitrogen source for the most likely scenario and the 1990 baseline (reported in Mt CO₂-e)

Calendar year	Dung and urine from beef cattle	Dung and urine from dairy cattle	Dung and urine from deer	Dung and urine from sheep	Emission from N fertiliser use	Total nitrous oxide emissions*
1990 baseline**	1.87	2.22	0.15	4.53	0.34	9.4
20081	1.88	3.90	0.23	3.23	2.00	11.51
20092	1.94	4.02	0.25	3.43	2.00	11.92
20102	2.05	4.08	0.27	3.55	1.82	12.05
20112	2.10	4.14	0.26	3.66	1.70	12.15
20122	2.13	4.19	0.26	3.74	1.89	12.49

* Total nitrous oxide emissions also include emissions from other animal species (goats, horses, pigs, and poultry), N-fixing crops, crop residues and emissions from burning of savannah and field burning of agricultural residues.

** 1990 values include all new science and methodologies and therefore are not identical to the 1990 assigned amount

1 Estimated emissions

2 Projected emissions using the inventory model

Table A10: Nitrogen output per animal for 1990 baseline, 2008 estimate and projected most likely scenario values for 2009–2012 (kg N/head/annum).

Calendar year	Beef cattle	Dairy cattle	Deer	Sheep
1990 baseline*	65.51	103.87	24.88	12.61
20081	73.45	114.14	30.18	15.33
20092	74.29	117.56	29.29	15.53
20102	75.61	118.18	30.03	15.75
20112	77.31	118.87	30.71	15.95
20122	77.81	119.80	30.71	16.17

* 1990 values include all new science and methodologies and therefore are not identical to the 1990 assigned amount

1 Estimated emissions

2 Projected emissions using the inventory model

Other animal species and greenhouse gas sources

Methane and nitrous oxide emissions of minor animal species present in the National Inventory ie, goats, horses, pigs, and poultry and nitrous oxide emissions from crop stubble burning, savannah burning and nitrogen fixing crops were forecast based on a rolling three-year average method from their actual level of production in 2008. As these sources made up only 1.5 per cent of total agricultural emissions in 2007 (0.55 MtCO₂-e), the impact of even large changes in any of these small emission sources on the total national emissions profile would be small.

Development of lower and upper scenarios

Two further scenarios were developed: a lower and higher scenario. The higher scenario combined the upper 95 per cent confidence interval values for animal numbers, animal performance and nitrogen fertiliser use. The lower scenario combined the lower 95 per cent confidence interval values. These two scenarios estimate the values of the upper and lower bounds of future projected emissions at the 95 per cent confidence level.

These calculations attempt to provide a range, with a specified probability, within which future reported emissions estimates should lie. It takes into account the uncertainty around the prediction of the forecasts used to determine the emissions, for example future animal numbers and performance levels. Predictions assume current science and do not account for any future changes in science or methodology.

Figure A3: Projected emissions over CP1

Text description for figure A3

Animal numbers and nitrogen fertiliser usage

Table A11: Projections of animal numbers (000) and nitrogen fertiliser usage (tonnes) for low and high scenarios

Year end 30 June	Beef cattle		Dairy cattle		Deer		Sheep		N fertiliser use
	Lower	Upper	Lower	Upper	Lower	Upper	Lower	Upper	Lower	Upper
2009	3,950	4,475	5,483	5,682	1,141	1,602	29,944	41,723	266,928	447,996
2010	4,116	4,618	5,472	5,818	1,197	1,667	30,087	43,036	219,721	432,873
2011	4,125	4,628	5,518	5,909	1,141	1,632	30,449	43,826	208,050	420,236
2012	4,151	4,652	5,542	5,950	1,140	1,631	30,665	44,240	229,631	478,333

Enteric methane emissions

Lower and upper estimates of enteric methane emissions were obtained from running the inventory model with the lower and upper estimates of animal numbers and performances. This gives a lower and upper bound for projected enteric methane emissions at the 95 per cent confidence level (Table A12).

Table A12: Projections of enteric methane emissions for the main livestock industries for the lower and upper scenarios (Mt CO₂-e)

Calendar year	Beef cattle		Dairy cattle		Deer		Sheep
	Lower	Upper	Lower	Upper	Lower	Upper	Lower	Upper
2008	4.82	5.04	8.85	9.31	0.56	0.59	7.68	8.23
2009	4.63	5.59	8.94	9.93	0.52	0.76	7.16	9.59
2010	4.86	5.9	8.96	10.28	0.54	0.83	7.22	10.28
2011	4.97	6.05	9.04	10.56	0.53	0.83	7.41	10.60
2012	5.03	6.12	9.14	10.76	0.53	0.83	7.58	10.86

Nitrous oxide emissions

Lower and upper estimates of nitrous oxide emissions were obtained from running the inventory model with the lower and higher estimates of animal numbers and performances. Emissions from nitrogen fertiliser were projected using lower and higher estimates of nitrogen use. This gives an upper and lower bound for projected nitrous oxide emissions at the 95 per cent confidence level (Table A13).

Table A13: Projections of nitrous oxide emissions from the main nitrogen sources for lower and higher scenarios (Mt CO₂-e)

Calendar year	Dung and urine from beef cattle		Dung and urine from dairy cattle		Dung and urine from deer		Dung and urine from sheep		Emissions from N fertiliser use
	Lower	Upper	Lower	Upper	Lower	Upper	Lower	Upper	Lower	Upper
2008	1.84	1.92	3.80	3.91	0.22	0.23	3.12	3.34	2.00	2.00
2009	1.76	2.13	3.81	4.05	0.21	0.30	2.89	3.92	1.53	2.56
2010	1.85	2.26	3.81	4.12	0.21	0.33	2.91	4.22	1.26	2.48
2011	1.89	2.32	3.84	4.19	0.21	0.32	2.99	4.35	1.19	2.41
2012	1.92	2.35	3.87	4.24	0.21	0.33	3.06	4.46	1.31	2.74

 

Overall assumptions and limitations of the projections

All the above projections need to be assessed within the inherent uncertainties of biological systems. Climate shocks such as droughts, and the economic conditions which are largely driven by overseas markets, can rapidly change the circumstances under which the agricultural industry operate over the next few years.

Uncertainty in projections of animal populations and animal performances and of the science underlying measurement methods, all attribute to the uncertainty in projections of total emissions.

Emission mitigation technologies such as nitrification inhibitor DCD and improvements in the science behind measuring agricultural emissions (Fracgasm), have been incorporated into emission projections. New mitigation technologies and further refinements of measurement methods will bring further changes to these projections.

Adoption of mitigation technologies may be counter-balanced by greater increases in emissions from increases in animal numbers and further improvements in animal productivity growth. Past data on animal productivity growth were used to derive the best-fit projection equations for future changes. However, animal performances remained largely dependent on future improvements in technologies and management practices.

References

Austin D, Cao K, Rys G, 2006. Modelling Nitrogen Fertiliser Demand in New Zealand. Paper presented at the New Zealand Agricultural and Resource Economics Society conference, Nelson.

Clark H, Brookes I, Walcroft A, 2003. Enteric Methane Emissions for New Zealand Ruminants 1990–2001 Calculated Using an IPCC Tier Two Approach. Report prepared for the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry by AgResearch Ltd.

Clough TJ, Kelliher FM, Clark H and van der Weerden TJ. 2008. Incorporation of the Nitrification Inhibitor DCD into New Zealand’s 2009 National Inventory. Prepared for Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, PO Box 2526, Wellington.

Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, 2008. Briefing on Methodology for Forecasting Livestock Numbers and Nitrogen Fertiliser Use, 8 pp.

Sherlock R, Jewell P and Clough T. 2008. Review of the New Zealand Specific Fracgasm and Fracgasf Emission Factors. Prepared for Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, PO Box 2526, Wellington

 

previous next