Organic news 14th April 2011

NEWS ****NEWS****NEWS****

Organic sales in Ireland return to stability:

"According to the latest Kantar data (52 wk ended 20th Feb 2011) the Irish organic market is valued at �97.8m. This represents a marginal decline on the previous year but signals a significant slowdown in the rate of decline from 14% a year earlier." according to Mary Morrissey of Bord Bia, who have access to Kantar's research (slightly wacky super slick site btw!)

Similar news came from the UK and the US recently, whereas the mainland of the EU never saw decline anyway.....more on this in the Examiner soon....

Organic Farming and Climate Change mitigation:

Two talks coming up soon:@ Dublin and Cloughjordan by Gundula Azeez, formerly of the British National Farmers Union, the Soil Association the EU Commission. Part of the FEASTA lecture series on Low External Input Agriculture - the only road to a sustainable food supply ,these talks will encompass farming, climate change, organic and biochar. Full weekend of events listed here

OLLIES SANTY WISHLIST

A few days late with this one, but it landed in the Examiner first, so Santy got it in time......

Free free to search for 'santy' on the very useful searchbox over there on the right (scroll down a bit!) - you will find the last few years of wishlists I've sent him......................

Ah santy, me auld segosha - its been a while. So much has changed. Things have moved on, yet, as we hear so often, �we are where we are�.

Well, I'm not sure where that actually is Santy. I'm confused, because 'where we are' seems to be worse than where we think it is. So, really, we are not where we are at all. In fact, we are where we hope we aren't � everytime.

Anyhow, I left it till now to write this note to you because I was waiting for the budget. I was not expecting much there santy, but boy did you deliver on the 9th.

Thanks so much for not getting out the slash hook for the organic sector's budget - I was really worried there. After Trevor Sargent left, I thought it was curtains for the Organic Grant Aid and the Organic Farming Scheme's funding. But no, organic has survived again, with less cuts than a retired, armless butcher with a blunt knife. Or something.

Fair play there Santy, you're a star. You must have been under severe pressure. At least Harvest 2020 kept its commitment to growing the organic sector, which probably helped.

So, for 2011, I think I want...growth in the organic sector. I know I always ask for that one, but we need it now more than ever. Last year, a little more volume was sold, but the value went down a bit too. Can you fix it for me to have the value increase for 2011?

One way might be with the green public procurement Junior Minister Cuffe announced. That's where the state will start to feed the public sector organic food. Sounds yum, though the press release will have to be handled carefully, or else Shane Ross will probably have a canary.

Naturally, a few more organic farmers � plenty did the course this year, so if a few more of them take the plunge in 2011, and join the Organic Farming Scheme, I'd be delighted.

I'm getting very worried about climate change though Mr Claus. It seems everyone has just forgotten about it, with the recession and the cold snap. People who really should know better are joking about global warming and freezing winters, as if climate change and extreme weather aren't compatible! I'm only a nipper and I know they are!

Plus, according to the World Meteorological Association, since records began in 1850, 2010 was the third warmest year globally, the last decade the warmest ever and the parts per million of carbon in the atmosphere was the highest ever, at 386.8. Wow. And all of this is in a year of recession, when we haven't been able to do as much of the climate change causing actions we normally do.

Farming's Green House Gas (GHG) performance has been improving year on year here in Ireland, Santy, but I'm very worried about dairy once the quotas end. Milk production may increase by a full 50%, or 2.75 billion litres. This alone could increase Ireland's' emissions by a 12%. It says so in Harvest 2020.

Unfortunately the solutions are aspirational. Harvest 2020 does talk a lot about how great and grass fed we are with our livestock Santy, but we also use plenty of synthetic fertilizer and compound feeds. They use up loads of fossil fuels in their production elsewhere.

So a dairy GHG solution Santy � I know its a big one, but if anyone can, you can. That way, you could write off some of the massive amount of methane those raindeers must emit with their globe trotting on December 24/25th � phew!

(And you know I was only joking about organic venison last year santy!)

And while we're at it, let's try to get the beef livestock even more grass fed. Let's bring in even more of the kind of animals that can thrive in the outdoors for longer - Galloways, Dexter, Moiled and the like please Santy.

Do your best � you always do! Ollie

BIOCHAR COULD REDUCE GREEN HOUSE GAS EMISSIONS BY UP TO 12% - IF DONE PROPERLY, NEW RESEARCH SHOWS

A mate of mine is the lead author on a recent Publication in Nature Communications on Biochar. Fair Play Dom!

Here's a longer version of a piece I wrote for the Examiner on it, in my weekly Organic Diary (every Thursday)

Is there a way for farms to be fertilized and to reduce farming's Green House Gas emissions at the same time? The principles and practices of organic farming, such as the use of clover for nitrogen fixing, are no doubt helpful in highlighting the options and opportunities for conventional farming.

There may now also be another option. According to new research, just published by a team of international scientists in the journal Nature, a substance which can be made from farm waste could reduce the world's greenhouse emissions by up to 12 per cent.

The scientists writing in the journal Nature say "Biochar" is a fine charcoal that can store carbon while helping to improve soil.

Biochar is made by decomposing biomass like plants, wood and other organic materials at high temperature in a process called slow pyrolysis.

"Biochar offers one of the few ways we can create power while decreasing carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere. And it improves food production in the world's poorest regions by increasing soil fertility. It's an amazing tool," said Jim Amonette, a soil chemist at the US Department of Energy's Pacific Northwest National Laboratory.

Some of the specific benefits of biochar include the fact that it can take carbon and store it for hundreds of years, as well as: improve the soil's functioning (water retention and nutrient levels), decrease nitrous oxide and methane emissions from the soil into which it is tilled, and produce some bio-based gas and oil during pyrolysis.

It is also one of the few substances that can disrupt the Carbon Dioxide cycle, as it releases oxygen from the Cycle as did coal in its formation millions of years ago.

Interestingly, the researchers looked to the world's sources of biomass that aren't already being used by humans as food. So they looked at waste crop leaves, stalks and rice husks, livestock manure and yard trimmings.

Lead author Dominic Woolf's abstract for the article states that the reductions of 12% of current anthropogenic CO2_C equivalent emissions can be achieved "without endangering food security, habitat or soil conservation".

According to a detailed Science Daily report on the study:

"The researchers then calculated the carbon content of that biomass and how much of each source could realistically be used for biochar production.

With this information, they developed a mathematical model that could account for three possible scenarios. In one, the maximum possible amount of biochar was made by using all sustainably available biomass....

"the maximum scenario could offset up to the equivalent of 1.8 petagrams -- or 1.8 billion metric tons -- of carbon emissions annually and a total of 130 billion metric tons throughout in the first 100 years. Avoided emissions include the greenhouse gases carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide.

The estimated annual maximum offset is 12 percent of the 15.4 billion metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions that human activity adds to the atmosphere each year.....

Adding biochar to the most infertile cropland would offset greenhouse gases by 60 percent more than if bioenergy were made using the same amount of biomass from that location, the researchers found."

The origins of Biochar are in South America. Before settlers arrived, agricultural waste was smouldered by the farming inhabitants to help with soil fertility. This involved covering burning biomass with soil and then letting it smoulder. This process was labelled Terra Preta, or Terra Pretta de Indio by the European settlers who arrived.

This soil is still today more fertile and indeed dark (from the charcoal) than surrounding soils.

As with all supposed magic bullet solutions to climate change, there are pros and cons. Most who query biochar's potential, and indeed many undecided experts, see it as a small part of a multi-strand solution.

Even in this, it is acknowledged that only with careful management of its potential, can it emerge as a positive:

"Using biochar to reduce greenhouse gas emissions at these levels is an ambitious project that requires significant commitments from the general public and government. We will need to change the way we value the carbon in biomass," according to Jim Amonette.

This latter point is the key. While Biochar can work, throwing it to the wolves of global carbon trading could lead to a very messy situation, full of unintended consequences.

Critics worry about plantations to produce biochar displacing forestry: anything from 200 million to over a billion hectares have been suggested. This would replace existing forest, Savannah and woodlands with biochar plantations.

Ironically people who currently use these, in western terms, uneconomical lands, also produce hardly any Green House Gases.

Massive commercial tree plantations have, all over the world, been shown to be environmentally destructive in a myriad of ways, from soil erosion to pesticide run off.

There are also examples where biochar has been shown to suppress rather than improve plant growth, and also stimulate bacterias which cause other types of climate change anyway.

Of course, it doesn't have to be like this. Biochar can simply be a case of baby steps in the right direction, using farm wastes that would otherwise be costly to treat and climate change causing if left untreated.

Here in Ireland, FEASTA (the Foundation for the Economics of Sustainability) have been engaged in a Department of Environment funded multi agency initiative to examine carbon cycles and sinks. Research into biochar for arable farming has been part of this.

The journal article reference: Dominic Woolf, James E. Amonette, F. Alayne Street-Perrott, Johannes Lehmann, Stephen Joseph. Sustainable biochar to mitigate global climate change. Nature Communications, Aug. 10, 2010)

For more see feasta's Carbon Sinks and Cycles site

RADICAL RUPTURE OR RADICAL REALISATION: ORGANIC FARMING AND CLIMATE CHANGE

With random and sudden ruptures, it becomes possible to imagine different realities.

Sudden war, sudden disaster, realising your girlfriend is pregnant, all of these things, from the personal to the seismic, can sharpen the focus and change the dynamic.

Ireland has just experienced sudden onset recession, and even more sudden onset flooding. So what was written in stone has been, literally and metaphorically, washed away.

Who knows what the next decade will bring? Even the next few years will be interesting in that Chinese proverbial sort of way: strikes, deflation, unemployment, but also perhaps the resourcefulness of a young, well educated population shining through.

(Image from NASA)

Global warming and the peaking of oil availability will be defining aspects of these coming years.

We don't know how related to global warming the recent flooding in Ireland has been.

But we do know that organic farming, in some very significant ways, fights both flooding and global warming.

The UK's Soil Association has recently released a report on the soil carbon building dimension to organic farming, and speculated on a world where organic farming was the norm.

This mega-imagining is radical rupture stuff, but maybe now is the time for that sort of thinking.

This new report's key point is that organic farming methods build up the amount of carbon in the soil, which in basic terms means that its not in the sky causing global warming.

Taking their cue from a review of the 39 available comparative studies of organic farming

soil carbon levels, they made some significant points:

�Soil carbon sequestration, according to the IPCC�s scientific advisors on land use, represents 89% of agriculture�s greenhouse gas mitigation potential.� (The IPCC are the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change).

They describe this as a �blind spot�, as it is an otherwise under analysed area: most attention is focused on methane, nitrous oxide and anaerobic digestion.

In other words, locking carbon into the ground is farming's biggest trump card: the report in fact reveals that carbon sequestration may be far more significant that these other areas.

�Unlike the carbon released from fossil fuels, the soil carbon store has the potential to be recreated to a substantial degree�.

This means that farming, properly practiced, can be the planet's knight in shining Armour.

�More widespread adoption of organic farming practices and grass based and mixed farming systems � can make a significant and immediate contribution to greenhouse gas mitigation.�

Humid Ireland is well placed to further develop its grass based and mixed farming systems, as well as organic.

A key comparative finding is the following; �Organic farming practices produce 28% higher soil carbon levels than non-organic farming in Northern Europe, and 20% for all countries studied�

What these levels mean is that, if adopted on a significant scale globally, �organic farming could potentially sequester 1.5 billion t(onnes) C(arbon) per year, which would offset about 11% of all anthropogenic global GHG emissions for at least the next 20 years.�

Thinking globally on this level might seem far fetched and outlandish. But then, so do last year's property prices. And so would the current flood levels, from the vantage point of 12 months ago.

Imagine if farming offset 11% of all human-caused GHG (Green House Gas) emissions?

Crucially, bringing many relevant aspects of the global warming and farming debates together for a country like Ireland, the report suggests the following:

�Grass-fed livestock has a critical role to play in minimising carbon emissions from farming and this must be set against the methane emissions from cattle and sheep�.

�This is because grasslands for grazing livestock, whether permanent pasture or temporary grass on mixed farms...represent vitally important soil carbon stores.�

Ireland has a head start over the more intensive, compound feed driven meat and dairy sectors of other countries.

It may turn out that grass fed animals on mixed farms, just slightly adapted to encompass organic farming principles, will be a significant part of dealing with global warming.

Is that a radical rupture or a radical realisation?

Green Beliefs afforded same rights as religious beliefs...in the UK

Here is a quirky enviro story, in the run up to the Copenhagen Climate Change summit:

Employees who raise concerns about their company's environmental practices won the right to legal redress yesterday after a judge ruled that green beliefs deserved the same protection in the workplace as religious convictions. In a landmark ruling which legal experts said could open the floodgates to thousands of claims, appeal judge Mr Justice Burton, ruled that environmental views should be protected under the employment equality laws. Workers who are victimised for strong environmental views such as how a company should deal with cutting carbon, managing waste or using aviation to travel to meetings can now bring compensation claims against employers.

For more on this see the feature in the Guardian

climate change and farming in Ireland: part 2

photo by: Mariah gale, licienced under creative commons

In November, Minister for the Environment John Gormley said that �all sectors will have to cut emissions�. According to Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Brendan Smith TD, �making significant cuts from agriculture will be very difficult�.

He warned against �significant downward pressure on animal numbers, something that would �in a global context make no sense�.

The Minister said that if Ireland was to reduce cattle numbers, the global climate change situation would actually be worsened because "Irish beef would simply be replaced on world markets by beef produced in a much less sustainable way".

This point of carbon leakage has been raised in many quarters. Essentially the suggestion is that if we stop producing, other less sustainable regions in the world will instead. This will increase rather than decrease overall GHG emissions.
Department of Environment representative, when queried, claimed that �there is no confusion between this Department and the Department of Agriculture on greenhouse gas emissions from the agriculture sector.�

Simple and straightforward. And yet, there since the EU targets were agreed, there has been a rumbling on going discussion on footing the GHG bill. Enough to remind one of Queen Gertrude's most famous line: 'The lady doth protest too much, methinks'.

What has been dubbed the 'cow tax memo' suggested, according to reports, that �imposing a levy on all livestock is the best way to avoid having to cut the size of the national herd�.

This memo proposes a levy set at �5 per tonne of CO2 emitted, to generate just over �100 million. This has been reported as an equivalence of a levy of �13 for each dairy cow, �7 for non diary cow, �1 for sheep.

Minister Brendan Smith and even the EU commission have all come out railing against the possibility of this cow tax.

According to former Green Party leader, Minister of State Trevor Sargent, who's brief also includes cattle breeding, �A myth has been peddled however claiming Minister for the Environment and Local Government John Gormley T.D. is in favour of a cattle cull to reduce methane emissions. This is completely untrue and is a gross disservice to the work Minister Gormley has been doing to help the long term viability of all sectors, including agriculture�.

He points to two crucial areas his colleague has achieved for Ireland and agriculture with regard to climate change: In the European climate change deal agreed before Christmas, �Minister Gormley ... achieved flexibility in the deal to ensure that Ireland did not face higher costs of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and that we would not be forced to reduce our national herd�.

Gormley �also met with the European Presidency�s chief climate change negotiator, and was successful in having carbon leakage placed onto the agenda for future climate change negotiations�.

Just how much agriculture should pay is an altogether more interesting question in a contracting economy.

While demand for higher end food products may reduce abroad, it is likely that agriculture, which already provides 32% of net foreign earnings, will become more prominent in the future. Ireland have various practical advantages in producing food (e.g. climate, access to markets) which do not pertain in most other economic sectors.

According to Dr Mary Kelly of the EPA �The profile of greenhouse gas emissions in Ireland is unusual in the European context, with agriculture currently accounting for 27 per cent of all emissions and 40 per cent of emissions in the non-trading sector. This makes it very difficult to effect actual reductions on the scale required in the non-trading sector�.

The Koyoto targets, it seems, might be reachable due to recession. However the EU targets will prove far more difficult. Climate change experts have predicted that Ireland's' emissions will be down by between 5 and 9% in 2009, because of the recession.

Frank Convery, professor of environmental policy at University College Dublin, was reported recently as saying that Ireland's emissions may well be as close to the 63 million tonnes permitted under Koyoto. This would save the government E300 million in the purchase of carbon credits.

A recent EPA report, issued in March of this year, considers different scenarios, including that of economic shock until 2010 � decline by 7% each year until 2010, and then growth until 2020.

According to the EPA report, irrespective of economic performance, there is only one scenario for agricultural emission projections:

�Emissions are projected to decrease by 4% over the period 2007 � 2020 to 17.8 Mtonnes of CO2e.� This estimate was actually 18.95 Mtonnes in 2008, so agriculture is performing even better than just last year's predictions from the EPA itself. Agriculture in 1990 accounted for 35% of emissions.

Individual sectors performance within agriculture underscore this fact: According to Dr Gerry Boyle of Teagasc �Technological advances in dairy production, for example, have led to a drop of 12.4% in the amount of methane produced per kg of milk between 1990 and 2006�.

Most GHG emissions from Irish agriculture are methane from livestock and nitrous oxide from soils.

Specific measures under the Rural Environment Protection Scheme (REPS) �are expected to raise awareness amongst farmers of the need to address climate change and also to promote greater acceptance and uptake of technologies that contribute to greenhouse gas abatement, such as use of minimum tillage and the adoption of low emission trailing shoe technology for slurry spreading� a DAFF spokesperson said, when queried.

Other abatement strategies include: dietary modifications, additives or probiotics to reduce methane production, breed selection, increasing the length of the grazing season and breeding more efficient animals.

The spokesperson also pointed out that the nitrates directive had resulted in �better use of nutrients with consequently less nitrogen application and therefore fewer nitrous oxide emissions�. This includes matching nitrogen use to soil type, increasing clover use on farms, use of nitrate inhibitors�.

It was also suggested that �in terms of reduced fertiliser use and consequent emissions, organic farming will also have a role to play and is supported through the Department of Agriculture Fisheries and Food's Organic Farming Scheme.�

Forestry and energy crops are also relevant. To encourage energy crop cultivation, the National Energy Crop Premium (E80 per hectare) was introduced in 2007 to supplement the EU Premium of E45 per hectare.

A new Bioenergy Scheme was also launched offering establishment grants worth E1,450 per hectare to plant willow and miscanthus. Land planted with energy crops can also benefit under the Single Payment Scheme as well as REPS and the Disadvantaged Areas Scheme, subject to some restrictions on the areas planted.

The main issue from a farming perspective is, according to Gerry Boyle, �Gaining credits for afforestation and biomass production for bioenergy is problematic�. However, �there is no basis in logic for the agricultural sector not benefiting in accessing these offsets given that it is farmers that will need to alter their land use practices�.

However, there are other laggard areas. Gary Lanigan is a Teagasc research officer based in Johnstown Castle. His area of speciality is emissions, including GHG emissions, and soil carbon content.

According to Lanigan, while fertilizer usage is down down 20-25% from 1998, and while sheep and cattle numbers are down too, he estimates that �Only about 1% of farmers are using clover�.

Considering the numerous cost and environmental benefits, this is an astounding figure.

There are many considerations in the debate on GHG emissions. A complete and comprehensive life cycle analysis might skew all the figures again: While the application of fertilizer produces GHGs, so to does the making of fertilizers.

A nagging worry of course is the possibility that the scale of the problem and the scope of the solutions simply do not match up.

In the meantime, matching efficiencies and emissions, and seeing opportunities in the constraints may help agriculture move forward sustainably.

Climate change and farming part 1

In light of the new report issued today on climate change and its affect of agriculture, here's part one of a feature on climate change and farming.

The simple and objective facts of climate change are straightforward up to a point. The main question from an agriculture perspective is: how should the effort of readjustment be shared out amongst the sectors?

First, the facts: According to Dr. John Sweeney, (NUI Maynooth), The Intergovernmental Panel of Climate Change (IPCC) reports present �unequivocal evidence� that planet is currently experiencing �the loading of greenhouse gases on the atmosphere to concentrations not experienced for over 650,000 years...there is also now very high confidence that the globally averaged net effect of human activities since 1750 has been at least five times greater than that due to solar output changes�.

This will affect water patterns, putting severe pressure on both agricultural productivity and populations, especially in wetlands, deltas and the driest parts of Africa. The rest of the world will have more extreme weather, while 20-30% of plant and animals species will also face a high risk of extinction.

In Ireland, this will make parts of Leinster, Ulster and even occasionally Munster more likely to suffer drought, with mid summer housing of animals a possibility. Crop growing patters will alter, with potatoes more difficult to grow apart from in the north west.

Reduced fertilizer application, extensification, summer water shortages and pest/disease pattern alteration are all likely to occur.

However, the overall effects will not be as serious in Ireland or to Irish agriculture as elsewhere. Most main sectors will get to continue, albeit in a modified form.

There are two main targets the government is working towards � Koyoto (up to 2012) and the EU targets (up to 2020).

The Kyoto Protocol limits Ireland�s total national emissions to an average of 62.8 million tonnes of CO2e, per year in the period 2008 � 2012. This is 13 per cent above the 1990 baseline estimate.

Importantly for agriculture, Co2e means carbon dioxide equivalent � other Greenhouse Gases (GHGs), such as methane and nitrous oxide are measured as compared to carbon dioxide in terms of their global warming potential. Methane is considered 21 times more damaging than carbon dioxide, a figure which may even be upgraded to 25 times soon.

The EU targets of a 20% reduction in GHG emissions relative to 2005 figures are more recent and more challenging.

organic 2007 becoming organic 2008

Here is my review of key organic news 2007, with a look towards 2008. as often is the case, the emphasis is particularly on Ireland. No hyperlinks as of yet, but they are nearly all in the labels on the left in any case.

As a year turns over it is apt to look back on 2007 from an organic perspective. There were a mixture of highs and lows, with perhaps more of the former.

2007 saw a rise in both global and national organic food consumption: globally up to �30 billion, nationally up to �76 million. Production has also been rising: globally it now stands at over 31 million hectares. Nationally, there has been an increase since 2006, following the lean years of 2000-2005. Currently, there are about 1300 organic farmers in the republic of Ireland farming about 40,000 hectares.

One thing that might have a bearing on these figures, and a definite high of 2007, is of course the Ministry Trevor Sargent has taken on, which has organic under it�s remit. The Greens entering government was certainly a noteworthy event of 07, and their choice of ministries clever strategically. Minister Sargent�s aim to increase the organic acreage to 5% (from just under 1%) by 2012 is laudable. The first minor changes - the decoupling of organic from REPS, tillage and horticulture changes, and the establishment of the Organic Farming Scheme � are worthy enough. However we now need to see more targeted, timelined action in key areas.

Separate to policy issues, organic companies in Ireland seem to be lording it at present. St. Tola�s organic cheeses scooped top prize at the inaugural SHOP (organic) awards. Meanwhile, Glenisk dairies, Ireland�s biggest organic company won the �making a difference� award at the Food and Drink awards.

Glenisk seem unstoppable at present. They now export to the UK and have invested �8.5 million in their new production plant, where they process 5,300 tonnes of yoghurt annually.

They have also managed to maintain and develop their eco-credentials. These include converting their truck fleet to biodiesel, powering their plant with wind power through Airtricity and installing a reed bed system for waste.

One thing that was not a highlight however, was national organic week. If anything, this year�s week was weaker than last year�s week (which was weak anyway!). The supposed showcase does need considerable enlivening and, in particular, better funding. There are many causes of the week�s relative obscurity, which have been outlined here before. Organic producers themselves, retailers, Bord Bia and the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food all share some of the blame. Next year�s will have to be better, but it will need co-operation, vision and hard work.

From the beginning to the end of 07, in the UK and in Ireland, people in authority have continued to deny the benefits of organic food. The then UK Environment minister, David Miliband was lambasted for calling organic food a lifestyle choice way back in January. Likewise, the Food Safety Authority of Ireland were criticised for also describing organic food as a lifestyle choice in November.

This position seems increasingly untenable in the face of mounting research into the nutritional benefits of organic food. Amongst other 2007 research into organics the QLIF project�s research was perhaps the most headline-grabbing.

This University of Newcastle-based study found that organic fruit and vegetables contained up to 40% more antioxidants than their conventional counterparts. Antioxidants are thought to play a role in the better cardiovascular health.

Another noteworthy piece of organic-related research from 2007 found that children who consume organic milk are less likely to develop eczema, asthma and related allergies. However the research referred not just to cow�s milk but to mother�s milk: it suggested that mothers who consumed organic dairy products passed on this beneficial effect to their babies. This research is also the first example of specific health benefits (as opposed to simple nutritional superiority) being revealed in an organic product and published in a scientific peer-reviewed journal.

2007 was also the year when food prices and climate change became centre-stage issues. Globalisation in all its nuances has begun to bite. Bali may have been a bit of a bail out for the industrial world, but if the approaching change in administration in the US is anything like that of Australia�s, there may be hope on that front too.

On both these fronts, and on so many more, organic farming has a role to play. Here�s to an organic 2008.

Does what follows represent the beginning of the end of normal politics and the origin of some other way of governing Ireland?

Challanged by John Gormley of the Green Party twice, Noel Dempsey, Fianna Fail government minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources said on RTE�s the week in politics an hour ago that he would indeed join a cross party alliance to develop a strategy on climate change.

Were anything to come of this post-election, then this would be a very rare and significant moment. It would be a moment where the votes of the considerable majority of people who voted actually meant something. Usually, a standardized situation in Irish and indeed in most government formations always accrues. Most of the time, the votes of just-enough-people-to-make-a-government is all that ever counts.

In this new potential situation, this would be a bit like a national emergency climate change grouping. Whether it could behave like say a government department or a more standard all- party committee remains to be seen.

Gormley compared this potential new situation for governing on climate change in Ireland to the one currently in existence in Denmark.

It�s also the kind of thing Israel does for security/war � that�s show the potential for making big decisions that effect people, eh? If most or all parties in the D�il agreed to this, then government policy in a specific area could be made by most or all parties. This would be a mild dose of consensus politics, and it would also be a bit like how things are supposed to work in government in the other jurisdiction on the island.

It would also be an intriguing validation of one of the Green party�s classic clich�s: �neither left nor right but ahead�

The Greens could sort-of be in government without being in government. Here�s a new, less snappy but more substantial motto for the Greens: �Neither with the left nor the right but both at the same time, whichever is in government�. OK more: �In fact it doesn�t even matter, because we�ll always actually be in government now, at least on climate change. So, what else can we make seem so important that we�ll get another bit of that cross party consensus government going? Ah, doesn�t matter, everything is related to climate change these days anyway��