3 days ago
Cure Worse Than The Cause?
'We are going down a dangerous and totally unnecessary road using bromoform', said Jane Smith, leading North Otago farmer and environmentalist. Jane is a co-founder of the Methane Science Accord that questions the promotion of methane-reducing products containing tribromomethane (bromoform) — a chemical compound found in seaweed and chlorinated water — now set to be unleashed on pastoral farming.
Bromoform is ozone-depleting, classified as a volatile organic compound (VOC), and in some jurisdictions like the USA, is banned from use in livestock destined for human consumption. Here in New Zealand, these products are restricted from use in breeding or dairy cattle.
The Methane Science Accord has fears around food safety, questions about animal welfare, and doubts that such intensive, expensive interference in the natural biogenic rumination process is either necessary or justified.
'The mere fact it has been suggested these products be used only on prime stock destined for slaughter, and not on lactating or reproducing animals, is concerning in itself,' says Smith.
A slow-release methane-reducing bolus developed by Ruminant BioTech and backed by AgriZero, (a joint taxpayer-industry venture) reportedly show methane reductions of up to 70 percent over 100 days. Ruminant BioTech's other investors include Rosrain Investments and NZ Green Investment Finance (a government-backed fund set to be shut down).
One product, called Emitless, is designed for cattle weighing between 350 and 450 kilograms. A second product, Calm A Cattle Bolus, aims to reduce methane emissions for up to four months. These contain a halogenated methane analogue (three bromines replacing hydrogens on methane). It has strong anti-methanogenic properties and inhibits methane production by interfering with enzymes in methanogenic archaea in the rumen (particularly methyl-coenzyme M reductase).
The Environmental Protection Authority said the active ingredient fits within existing veterinary standards and does not require individual approval under hazardous substance law, however the product still awaits sign-off under the Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Act.
The Methane Science Accord states that not only is the cost of these is unknown but there is no measurable benefit to global climate temperatures and the return on investment is far outweighed by a myriad of risks.
'Having to round up stock every 120 days to force a bolus down their throat raises serious issues around safety for our farmers, particularly as there is absolutely no calculable gain to be achieved by this proposal', states Jane Smith.
Methane Science Accord (MSA) co-founder Owen Jennings questions 'Why would we interfere with the natural biogenic process of rumination, why would we risk our naturally pasture-raised global status, why would we add further stress, risk and cost to our farmers and their livestock?'
AgriZero CEO Wayne McNee admits 'farmers will need financial incentives to adopt them'.
Smith suggests 'there are a lot people set to make a lot of money out of selling methane mitigation pills and potions into our sector, at the cost to the taxpayer, farmers and the risk to our naturally-raised livestock status. I'm assuming this is a knee-jerk reaction to justify the millions of taxpayer and ag sector dollars that have been squandered so far on these products.'.
'The lack of public transparency around safety, testing and environmental modeling is concerning not only for the farmers themselves but our sensitive global markets such as the EU don't even allow for grain-feeding. The cure is certainly worse than the cause'.
A survey carried out by NZ Farming, The Methane Science Accord and Groundswell in May 2025 showed that 95% of the 1460 farmer responses would not use methane mitigation boluses, vaccines or feed additives in their livestock.
