Regulatory consultant Julia McNab says there is nothing to legally stop a company launching a methane inhibitor now, given its absence from the ACVM regulations.
New Zealand farmers’ adoption of methane inhibitors risks having the brakes go on as regulations fail to keep up with emerging inhibitor technology.
Several major interests are trialling methane inhibitors in on-farm trials through NZ. This includes Dutch company DSM, with its patented Bovaer formulation that has achieved methane emission reductions of 30% in feed rationed dairy cows, and even greater in beef cattle.
Trials are under way in grass-based NZ systems, while approval to use the product has already been granted to farmers in Chile and Brazil.
Fonterra is also working on its in-house developed inhibitor Kowbucha, derived from milk cultures, and achieving 50% methane reduction in lab modelled rumen systems.
But Dr Julia McNab, director of regulatory consultancy group Intuit Regulatory, says the current Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines (ACVM) regulations need to be changed before farmers will have approval from the likes of dairy and meat processors to use them.
“At present, methane inhibitors are not considered an agricultural compound, nor are they a veterinary medicine,” McNab said.
“The ACVM Act is based on four key risk areas: animal welfare, public health, agricultural security and trade requirements. There is nothing there for ‘environmental protection’”.
McNab said she had been seeking changes to the regulations for over a year in light of the surge in inhibitor products likely to come as NZ pushes for a 10% methane reduction by 2030, and 24-47% by 2050.
“There has been a lack of any sense of urgency around it, although I understand they (MPI) are due to have a workshop in the new year,” she said.
Initial plans to change the regulations to cover any product that inhibits greenhouse gases has been advised as not being specific enough and requires products to be listed by active ingredient.
“There are companies doing trial work now on a number of compounds and we need to know what type of trial work needs to be done in order to meet regulatory requirements, which at this point do not exist,” she said.
Technically it would be possible for a company to launch an inhibitor now and be free of regulations that make no allowance for it.
“But processors may have something to say about how they would view the use of it by farmers,” she said.
Back in 2013 export markets were spooked by residues of DCD, a nitrate leaching inhibitor, detected in samples of Sri Lankan milk powders exports. This scare came on the back of the Chinese melamine scandal in 2008 and promoted the banning of further DCD use.
In light of those high-profile residue issues, industry sources are adamant Fonterra in particular will not give the green light to farmers to use any methane inhibitor unless it is validated by ACVM regulations.
McNab fears timelines may stretch out to over two years before regulations and efficacy requirements are finalised.
That risks the first target of 10% reduction in methane by 2030 becoming harder for farmers to achieve without one of the tools to do so.
“And we also need a method to include these inhibitors into our greenhouse gas inventory. Farmers want to be able to look at all these products and know they are comparing apples with apples,” she said.
Her concerns are shared by Mark Aspin, manager for the Pastoral Greenhouse Gas Research Consortium.
In a webinar on inhibitor development this week, he said a clear regulatory pathway for the emerging technology was critical.
“For us it is important for animal welfare and food safety,” Aspin said.
Fonterra chief science and technology officer Dr Jeremy Hill confirmed the company is also wanting MPI to clearly define “methane inhibitors” under ACVM and that both scientific evidence and efficacy data would be needed to support each inhibitor.
Hill also confirmed Fonterra would be seeking validation for its own Kowbucha inhibitor, should it move to commercial production.
He said having a framework in place within the ACVM regulations as soon as possible was the ideal, but noted each product would need to undergo appropriate assessment.
McNab says she knows of at least five other inhibitor product projects under way in addition to Bovaer. This includes a red seaweed project with Australian researchers.
Karen Booth, ACVM manager at NZ Food Safety, said last year MPI consulted on increasing regulatory oversight of inhibitors, with strong support to do so.
In March this year, Cabinet agreed there needed to be strengthening of regulation of inhibitors under the ACVM Act, including a two-year transition period.
“MPI is working through the best legislative approach to regulate inhibitors effectively, including what changes may be needed to the ACVM Act and regulations,” Booth said.
“The timeframe has not been finalised, but this is a high priority for MPI.”
Once regulated, inhibitors will require registration for the product formulation and most of the existing guidelines for registration would be applicable for inhibitors.
