News

Aus red meat sector drops Carbon Neutral 2030 target

James Nason 26/06/2025

In a major policy reset, the Australian red meat industry has confirmed it is walking away from the Carbon Neutral 2030 target set in 2017.

The significant news was almost hidden in a Red Meat Advisory Council statement quietly released today which outlined the results of a just-completed review of the industry’s Red Meat 2030 plan, first launched in 2019.

The updated Red Meat 2030 plan released today followed six months of industry consultation.

It has been updated to reflect “the changing operating environment and industry’s needs and objectives for the next five years”, RMAC independent chair John McKillop said in a media release announcing the revised plan.

Carbon Neutral 2030 goal ‘not achievable’

He said the new roadmap outlines how the industry will work together to “reduce emissions intensity per kilogram of beef produced”, a goal the industry “remains committed to achieving”.

However, as understanding around livestock emissions and their impact on the environment had advanced significantly since Red Meat 2030 was originally launched in 2019, “we now recognise that the previous Carbon Neutral 2030 goal is not achievable,” he said.

Rather, the industry has updated its plans to maintain its focus on “reducing emissions intensity”, as well making a renewed commitment “to positively contribute to Australia’s net zero ambitions while advancing profitability, productivity and sustainability.”

The statement outlined several areas in which the red meat industry has worked to apply science to helping producers manage livestock emissions including advanced low-methane genetics, research into storing soil carbon in grazing systems, trialling feed additives that cut emssions, developing online modules, calculators and workshops to improve producer understanding of carbon, investing in clean and renewable technologies and more efficient processes to help reduce the processing sector’s greenhouse gas emissions intensity and water efficiency.

“Looking ahead we are building on these strong foundations to accelerate investment to help us reduce emissions intensity per kilogram of red meat, increase carbon storage in the landscape, and improve productivity,” Mr McKillop said.

‘Carbon’ Neutrality increasingly called into question

The Carbon Neutral target set in 2017 has increasingly been called into question by a number of prodcuers in recent years as scientific understanding has developed around how different sources of emissions – from constantly recycled biogenic sources including methane from livestock to ever-accumulating sources of emissions from burning fossil fuels – have vastly different long-term warming impacts and outcomes.

Widely used global-greenhouse gas accounting metrics adopted decades ago do not differentiate between the different warming effects of different greenhouse gas emissions, with scientists such as Oxford University’s Myles Allen and University of California Davis’ Frank Mitloehner highlighting that the warming effect of emissions from stable herds of livestock is dramatically overstated under current accounting rules, and Climate Neutrality is a more appropriate target for biological sources of emissions rather than Carbon Neturality.

Today’s announcement follows successive years of active research and investigation into prevailing greenhouse gas accounting metrics by Cattle Australia, and in particular vice-President and CQ cattle producer Adam Coffey.

The Carbon Netural target has loomed as a rod for the industry’s back under existing greenhouse gas accounting mechanics by holding the industry to a net zero position by 2030. The industry has less than five years left to achieve that target, and despite making progress, remains about 90 percent short of reaching that Carbon Neutral target.

On the measure of Climate Neutrality the industry is making substantial progress according to a CSIRO study which shows the red meat industry has reduced net greenhouse gas emissions by almost 78 per cent against the 2005 baseline.

The decision to discontinue the Carbon Neutral 2030 target was made by all red meat industry councils and means all sectors and MLA are now closely aligned.

“A significant reset”

When contacted by Beef Central this afternoon, Mr Coffey described the shift as “a signfiicant reset”.

“Our reduction ambitions around emissions don’t change, we’re just not heading for a target that is unachievable and more importantly sets the wrong context,” he told Beef Central.

“The crucial thing is that livestock aren’t the climate villain they’ve been made out to be.”

“Our emissions reductions are very important but as a grassfed producer in Australia, you are inherently at a point of climate neutral, so you are not contributing to further warming.

“Compared to a fossil emitter, any further interventions we make are removing more carbon dioxide from the atmosphere than previously existed, not just emitting less.

“This is why policy change at a federal level is hugely important. We are back at the steering wheel of our emissions future and this will be the basis for more meaningful discussions and outcomes as we move forward This is an important part of a global reset around how we measure and account for enteric methane from livestock.”

In terms of what the industry’s new goal to replace CN2030 would be, he said there was now an opportunity to take time to redevelop a strategy that is “more in line with what we are or aren’t doing and is more meaningful for industry”.

Updated Red Meat 2030

Today’s media release said the Red Meat 2030 plan has been updated to reflect the changing operating environment and industry’s needs and objectives for the next five years.

“Since Red Meat 2030 was launched, the red meat sector has achieved record breaking success. In 2024 alone, Australia set a record for the export of red meat and livestock,” Mr McKillop said.

“Australia exported product worth over $20 billion in 2024 and was the world’s second largest beef exporter and largest sheepmeat and goatmeat exporter.

“Red Meat 2030 updates the goal of doubling the value of red meat and livestock sales to focus on productivity and profitability outcomes, rather than a total sales volume focus.

“This updated metric ensures industry focuses on growing demand for Australian products through global market access.

Strong foundations to build upon

“Looking ahead, the industry would build on the strong foundations to accelerate investment to help us reduce emissions intensity per kilogram of red meat, increase carbon storage in the landscape, and improve productivity,” he said.

The Red Meat 2030 strategy commits to an industry-wide audit of skills needs, to help recruit a future workforce as well as developing a regional market access strategy.

“We are proud of the role the Australian red meat and livestock industry plays in supporting the rural, regional and remote communities of our great country,” Mr McKillop said.

“We will continue pushing forward to ensure Australia is a global leader delivering trusted, sustainable and highquality red meat products and livestock to the world. The first five years of Red Meat 2030 has achieved that, and the next five years will build on it further.”

Read the full Red Meat 2030 report released today by clicking here

Leave a Reply to Stanley Bruce Collins Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Your comment will not appear until it has been moderated.
Contributions that contravene our Comments Policy will not be published.

Comments

  1. Joanne Rea, 27/06/2025

    Red meat statutory organisations adopting CN2030 was always a political decision when they have always said the were “research and marketing” only, and used that as an excuse for years to ensure that no levy dollars could flow to our representative organisations, in spite of swimming in cash while the industry organisations struggled.
    With a review on the cards, how much of this is a ploy to once again repudiate any claim the grassroots organisation may have on some levy dollars by again claiming (not quite) political neutrality.
    If they are listening to producers now (which I doubt), there are many of us who do not want any increase in levy unless and until the whole statutory setup becomes more democratic where they must listen to producers, where they have a real vote at AGMs instead of a Clayton’s vote, and there is a portion that is set aside for the Grassfed Cattle Organisation.

  2. Stanley Bruce Collins, 27/06/2025

    A step in the right direction. Australia could totally eliminate its emissions and it would have close to zero impact on total global emissions. What is the sense in wrecking economies for nil gain?

  3. Bob Wilson, 27/06/2025

    Dare I paraphrase the words of DJT….. “This is one great climate scam”!
    It’s amazing how things change when one world leader with courage calls out the climate bull***t….

  4. Paul Franks, 27/06/2025

    So how many millions was wasted on this grand endeavour, and there is talk of wanting to increase the $5/head levy.

    Also who exactly is this “industry consultation” done with as it is obvious it is not bread and butter producers., the ones that have to do all the work. There seems to be a lot of decisions made by industry bureaucrats who claim “industry consultation” was done yet it all comes out of the blue. Another recent one was the MLA offshoot Integrity Systems Company mandating every producer now do an animal welfare management plan or be kicked out of LPA where they said there was “industry consultation” despite no one knowing anything about it until they bought it in.

    There seems to be a huge disconnect between these industry bodies and the people they claim to represent.

    And to make matter worse, look at the prices producers, especially in Queensland are currently getting compared to producers in other first world countries. They are not exactly crash hot.

  5. Michelle Finger, 26/06/2025

    Great to see … but oh how embarrassing for our whole industry!!
    What a PR disaster!
    This whole situation could have been avoided if those in the ivory towers of our industry would just LISTEN to the grass-roots producers whom they claim to serve.
    We have been screaming against this foolishness from the start, but people making decisions on our behalf are so arrogant they think they know better.
    Question is, havd they learned any lessons from this fiasco?

  6. Grant Piper, 26/06/2025

    Well, almost some sense, finally, but can’t drop the climate boiling BS completely or they won’t get invited to the ‘right’ dinner parties. Would setting virtue-signaling ‘climate goals’ and spending real money on it for several years, be classed as advocacy? I love when brainless ideology and wishful thinking collides with reality. Hopefully a lot more to come.

  7. Matt Carter, 26/06/2025

    Good!

  8. Tom STOCKWELL, 26/06/2025

    “Hallelujah”, quoth the late, great Leonard Cohen.
    First we take CN30, Then we Take Net Zero.

Get Beef Central's news headlines emailed to you -
FREE!