New Zealand’s greenhouse growers are at a critical crossroads as proposed changes to the industrial allocations under the Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) threaten their future. The Climate Change Minister, Simon Watts, is being urged to reconsider policies that could impose an estimated $30,000 per hectare in additional costs on tomato, capsicum, and cucumber producers. For an industry already operating on thin margins, this could be the tipping point that makes domestic production unsustainable.
John Murphy, Chair of Vegetables New Zealand, argues that the changes would not only harm local growers but could paradoxically increase the carbon footprint of the food consumed in the country. As these greenhouse operations face the risk of closure, imports would likely rise, bringing food from countries where production methods result in higher emissions. The irony is stark: policies meant to reduce New Zealand’s carbon emissions could inadvertently increase global emissions through reliance on imported produce.
Greenhouse operations in New Zealand are unique compared to other industries grouped under the ETS. Unlike steel or cement manufacturing, greenhouse growers actively use CO2 to enhance production. Carbon dioxide is captured and pumped into their controlled environments to stimulate plant growth, making their operations highly efficient and minimizing land use. In fact, New Zealand’s greenhouse food production accounts for less than 1% of the nation’s total emissions. This environmentally conscious approach makes it difficult to justify lumping greenhouse growers with high-emission industries under the same policy umbrella.
Moreover, growers argue that the proposed changes fail to consider the efforts they have already made toward decarbonization. Many have invested in technologies and practices that reduce energy use, cut emissions, and increase efficiency. They are seeking a twofold response from the government: delaying the industrial allocation baseline change until 2025 to allow for a smoother transition, and the creation of a Sustainable Food Systems Fund. This fund would reinvest proceeds from the ETS into decarbonization efforts within the greenhouse sector, helping growers transition to alternative energy sources and further improve their sustainability.
The urgency of this issue extends beyond the economic impact on growers. The ripple effects could be felt throughout New Zealand’s food security and public health. The current outbreak of Tomato Brown Rugose Fruit Virus (ToBRFV) in Australia is a sobering reminder of the risks of relying on imported food. If local production diminishes, New Zealanders could face higher prices, reduced access to fresh produce, and increased vulnerability to global supply chain disruptions.
In the broader context, the greenhouse industry’s struggle in New Zealand underscores a larger debate about balancing environmental policies with food security and economic sustainability. Policymakers are being urged to look beyond theoretical models and consider the real-world consequences of their decisions. Without adjustments, these industrial allocation changes could undermine years of progress in sustainable agriculture and put New Zealand’s food sovereignty at risk.
The proposed changes to industrial allocations under New Zealand’s ETS threaten to upend the greenhouse growing sector, which has worked hard to reduce its environmental impact while providing fresh, local food. If the government does not take a more nuanced approach, the country may see an increase in imported produce with a higher carbon footprint, negatively impacting both food security and environmental goals. A delay in implementing the changes and the creation of a fund dedicated to supporting greenhouse decarbonization could provide the sector with the breathing room it needs to continue contributing to a sustainable food system.
