3News » Home
Full Story

GM breakthrough could have huge climate benefits

8 comments | Post Comment email Email printer friendly Print    Text Size:
aA
aA
aA
The AgResearch breakthrough is internationally significant

The AgResearch breakthrough is internationally significant

video
EXCLUSIVE
Published: Tue, 15 Jun 2010 6:00p.m.

By Samantha Hayes

New Zealand scientists have made a breakthrough in the fight to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

By genetically modifying clover, they have found a way to make cows belch less, as well as cutting back on their flatulence.

“We’ve taken a single gene from rabbits foot clover and put it into white clover,” says AgResearch science manager Chris Jones.

It’s genetic modification which activates tannins, like those found in red wine and which gives tea its brown colour.

Most importantly, nutrients that were once found only in the clover flower become available in the stem and leaf.

No cow has chewed it yet, but scientists are excited.

“They’ll be more productive - more meat and milk,” says AgResearch spokesman Jimmy Suttie.

“There will be less bloat, which addresses the animal health and welfare issue, and finally there will be less greenhouse gasses.”

This breakthrough is internationally significant – half of all greenhouse gas emissions come from agriculture.

AgResearch has been working on the project for years, but hasn’t been confident enough to talk about it until now.

“I think there is two or three groups in the world where this could have been done,” says Mr Suttie.
“Several groups in the world who have been trying to do this. Basically, our guys got it first. It’s great.”

The world’s food production needs to grow by 50 percent in the next 20 years, but with that comes twice the agricultural emissions.

AgResearch estimates its clover could reduce methane emissions by 10-15 percent and have huge benefits for the climate.

“I regard it as the Holy Grail and basically what we’ve got here is some technology that has exerted some DNA in the plant, that gives these benefits,” says John McKenzie of GM PGG Wrightson Seeds.

“These benefits are really big for agriculture and the environment.”

But these benefits can only be achieved through genetic modification – something the Green Party opposes.

“Why should we let them not only pollute them, pollute our rivers which they’re already doing, but every pasture across the country,” says Green Party co-leader Russel Norman.

“What’s in it for New Zealand, to let them do that?”

Although AgResearch is talking genetic modification, the process doesn’t involve another species – just two types of clover.

Greenpeace is relatively relaxed about it.

“It looks like it’s not our version of genetic modification,” says Greenpeace GE campaigner Carmen Gravatt.

“So in terms of all the scale of options you could have in addressing climate change, this is certainly not the Frankenstein version.

“If it is genetically engineered, we shouldn’t go near it.”

AgResearch say they make no apologies for it being a GE crop and want to see it benefitting New Zealand farmers.

“Out there in the grass, in the New Zealand environment, I want to get it out there,” says Mr Jones.

Realistically that release is still 15 years off.

This research is so sensitive that one of the scientists doesn’t want to be identified.

A few years ago, an AgResearch scientist was effectively chased out of the country by anti-GE protestors who attacked his house and car.

He felt so threatened he abandoned his work.

But this project my be different – it doesn’t involve any radical modification, taking genes from one organism and placing them in another, rather they have just switched on genes that were already present.

3 News

Become a fan of 3 News on Facebook and on Twitter.

Comments [8]

v
17 Jun 2010 8:31p.m.

Hey Greg you have missed the boat on the new scare from the UN . 'UN says case for saving species 'more powerful than climate change' But this is more TAX to fix a non problem still full of political science fiction. 'http://climatequotes.com/2010/06/13/teeb-pushes-fear-and-new-taxes/

atrout
17 Jun 2010 10:47a.m.

Russel/Tandor/Lisa Er... Unfortunately your position seems to be another attempt at scare mongering. Refering to each other back and forth doesn't strengthen your arguments- rather, it weekens them as there is no substance offered. Health hazards alluded to but no references provided. Your approach is a bit little a water torture.. a lot of sustained drips which are intended to change public opinion over time. Attacks on dairy, chicken farming and pork all reveal a bias against the product rather than genuinely against the farming practices. The frequent lack of good data seems to be unimportant as long as public opinion against meat eating is promoted. Your staunch advocates don't seem to have visited farms, gone fishing, read a bit about NZ's sustainable forestry projects and so on. Instead it is a constant chatter against those who are at the pitface of providing food and products by people who are signicantly removed from where the real action takes place. Get out and mingle with real people, in real places where bills are paid and incomes made.

Greg
17 Jun 2010 10:19a.m.

Hi Samantha, I liked your enthusiasm when you presented this piece. It's always nice to present a “good news” story. You researched it well, too. I'd just like to talk about a few of the background comments you made, though. There are a few things that “everybody knows” that are, well, wrong. (I'm not talking about those "global warming is a myth" crazies before me, either.) Although this clover modification is great news for NZ, it won't make much difference in the world. Other countries don't use much clover. Most beef cattle are fed on maize, and cattle fed on maize produce a lot more methane than those on pasture. There's this underlying idea that NZ can feed the world. We can't. We're too small. Fonterra knows this, and it wants to remain a bulk food producer. That's why it's moving overseas, setting up operations in China, the USA, and South America. NZ's future is in boutique goods and tourism--we're too small for the mass market. Also, the world doesn't really need 50% more food over the next 20 years. Half the world eats too much, the other half not enough, and a lot of food is wasted. Over the next 20 years, the world needs maybe 10 percent more food. Mostly, it needs fairer distribution. NZ can't feed the world, but it can help by pushing for a fair go. Getting rid of Europe's and the USA's subsidies to their farmers would let poor countries like Kenya and Laos make a living from farming. (It would help NZ a bit, too, of course. But not as much as poor countries.) Giving poor farmers a chance wouldn't mean twice the emissions, either. I realise that these things make the story harder to tell, but I think you can do it. You already skewered one urban myth. Most people think that as soon as something has been invented, it instantly goes into mass production—problem fixed. You did well to highlight the fact that this breakthrough will take 15 years to roll out.

L Lister
16 Jun 2010 9:49a.m.

Fortunately the release is still 15 years away by which time the world will have realised that AGW is a myth and hopefully too by then GM will have been proven scientifically unsafe. Amazing though how easily Greenpeace compromises when it comes to their global warming agenda. Such is the nature of their hypocrisy.

Lisa Er
15 Jun 2010 11:00p.m.

Before TV3 reports on GE they need to do their homework.
Read Nandor's blog.
and....once New Zealand is no longer GE free our 'natural clean green'products will not be welcomed in many countries of the world.
There is also much research showing that GE food are upsetting our digestive systems and causing health problems.
While scientists are meant to work on one project at a time, it is the job of the media to give a balanced report.

Russel Norman
15 Jun 2010 10:23p.m.

We have a good understanding of it. That's why we have concerns. And for those of us who take climate change seriously, why gamble on untested GE clover that might cut emissions in 15 years rather than using reliable methods to cut emissions now such as reduced stocking intensity. See - http://blog.greens.org.nz/2010/06/15/ge-magic-clover-solves-climate-change-or-not/

V
15 Jun 2010 8:35p.m.

Why are being continually fed the lie about AGW. We are not creating GLOBAL WARMING.. The UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change misled the press and public into believing that thousands of scientists backed its claims on manmade global warming, according to Mike Hulme, a prominent climate scientist and IPCC insider. The actual number of scientists who backed that claim was “only a few dozen experts,” he states in a paper for Progress in Physical Geography, co-authored with student Martin Mahony. “Claims such as ‘2,500 of the world’s leading scientists have reached a consensus that human activities are having a significant influence on the climate’ are disingenuous!.

Hayden
15 Jun 2010 6:46p.m.

Does the green party even understand what GM is? They seem to have quite a bias on the 'issue'

Post a comment

Before commenting, please take the time to read our moderation guide here
Name:
Email: (Won't be published)
Comment:



3News Video 3News Audio

Post your opinion

3News - Was the force used at the Dotcom mansion excessive?
On January 20th, two helicopters and 76 police officers arrived a
Comments (194)