I’m Calum, the Calculator Data Assistant for the Farm Carbon Toolkit (FCT). I can imagine if you don’t work for FCT, you may not know who I am. I tend to work in the background, assisting the passionate and driven people who do great work in helping farmers to meet their low carbon and sustainability goals.
Day to day, my activities and tasks can vary widely, depending on the needs of the Calculator team as well as Izzy, our Data Scientist with whom I also work closely.
I primarily work with the Calculator team which can involve a variety of tasks. One of my main responsibilities is the rigorous testing of the Calculator after every update, and following the addition of new items to the calculator. Flagging errors and helping to resolve issues (if indeed there are any!) ensures a reliable tool and the efficient running of the calculator that farmers and landowners can use seamlessly. Another major part of my role is information-finding. Regularly, the Calculator team receives requests for additional products/items/data entries to be added to the calculator. Personally, I was surprised by how many crop protection products (insecticides/herbicides etc.) that are available to farmers, upwards of 30,000 different products available in the UK alone. So you can imagine, with changing trends and needs of farmers to protect their crops in various ways, we as a Calculator team need to keep up with adding additional products to the calculator.
Outwith helping the smooth running of the calculator, my responsibilities include assisting Izzy, our Data Scientist, with her work. Recently, I’ve been assisting her in updating and maintaining soil sampling datasets using QGIS (a spatial data software) that have been collected by the advisory team. I also assist Izzy by testing apps that she designed herself! One of which is a soil sampling app for use by the FCT Advisory team to record soil sampling points more efficiently. I’m particularly grateful for this piece of work as it takes me away from my desk and gets me walking around, albeit on the streets of Edinburgh rather than the fields.
My day to day can vary depending on the tasks that are required or whether I’m working out of my flat, a cafe or the Melting Pot, the co-working space I go to. I’m kept on my toes with the diversity of work to do. Through this type of work, it might seem easy to disassociate from the real-world challenges faced by farmers in a changing climate when you’re spending your days hidden behind a screen, focused on numbers and code. However, this is what I feel FCT does very well, in connecting us to the issues we are all helping to solve. Between the numbers and spreadsheets, we do well to have numerous meetings, whether it be online, hearing about the projects FCT are involved in such as Farm Net Zero, or in person days where we celebrate the farmers that are doing the most to demonstrate low-carbon, sustainable agriculture.
My first in-person day was last September at our annual field day, where FCT presented the Carbon Farmer of the Year. An opportunity to hear first-hand what farmers are implementing to produce our food in a sustainable and low-carbon manner with the help of our carbon calculator. I always come back from these days feeling invigorated to tackle the next challenge knowing that farmers are using the calculator to benefit their farms and the environment.
Written by Tim Dart / Project Manager, Farm Carbon Toolkit
This article reviews the mechanisms and inputs to ruminant diets which are known to impact greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. It explores how these can be used by ruminant livestock farmers, alongside their limitations and the need for more research into more systems-based approaches to reduce methane emissions from ruminants.
Methane (CH4) is an important greenhouse gas in livestock-based agriculture as it is particularly potent. Over a 20-year period, methane is approximately 80 times more powerful at heating the earth than carbon dioxide (CO2), though it dissipates much more quickly (7-12 years) compared to CO2. Because methane is such a potent greenhouse gas, anything that can be done to reduce those emissions cost-effectively and without negative impacts on animal health, welfare and productivity is beneficial.
Ruminant animals have diverse microbial populations in their stomachs and these form a natural ecosystem in their own right. Anaerobic fermentation is a key process in the digestion of natural forage-based diets. Methane is released by anaerobic microbial activity through a process called methanogenesis and is consequentially released into the atmosphere as a by-product of digestion. Methane production also results in a loss of gross ingested energy and reduces animal growth and development, so minimising methane production can in theory lead to an increase in animal growth and productivity.
All ruminants (cattle, but also sheep and goats) together, contribute 30% of global methane released into the earth’s atmosphere. While this briefing focuses on methane inhibitors in ruminant diets, there are also opportunities to reduce methane emissions post-digestion, such as through manure and slurry management, biodigesters and activity to increase dung beetle activity. This will be the focus of a forthcoming briefing. Strategies to reduce enteric methane production are a major focus of research, due to the significance of methane. Initiatives like the Global Methane Hub are leading work on increasing our understanding of the mechanisms for reducing methane production safely in ruminants. Feasible approaches include improved animal and feed management, such as diet formulation, which has shown potential for meaningful emissions reductions. This is an active area of interest for organisations such as the Farm Carbon Toolkit (FCT) alongside our work on strategies to reduce enteric methane production post leaving the digestive system.
The commercial backdrop
FCT is aware of the significant ongoing efforts to develop products aimed at reducing methane emissions. Much of this work has focused on supplements that can be added to the animal’s diets, as these offer clear commercial opportunities for manufacturers. However, generating robust scientific data to support solutions based on practice changes, rather than commercially sold products, has been more challenging. As a result, these approaches and beneficial practices are underrepresented in discussions about methane reduction, due to the current lack of robust evidence demonstrating their effectiveness.
Adding supplements to ruminant diets becomes difficult to achieve when those animals are consuming a forage-based diet, grazing in the wider environment and consuming a variable and diverse range of plant species. In these situations, research into the makeup of these forages which can reduce emissions is taking place, but with no patentable product to promote, the investment in research and development is understandably less intense. As such, FCT as a farmer-led community interest company, may have a legitimate role in seeking to facilitate and advance the science in this area of research and development.
Feed supplements are now becoming commercially available in the UK. The most common supplement currently is 3-NOP (Bovaer®) which has drawn the attention of the media in recent weeks. There are thought to be other products in advanced development that are now close to market. There are other strategies and approaches where scientific data has established methane inhibitory activity which we discuss below.
Current understanding of Methane Inhibitors and their mode of action
Bovaer®
Bovaer is a synthetically manufactured enzyme inhibitor with an active ingredient called 3-Nitrooxypropanol (hence 3-NOP Bovaer). It is scientifically referred to as a Methyl co-enzyme or M reductase Inhibitor, meaning it blocks the activity of a combination of enzymes that breaks down organic compounds (under anaerobic conditions found in the rumen) and therefore prevents the final biochemical stage of methane release. It is called a reductase process (a reduction process) that would normally result in the breakdown of a glucose chain (a sugar) into CH4 (a methane compound). 3-NOP inhibits that activity.
Bovaer has undergone rigorous safety checks by the Food Standards Agency as part of its market authorisation process and is approved for use, and is considered safe for the consumers of milk and beef. It has been demonstrated to be safe for the animal, consumers, workers and the environment.
The dosage of Bovaer is recommended at 1 gram per 20 kg of feed (label recommendation). The manufacturer claims that a 45% reduction in methane emissions for dairy cows and 30% for beef cattle, is achievable, but only when the supplement is fed within a blended or total mixed ration.
Seaweed
Microalgae, commonly known as seaweed, are a large group of marine plants, made up of three relevant taxa: Rhodophyta (red), Chlorophyta (green) and Phaeophyceae (brown). Bromoform is found in the highest concentrations in red seaweed Aspargopsis, which is grown in subtropical regions around the world.Brormoform is also found in lower concentrations in the brown and green seaweed groups which are more ubiquitous and widespread in the world’s oceans. Feed additives derived from Asparagopsis have reduced methane emissions by 40+% and 90% respectively.
Bromoform (CHBR3) has proven to be highly effective at inhibiting methanogenesis along with other halogenated volatile organic compounds. These VOCs effectively bind to enzymes and reductases, reducing H2 and CO2 release and through archaeal organisms these produce CH4.
There are some studies and claims that Bromoform promotes increases in animal productivity, but other studies report modest reductions in milk yields (-6.5%) this appears to occur when reductions in animal intakes of feed are also observed. There has also been some evidence of abnormalities of the rumen walls of participating animals in such studies, with the loss of papillae and microscopic inflammation found in two studies, although the studies were not able to directly conclude that damage to the rumen was as a result of A.taxiformis supplementation. It is clear that there are discrepancies within the results of the various studies undertaken using Bromoform and that the energy in the H2 compounds resulting from the reductase reaction is not 100% possible to be re-diverted into volatile fatty acids and appears to require the expansion of H2 sinks within the rumen and is seen as an area of further developmental work.
There are numerous other bioactive compounds within the microalgae plants / seaweeds, and are known to produce other compounds that have anti-microbial function that could modify the rumen environment and reduce methane emissions in different ways. These include; phlorotannis, saponins, sulfonated glycans and other halocarbons and bacteriocins, these are the source of ongoing research and developmental work.
Condensed Tannins
Condensed Tannins (CT’s) are commonly found in high concentrations in various UK native flora, including Greater Birdsfoot Trefoil, Birdsfoot Trefoil and Sainfoin. These are all commonly found in herbal leys. CT’s are complex plant polymers of polyphenols found in legumes and other C3-type plants. CT’s are considered to reduce methane emissions through the following mechanisms:
Reducing fibre fermentation
Inhibiting the growth of methanogenic micro-organisms
Acting directly against hydrogen-producing microbes.
CT’s are able to bind to proteins, polysaccharides and metal ions and inhibit fibre digestion of longer-chain starch, cellulose and hemi-cellulose. As such CT’s consequently reduce the formation of hydrogen and acetate and inhibits the growth of methanogenic microorganisms, thus reducing enteric CH4.
Excessive inclusion of biologically active Condensed Tannins within ruminant diets have been found to be detrimental if it exceeds 6% of the overall animal diet in terms of dry matter intake (DMI). Elevated levels have been found to impact negatively on animal performance in terms of growth rate or milk yield. Target inclusion of CT’s are recommended to between 2 and 4% where improvements in animal performance can be achieved. The scientific quantification of the impact of CT’s on Methane emissions is not clear, with the research inconsistent with the work that has been published to date, but it is not considered inconsequential.
From other parts of the world, studies (predominantly Australia) are being undertaken on management practices and cattle browsing legumes known to hold high levels of Tannins, Desmanthus or Leucaena species. Leuceana is a tropical and sub-tropical legume fodder crop and Desmanthus is a tropical legume. The inclusion of both crops in ruminant diets has been shown to improve live weight gains and reduce methane emissions in cattle.
Diversity and grazing diets
By embracing the diversity of grazing diets, there is potential to reduce ruminant emissions through a whole-systems approach. This involves increasing the overall dietary content of tannins coming from multiple grazed forage species, such as herbal leys, willow and other silvopastoral feeds. This can achieve a measurable and meaningful reduction in enteric methane production. However, achieving this requires investment and expansion of knowledge and empirical quantification.
Other options
Other options for exploring enteric methane production, including but not exhaustively:
Genetic selection
Vaccination
Feeding of grape marc (which is high in Tannins)
Adding nitrate or biochar to feed
Conclusion
This is a dynamic area of development and knowledge exploration on GHG emissions, with many complex interconnections to broader environmental concerns. It is important to recognise these links, which include, but are not limited to, animal welfare, animal longevity, as well as other sustainability factors such as biodiversity, water quality, air quality. These, along with other far-reaching sustainability goals, must be carefully balanced to inform the best possible decisions.
Written by Alex Bebbington, Project Officer, Rural Business School, Duchy College
In November 2024, a farm walk was hosted by Andrew and Claire Brewer, winners of the Carbon Farmers of the Year 2024, as well as being a Farm Net Zero Demo Farm.
The Farm Net Zero (FNZ) project was very proud of Demo Farmers Andrew and Claire Brewer of Ennis Barton for winning the 2024 Carbon Farmer of the Year competition. Carbon Farmer of the Year is run by the Farm Carbon Toolkit and is sponsored by HSBC Agriculture UK. It aims to support farmers on their transition to low-carbon farming by championing farmers who are successfully on that transition and creating a network to learn from.
On Friday 8th November 2024, Andrew Brewer hosted a farm walk to explain some of the practices that led to him winning this year’s Carbon Farmer of the Year competition.
Andrew and Claire farm 1,000 acres at Fraddon, near Newquay, milking 450 autumn-calving Jersey cross cows to supply Arla. Cows calve in late summer and are milked twice a day, sometimes in a 10 milkings in 7 days system. Land is let for field vegetables and potatoes as part of the rotation. Andrew is a Demo Farm for the Farm Net Zero project and carbon footprinting from this has shown that the farm is emitting 0.67kg CO₂e per kg of Fat and Protein Corrected Milk (FPCM). Andrew puts this down to maximising milk from forage, feeding little concentrate, and farming without any fertiliser on grass for the last four years. As well as working to reduce emissions, Andrew is optimising sequestration in hedges and soils.
Grazing management and herbal leys
The dairy herd grazes for as much of the year as possible, where conditions allow. Sometimes this may only be for a few hours a day, but Andrew feels this is an important part of his farming practices. Grass is the cheapest feed available and if the cows can harvest it themselves (aiming for 90% of the cow’s feed intake from grazed grass) then this not only reduces costs, but also reduces emissions from tractor diesel. Similarly, letting the cows out to pasture means that they can “spread their own slurry”, further reducing costs and emissions (both from diesel use and from slurry storage).
Herbal leys are used extensively across the grazing platform. Their deep, diverse roots help to improve soil health, potentially capturing carbon into the soil, and access minerals and nutrients deep in the soil profile, allowing for good growth without artificial fertiliser. The impact of the herbal ley on milk yield and quality is being assessed through a Farm Net Zero Field Lab, comparing cow performance on herbal leys and ryegrass/white clover swards. The results of this study will be available soon.
Calving
Cows calve outside in late summer, with the calves then reared in batches in a woodchip bedded shed. The woodchip creates a very clean environment, eliminating the need for bought-in straw. All calves are taken through to finish, with beef bulls kept entire and finished at 12 months and beef heifers finished at 17 months. Youngstock are grazed on a mix of pasture, cover crops and the leftover vegetable crops after the human-grade plants are harvested. This integration of farm enterprises helps to fully utilise nutrients across the farm, reducing the need for buying inputs in.
Soil health: the basis of the farm business
Andrew did a Nuffield Scholarship in 2015 and attributes this to changing his views on soil health as the basis of the farm business. Through the Farm Net Zero project, soil carbon has been monitored over a number of years and the carbon sequestered into these fields has halved the farm’s carbon footprint. Andrew acknowledged that the carbon sequestration is variable, with not all fields capturing carbon, but will continue to monitor soil carbon in the future to identify the long-term trends.
Farm trails
As part of the FNZ Demo Farm work, Dr Hannah Jones of Farm Carbon Toolkit has assisted in the development of a variety of soil-focused trials. When fields are let for vegetables and potatoes, the soil can require assistance back to optimum status. Trials to reduce the negative impacts of these practices have included intercropping between cabbages to reduce bare soil and the risk of runoff. Another trial has followed methods to restore soil health after potatoes. Different mixes were planted after potatoes to assess the improvements to soil structure, stability and worm content. Results from this suggested that Westerwolds ryegrass had the greatest positive impact on soil health, possibly because of its rapid growth creating a large root mass, so Andrew now grows Westerwolds following veg crops. This fits well with the dairy as the Westerwolds produces excellent feed for strip-grazing dry cows before calving, another example of how the whole farm system is integrated to minimise the need for emissions-intensive inputs.
In all, Andrew and Claire focus on running a simple system well, integrating enterprises across the farm. This allows them to minimise emissions from inputs, as well as maximising sequestration into soils and hedgerows.
Guest blog by Claire Wallerstein, Cornwall Climate Care
Food systems under threat from climate change
Among the many threats posed by climate change, maybe the greatest is to our food systems. With our country producing less than 60% of what we eat, and the climate crisis already having a huge impact on many of the places we import our food from, the UK clearly needs to become more self-sufficient.
But increasingly extreme weather is affecting food production right here too. Following last winter’s endless rains, British farmers have had one of their worst harvests ever. We know that the way our land is farmed and managed can help us to mitigate the impacts of the climate crisis… or indeed to make things much worse.
However, with farmers facing unprecedented financial challenges and record numbers now fearing they’ll go out of business, can we realistically expect them to protect us all from climate change too?
Farming and land use are also increasingly becoming a lightning rod in the climate culture wars. Half-truths, misinformation and outright lies are being pushed across social media by those with a vested interest in crushing the whole green agenda.
While filming the Cornwall’s Climate Stories documentaries, we’ve been keen to find out whether all of this is impacting real world efforts to boost pro-climate and nature-friendly farming.
Farmers centre stage, with a supporting role by FCT!
As filmmakers without a personal connection to farming, it’s been fascinating for us to interview so many farmers and food producers across Cornwall (and our film Food for Thought was actually presented by an organic beef farmer).
We’ve also featured several members of the Farm Carbon Toolkit (FCT) team, including technical director Becky Willson, who we met in the middle of the 2022 drought.
Becky demonstrating the properties and health of soil
Becky took us out in a Cornish field to show us the huge differences that regenerative farming can make to both farmers and wider society. Biologically-healthy soils are not only more fertile, but also store more carbon, support more wildlife, and hold much more water – reducing flash flooding during our increasingly torrential downpours, but also enabling crops to keep growing during increasing periods of drought.
Another of our interviewees was FCT Impact Manager Jonathan Smith, who is trying to adapt to increasing coastal erosion as the sea level rises around his beautiful organic farm on St Martin’s in the Isles of Scilly.
Meanwhile, Farm Carbon & Soil Advisor Anthony Ellis appeared in our film Power to the People about climate change and energy, addressing one of the biggest flashpoints around climate action in rural areas – solar farms.
The loud public outcry against the idea of solar panels covering productive farmland has been unavoidable. However, Anthony believes we’re missing a trick by viewing land use in such a binary way.
He has raised his panels up 18 inches higher than usual to allow his sheep to graze beneath them. Aside from bringing him in additional income, the panels also improve the welfare of his animals.
When we visited on a very hot summer’s day, the sheep were relaxing in the shade of the panels and Anthony explained the grass holds on better beneath them during droughts than it does out in the open. Chickens can be kept beneath solar panels and all manner of veg grown between them too.
Anthony’s sheep under solar panels on a warm day
Few will argue that solar farms are beautiful – but the popular view of these sites as sterile and lifeless can be far from the truth. Recent studies have found well-managed solar farms act as vital havens for wildflowers and critical pollinators among barren landscapes of industrial farmland.
Bringing nuance into the debate
Concern over food security is totally understandable. However, even if all the solar area envisioned in the government’s net zero plans were built, this would still take up only 0.3% of our land area – just half the amount of land taken up by golf courses (and 0.5% of the land currently used for farming).
Solar farms are far from the only controversial way of using farmland to tackle the climate crisis though. Tree-planting initiatives are also leading to fears of food-growing areas being lost.
However, the picture is more nuanced here too. Agroforestry is a great way of introducing more trees into the landscape, while still using it for farming.
Chris Jones, who farms near Ladock, has planted strips of willow through some fields, allowing him to mob graze his livestock (regularly moving animals on from one small area of land to another, which is a great way of boosting soil biology and carbon storage).
Mob grazed cattle
Planting more trees across a farm, or allowing hedgerows to grow out, not only benefits birds, pollinators and other wildlife. This can also provide shade and shelter, important for livestock as our weather becomes more extreme, as well as additional fodder. Trees can also be coppiced to provide firewood or fencing materials, or could provide additional crops such as fruit or nuts.
Tree planting is often linked to something else that has spawned huge controversy – rewilding. Yet several farmers across Cornwall are involved in this to different degrees too, re-introducing extinct or struggling species from tiny harvest mice or water voles to larger and much more misunderstood ones, like beavers.
There’s alarm in some quarters about beavers eating fish (they’re vegetarian) or killing trees (most of the trees they fell regenerate). Concern about flooding of farmland may be more of a possibility. However, experience in countries like Germany, where beavers were reintroduced over 60 years ago, has shown these animals can be managed and relocated quite easily if problems arise.
In terms of benefits, beavers’ leaky dams help to clean up rivers and drastically reduce flash flooding, while the ponds behind them have been proven to kickstart an amazing return of other life, from insects and fish to bats and birds. Importantly for farmers in our changing climate, they can also provide a valuable reserve of water for potential use in times of drought.
Turning challenges to opportunities
We’ve met so many Cornish farmers who are grasping the climate challenge with great enthusiasm – from the Stoke Climsland cluster of small farmers working together to create wildlife corridors across their wider landscape, to huge businesses like Riviera Produce, which farms 8,000 acres across Cornwall, producing a significant amount of the UK’s cauliflowers, cabbage, courgettes and kale.
Riviera farm manager David Thomas looking at soil quality in a field of green manure
By adopting more techniques such as companion planting to encourage natural pest predators, Riviera have managed to massively reduce the amounts of pesticides and other chemicals they use. Worm counts in their soils have boomed, and by using cover crops after harvest instead of leaving bare earth there’s now far less run-off from their fields to cause flooding in nearby villages.
But…. there is one big elephant in the room around farming and climate action in Cornwall. Just a cursory glance shows that most of our farmland is dedicated to livestock – and the climate impact globally of the meat and dairy industry is huge.
Livestock farming may be a traditional part of Cornwall’s heritage and it’s true that we grow grass here very well. However, many animals today actually live in highly intensive systems dependent on imported feed and chemicals, with their waste contained in vast slurry lagoons that pump out planet-heating methane.
Innovative Cornish research is attempting to tackle these impacts – for example by capturing methane and turning it into a green fuel, or researching new feeds to replace damaging Amazonian soya.
These advances are important given that these mass-produced animal products are sadly much more affordable than milk or meat from higher welfare and more nature-friendly, pasture-fed animals.
However, it’s also important to recognise that nearly 10% of the UK population is now either vegetarian or vegan. Could this offer new diversification opportunities for Cornish farmers too?
We already have more Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) schemes, growing veg to organic principles, than anywhere else in the country – but there is potential for much more horticulture here too. A changing climate may increasingly also enable us to farm more and different crops, such as sweet potatoes, soya and grapes.
Holly Whitelaw testing (and tasting?!) soil at Boasvern CSA in West Cornwall
At least one Cornish livestock farmer is even considering growing oats to tap into the vegan oat milk market too!
Farmers have always been great at adapting to whatever is thrown at them – be that weather, government policies or changing public tastes.
However, as climate impacts worsen, adaptability is going to become key to their survival. We all depend on farmers three times a day, so supporting them in this changing world should be a priority for all of us too.
We’ve seen some tantalising glimpses all over Cornwall of many ways in which farming could become more resilient and much better for nature, people and the climate.
Making this a meaningful reality is clearly going to need much greater support from the government. However, we hope that, by showcasing the stories of so many passionate food producers around Cornwall, our films can help to enthuse more of the farming community to get on board with becoming part of the climate solution too.
In this series, we look at the changes in management that farmers and growers are taking in response to a changing climate. We’re looking at the tips, techniques and approaches that are borne out of the lived experience of farmers and growers, in response to a changing climate driven by global heating.
FCT exists to help food and farming businesses to reduce their carbon footprint, but increasingly every farming business also is having to adapt to the climate that we now have. It’s therefore vital that food and farming does both climate mitigation and adaptation at the same time.
Over recent years they have noticed a change in weather patterns, which has affected their farm in significant ways. Adam comments:
“The increasing frequency and intensity of high rainfall events coming with our changing climate are causing challenges in crop planning, and significant impacts on our soil. Soil erosion and water infiltration can be made much worse by heavy rainfall, especially in short amounts of time, as we’ve been experiencing.”
Indeed, research by EJP Soils shows that changes in rainfall patterns across Europe will be responsible for up to 23% more soil erosion by 2050. This could have very significant impacts on soil health, water quality and could lead to significant losses of soil carbon – the one major asset that farmers have to sequester carbon on their farmland.
The UK Met Office predict that rainfall will get more intense in both summer and winter over coming years and decades, in particular with very local variations; in other words, hard to predict and plan for.
Protecting the soil
Whilst we can’t influence the weather, we can respond to the weather patterns as we see them emerging. A good example is how we manage our soils, as this is so fundamental to food and farming. It is well known that leaving soil uncovered (in arable and horticultural systems) can lead to soil erosion, a decrease in soil organic matter, a loss of soil biodiversity, and other negative impacts on soil health and structure.
In turn, bare soil can have significant short and long term impacts on crop health, quality and yields. Water courses can end up being clogged up with soil and full of the nutrients that should be in our fields. Carbon can be oxidised and lost to the atmosphere, so that soils emit rather than sequester carbon.
Working out ways to change farming systems to be more resilient to these changes in climate will be critical for all farmers and growers. There are range of ways to build a more resilient soil, as Adam discusses:
“Over the last few years, we have changed our soil management practices. We’re working towards improving and maintaining soil health through regenerative principles. We’ve reduced tillage significantly, ploughing just one year in four now, and using pig tail tines as primary cultivation, with a power harrow. We’re also rotating some land with livestock and we’re very keen on keeping living roots in the soil as much as possible.
An example of standing water in tractor wheelings and a bed of carrots just harvested, with bare soil visible
Importantly we’ve really increased plant diversity and soil coverage. We’re constantly undersowing crops, so 80-90% of all fields have a green manure of some sort. This reduces exposure of soil to the weather, builds fertility and increases biodiversity.
There are three rotations across the market garden. Fertility building leys make up about 20-25% of land in any given year. Here we’re using 10-15 different varieties, including clovers, and annuals or biannuals – no long term grasses, we prefer cereals like rye oats and barley, plus winter wheat. We’re aiming to put in more deeper rooted species such as plantain, buckthorn, chicory, yarrow.
Deep rooting species can help improve soil structure and water infiltration
We also add manures (from our landlord’s organic farm), the amount being crop dependent. But with Soil Organic Matter levels at over 7%, we don’t need to add too much manure, and increasingly the green manures are performing that fertility building role.”
The impacts
Seeing is believing, and farmers and growers tend to learn a lot from looking at each other’s farms and understanding what others do differently. Knowing when something is working can be self-evident to farmers, not necessarily needing research to back it up.
At Pitney Farm Market Garden, Adam describes the impact of the changes they’ve made:
“Water infiltration rates on the areas covered by green manures are so much better; it’s obvious just to look at. There is no standing water on the green manures, even after heavy rain, whereas in the wheelings and a few bare beds there is standing water. This is evidence enough to me that we’re doing something right.
Kale with red and crimson clover undersown
Living plants cover the soil, reducing the speed and intensity that rain hits the soil. Roots help water sink into the ground, massively increasing infiltration rates and stopping the water running off the surface and carrying soil with it.
Soil improvements through Adam and Rita’s management have led to much improved water infiltration through better soil structure and aggregation
The healthier a soil is, with better aggregation, the faster the infiltration rate will be, meaning the larger amount of rainfall that the soil can deal with. We’re seeing good aggregation now in the top four inches of soil and lots of earthworms. We’re hoping that by introducing more deeper rooting species that aggregation will improve further down the soil profile.”
Bigger picture
When it comes to managing these issues of flooding and drought on a wider scale, Adam shares some thoughts:
“I’m coming to think that undersowing crops and ensuring the soil is covered, is actually an essential practice, not a nice add on. This is because of the increasing frequency and intensity of high rainfall events coming with our changing climate.
A lot of our agricultural soils in this country are in poor health. Many soils – particularly those under maize, are in very poor condition and have very little capacity to hold water. As the climate deteriorates, more and more farmers have to work harder and harder to produce crops, and do even more to protect our most precious resource, the soil, from harsher conditions.
Green manures and crops side by side, ensuring almost full soil cover at Pitney Farm Market Garden
Is the support, both technically and financially, in place to help farmers across the board to do this? Sadly, I really don’t think it is. The government doesn’t have a handle on it, and is not taking it seriously, which is really worrying. The climate crisis terrifies me on all sorts of levels. The impacts on global food supply chains and food security could be massive. We need to manage our soils better to both mitigate and adapt to climate change, as well as recreating our food systems to build resilience in food and farming.”
Written by Grace Wardell/Calculator Development Officer
Due to an increasing awareness of climate change, more people than ever are interested in the environmental impact of the products they’re buying. But how many of the claims around carbon are true and how can we trust them? The UK Green Claims Code suggests that 40% of green claims made online could be misleading1. As a farm business, it is particularly important to ensure that claims made around carbon or greenhouse gas (GHG) reductions and removals are truthful and transparent. Whether you’re being offered ‘low carbon’ fertilisers or want to promote your GHG reductions, navigating green claims can be tricky.
We know this can feel scary, no one wants to be accused of greenwashing. If you’re looking to make positive environmental claims about your farm, we would advise keeping a record of your working with evidence to back it up. We’ve laid out some key terminology to help get you started with carbon accounting, how you can market it and how you can evaluate the green claims of products you buy.
What are green claims?
Green claims (also sometimes called ‘environmental claims’ or ‘eco-friendly claims’) are often made by a product or business that claims a benefit to, or a reduced impact on the environment.
Some examples of green claims include:
“This product will reduce the carbon footprint of your farm”
“Company’s environmental footprint reduced by 20% since 2015”
“CO2 emissions linked to this product halved as compared to 2020”
How can carbon footprinting help?
Carbon footprinting is the first step to making green claims about your business or a product you’re selling. In order to reliably report changes in GHG emissions, you first have to estimate them. Conducting a carbon footprint can highlight ‘hot spot’ areas in your business which might be emitting more GHGs than you thought. Addressing these ‘hot spot’ areas and reducing emissions associated with them is often an easy first win in the journey to lower emissions, net zero and even financial savings. You can try out our carbon calculator tool, which is free for farmers and growers. You will then need to record your GHG emissions estimate in subsequent years. Once you have evidence of reduced emissions over time, you may want to promote this, for example on a product you sell or as a business. Here are some key terms to get familiar with.
Key terms
Reduced emissions refers to the direct lowering of GHG emissions by adopting more sustainable agricultural practices, technologies, and management strategies. These reductions involve minimising the release of GHGs that occur during conventional farming activities. Looking at ways to reduce GHG emissions is the first recommended step before you seek to make any “green claims”.
Example: A farmer adopts precision agriculture techniques to apply fertilisers more efficiently (e.g., using soil sensors, variable rate application, or slow-release fertilisers).
Impact: By optimising fertiliser use, the farm reduces the amount of nitrous oxide (N₂O) emissions, which are released when excess nitrogen is applied to the soil. Improving nitrogen use efficiency can directly reduce N2O emissions.
Avoided emissions refer to GHG emissions that would have been released into the atmosphere under business-as-usual practices but are prevented through changes in farming methods, land use, or supply chain activities. These emissions reductions do not remove carbon from the atmosphere directly, but rather prevent emissions from occurring in the first place. It’s very similar to “reduced emissions” but it is more hypothetical.
Example: A distributor uses biofuel from used cooking oil to transport their products (renewable energy source) instead of using diesel.
Impact: High emissions that would have been released from burning diesel or during transport are avoided. This distributor may have lower GHG emissions from transporting the same quantity of goods the same distance as compared to a distributor using diesel. However they may require more biofuel to transport the same quantity of goods the same distance so the avoidance of emissions is not guaranteed.
Carbon Removals is the process of actively removing CO2 from the atmosphere and storing it for a long time, using either technology or nature-based solutions. In a farming context, this is mostly done by natural sequestration of carbon into soils, trees and other biomass. These removals can help offset GHG emissions, making them a critical component of climate change mitigation efforts in agriculture.
Example: A farm establishes hedgerows along field boundaries, which serve as natural windbreaks and biodiversity corridors.
Carbon Removal Mechanism: Hedgerows sequester carbon in plant biomass and enhance soil carbon storage along the boundaries of agricultural fields.
Impact: In addition to carbon removal, hedgerows provide habitat for wildlife, improve soil health, and protect crops from wind and erosion.
Carbon insetting refers to reducing GHG emissions – or increasing carbon storage – within a company’s own supply chain, focusing on sustainability improvements that benefit the company’s own production processes and stakeholders. Whereas carbon offsetting involves reducing GHG emissions – or increasing carbon storage – outside of the companies supply chain, often by purchasing carbon credits from environmental projects, such as tree planting. With carbon offsetting, the reduced emissions, or enhanced carbon storage, occurs elsewhere and is therefore harder to track. Read our detailed explanation of carbon insetting and offsetting on our getting paid for carbon page.
When entering into any carbon insetting or offsetting agreement, try to ensure there is a clear definition of the project, who is responsible for claiming the GHG reductions and where those reductions are taking place. These principles can ensure there is clear evidence of where GHG reductions are coming from and can help prevent the double counting of emissions reductions.
Assessing green claims on products you buy
You might have come across “Low Carbon” products, one example of this is low carbon fertilisers. Traditional nitrogen-based fertilisers (e.g., ammonia, urea) are energy-intensive to produce, mainly due to the reliance on fossil fuels for the Haber-Bosch process, which converts nitrogen from the air into ammonia. Improvements in technology have now produced Green ammonia, manufactured using renewable energy (solar, wind, hydropower) to generate hydrogen through water electrolysis, instead of using fossil fuels. This significantly reduces the carbon emissions from fertiliser production. Alternatively, Blue ammonia is ammonia still being produced using fossil fuels, but incorporates carbon capture and storage methods to remove CO2 produced during the process. Blue ammonia still relies on the heavy use of fossil fuels, whereas green ammonia reduces this demand.
Urease inhibitors are an example of a GHG mitigation product that can reduce ammonia emissions associated with urea fertilisers. Urease enzymes are naturally present in soil and are involved in the process of changing urea into ammonia and carbon dioxide. This means that when urea is applied to soils, a significant loss of nitrogen occurs as ammonia is released into the atmosphere, resulting in air pollution. Urease inhibitors are added to urea-based fertilisers (sometimes known as protected urea) to slow down the enzymatic process, keeping more nitrogen in the form of plant-available ammonium for longer and increasing the fertiliser efficiency. New rules in England (2024) have outlined when unprotected/uninhibited urea can be applied, check out this AHDB article to see how it may affect you.
Another example of a GHG Mitigation product are methane inhibitors for ruminant animals. Methane inhibitors are feed additives designed to reduce methane emissions produced during digestion, specifically in the process known as enteric fermentation. The goal is to prevent or slow down the final step in the fermentation process where methane is produced without harming the animal’s digestion or productivity. A methane inhibitor feed additive (Bovaer by DSM-Firmenich) has been approved for use in the UK that on average claims a 30% reduction in methane emissions for dairy cattle and 45% reduction for beef cattle2. It is worth noting that the efficacy of these products can vary across different feeding systems and therefore may not always be a ‘silver bullet’ to reducing methane emissions.
Provenance
“Farm washing” by big UK supermarkets often leads people to believe that they’re buying products grown on small family farms within the UK, however a lot of this produce originates overseas or from big industrial scale farms.
Riverfords recent ‘Farmers against Farmwashing’ Campaign showed that 74% of shoppers want supermarkets to be transparent about produce and meat that is not British and sourced from abroad. When shoppers were shown a photo of produce in a UK supermarket under a Union Jack flag, 68% of people expected more than half of it to come from a British farm, when in fact, none of it did.
Supermarkets have been called out beforefor marketing these fake farm brands that sell imported produce under a fictitious farm name and even a Union Jack flag. As a consumer, you can always check the fine print on produce packaging to see where it originates and don’t just rely on branding.
Case Study: I’ve got a Life Cycle Assessment for a product I buy in, can I use it in my carbon footprint?
For inputs on your farm, you may be buying products that come with their own associated carbon footprint and want to know if you can incorporate this into your business’s carbon footprint. Let’s work through an example.
The feed you buy your dairy cows has a life cycle assessment (LCA) carbon footprint that has been passed onto you by the company selling this product.
Always check that the product LCA you have is for exactly the item you have purchased. The functional unit in this example would most likely be for 1 kg feed wheat and not a derivative of that, for example 1kg of white flour. Different products will have different processes involved that generate emissions, we can’t always assume that just because the products are similar, they will have a similar carbon footprint.
Check the methodology of the LCA to understand how it has been generated and what the uncertainties around it are.
For example, the feed wheat claims that it has a negative emissions factor (-1.2 kgCO2e/ kg wheat), i.e. the production of it has sequestered more carbon than it has generated. The LCA claims that this is due to using regenerative practices to grow the wheat which has enhanced soil carbon stocks. However, when you look at the methodology, it lists that carbon sequestration was not measured by direct soil measurements, but was instead modelled with Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Changes (IPCC) methodology Tier 1 approaches (see Box 1).
If the product you are buying claims to have a negative emissions value, then the methodology needs to be based on direct soil carbon or GHG measurements on that farm. If a direct measurement of sequestered carbon can be provided, this increases the reliability of the claim and can be passed on to a company which could include it as part of its scope 3 emissions inventory.
The choice of methodology will impact the reliability of the results. For example, there are three IPCC tiers to the recommended approaches (see Box 1). If direct soil measurements are taken, this would be a tier 3 approach and is the most reliable method, however the methodology uses a tier 1 (global) approach with estimated carbon stocks.
Check how the carbon footprint is reported.
Ensure the carbon emissions are reported separately to any carbon removals the company claims – not just the carbon balance (i.e. emissions – removals). There is a requirement by carbon reporting guidance to separate these two values. It is mandatory to report emissions, but not removals, due to the uncertainty around them.
Check the units that it is reported in (usually kg CO2e / kg product) and ensure that this makes sense for the way you will use the product.
Has the footprint been validated externally by third party verification? Although this is not absolutely necessary to have a reliable product footprint, it can help add confidence that the methodology has been checked by others.
If you are satisfied that the LCA has supplied a clear methodology on how the carbon footprint has been calculated, you may wish to include it as part of your scope 3 emissions report.
Box 1. IPCC Methodologies for Calculating GHG Emissions
Tier 1: This is the most basic approach, using default emission factors and generalised activity data provided by the IPCC for different sectors. It mostly uses global data and is intended for broad estimates with low accuracy.
Tier 2: This approach uses country- or region-specific emission factors and more detailed activity data, such as local energy usage. It improves accuracy compared to Tier 1 by incorporating factors that are more relevant to the specific conditions of the region.
Tier 3: The most advanced method, using detailed modelling or direct measurements and highly specific data for the particular circumstances of the country or sector. Tier 3 provides the highest level of accuracy by incorporating real-time data, complex models, and system-specific emission factors.
Each tier increases in complexity, accuracy, and the level of data required.
Pointers on how to sense check and provide robust environmental claims
The competition and markets authority has set out six principles for businesses to follow when making green claims and provided examples to help you assess green claims3. Here we have summarised the principles with examples:
Is the claim truthful and accurate?
Check the facts: Verify that the environmental benefit being claimed is backed by credible evidence. Look for data, scientific studies, or certifications that support the claim.
Avoid exaggeration: Ensure that the claim reflects the actual impact of the product or service and is not overstating the environmental benefits.
Is the claim clear and unambiguous?
Does it go beyond using generic phrases like ‘green’ and ‘eco-friendly’ and list the specifics of how it is an improved product?
Does the claim omit or hide important relevant information?
This may be hard to know and would probably involve doing a little bit of research around the product and its production methods.
For example, a product with ‘save our seas – these are microbead free’ makes you believe that similar products may contain microbeads – however microbeads are banned in the UK, and therefore shouldn’t be in any of the products!
Does the claim make fair and meaningful comparisons?
If a product is claiming to be better than others on the market, how has this been assessed? Has the comparison included a wide range of alternative products?
Does the claim consider the full life cycle of the product or service?
Life cycle assessments show the overall impact of a product from cradle to grave.
Is the claim substantiated?
An example of a substantiated claim might be: “Our product packaging is made from 100% recycled materials and is fully recyclable. By using recycled materials, we have reduced our packaging-related carbon footprint by 40% compared to virgin plastic packaging. This reduction has been verified through a third-party Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) in compliance with ISO 14040 standards.”
Now in its second year, the annual Carbon Farmer of the Year competition is organised by the Farm Carbon Toolkit and generously sponsored by HSBC Agriculture UK. The competition aims to find farmers and growers who are engaged with–and passionate about–reducing their business’s climate impact through changing management practices to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.
Andrew Brewer was awarded the Carbon Farmer of the Year Award for 2024, presented by Steve Dunkley, our sponsor from HSBC Agriculture (seen in the picture below).
Andrew Brewer, Winner of the Carbon Farmer of the Year Award for 2024 presented by Steve Dunkley, HSBC Agriculture UK
Andrew is part of the Farm Net Zero project and low GHG farming has been a top priority for him and his farm for a number of years. He manages 500 Jersey X dairy cows across his 400 Ha farm in Fraddon, Cornwall. He stood out to the judges for his understanding and application of a range of practices to enable his pasture-based dairy farm to remove atmospheric carbon into soil, trees, and hedges, while simultaneously minimising farm GHG emissions by focusing on maximising forage intake for his dairy cows and minimising inclusion of supplementary concentrate feeds. Andrew also selectively breeds his cows to work well within his pasture-based system. There is an opportunity to tour his farm during a farm walk he is hosting on November 8th.
The other two finalists, Tom Burge and Jason Mitchell were praised for their continued efforts to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions in their businesses. The finalists awards were presented by David Cope, Head of Sustainability at the Duchy of Cornwall who was also on the panel of judges (seen below). Tom Burge, who featured in the mob grazing workshop has done fantastic work cultivating a low input grazing system which has seen vast improvements in his grass quality and sequestration potential.
Similarly, Jason Mitchell is a Director of Greenville Dairies Ltd based in Newton Stewart, Northern Ireland. He has also been recognised for his continued effort to farm in a low carbon management system. At Greenville Dairies they have reduced emissions from their 850 strong dairy herd, largely through the application of genomics leading to greater feed efficiency alongside the development of a significant Anaerobic Digestion facility which sees them now taking in food waste alongside utilisation of cow manure to produce electricity, liquid natural gas (LNG) and digestate. Electricity and LNG are sold to the grid and to Companies such as Lakeland Dairies (their customer for their milk).
Tom Burge and Greenville Dairies, Carbon Farmer of the Year 2024 finalists, with David Cope, Head of Sustainability at the Duchy of Cornwall
Competition judges, Steve Dunkley (HSBC UK), David Cope (Head of Sustainability at Duchy of Cornwall), and Liz Bowles (CEO Farm Carbon Toolkit) were very impressed with the commitment and innovation shown by all the finalists in identifying sources of GHG emissions on their farms and developing strategies to both reduce emissions and increase the rate of carbon removal into soils and non-crop biomass.
Liz Bowles, Chief Executive Officer at Farm Carbon Toolkit, says:
Once again, the Carbon Farmer of the Year competition has identified some truly inspirational farmers. All our finalists have made great strides in reducing business reliance on fossil fuels through changes to their farming practices and careful soil management to reduce GHG emissions and sequester carbon.
It was particularly positive to see a dairy farm winning this year’s competition, given that dairy farming is often in the media spotlight for its adverse environmental impact. We are looking forward to showcasing the many effective ways that our finalists are reducing on-farm emissions and increasing carbon storage for others to see at free farm walks over the coming months. Watch this space!
Steve Dunkley, HSBC UK Agriculture, says:
HSBC UK Agriculture is pleased to support the 2024 Carbon Farmer of the Year competition. The quality of entries has been superb and hugely inspiring. As a business, we’re very keen to support the agriculture industry in transitioning towards net zero. While that will take many forms, we have the ambition to help farmers fund investment in the new practices and technologies needed to evolve.
The Carbon Farmer of the Year competition is a great way of showcasing how farmers are already achieving these changes and encouraging others to follow their lead
The FCT field day was an event to shine a light on the sustainable solutions benefiting farmers economically, socially and environmentally. The focus was on mixed agricultural systems, as well as celebrating those who are doing the most to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and sequester carbon into their soils.
On the 25th September 2024, our Annual Field Day brought together farmers from all over the country, including the winners of our past FCT Soil and Carbon Farmer of the Year competitions, to hear about the exciting developments in sustainable agriculture. In addition, we were grateful to HSBC UK Agriculture who helped sponsor the Carbon Farmer of the Year Competition and to all our supporters of the Annual Field Day – Cross Compliance Solutions, First Milk, Shearwell, Velcourt and Yeo Valley.
The event was held at Boycefield Farm in Dilwyn, courtesy of Billy Lewis, Soil Farmer of the year (2022) and the Lewis family. The day was a grey one with a few showers but did not dampen any spirits or the curiosity of the farmers that enjoyed the day!
Our delegates arrived ready for a 10am start which was officially kicked off by a welcome from FCT CEO Liz Bowles and an introduction to the farm by host Billy Lewis.
Opening comments by Billy Lewis to all the guests
Billy Lewis – Our host and 2022 Soil Farmer of the Year talking about how the farms’ approach of integrating livestock and herbal leys into a previously intensive arable system has rejuvenated soil health, drastically reduced fertiliser and feed inputs, whilst boosting profitability. Billy also mentioned the challenges his farm has been facing, with the changing climate and consistently wet weather proving to be high on the list.
We enjoyed a circuit of the farm to join workshops on subjects including adapting arable rotations to build fertility and resilience in a changing climate, mob grazing and the importance of soil testing. We heard about developments that have been made on Boycefield farm, as well as from farmers implementing similar systems across the country.
We have captured a snapshot of the workshops below:
Soil clinic – chaired by Becky Wilson (FCT)
We heard from our very own Becky Wilson and Niels Corfield, a regenerative agriculture advisor.
Becky standing in the soil pit explaining the benefits of upkeeping healthy soil to the group
Niels and Becky focussed on firstly, and most importantly, how the health of the soil is crucial to any agricultural system. Having a deeper understanding of what to look for within the soil aids farmers in assessing their own soils and tailoring their systems to increase soil health and fertility.
Becky brought us around the freshly dug soil pit to demonstrate the levels of compaction that occur at different depths. Highlighting the importance of less dense, yet stable soil in the top layer so that root growth of grasses and herbal leys are not hindered by increased soil density. It was pointed out that Billy Lewis’s mob grazing style was contributing to the meadow’s low soil density and therefore thriving grass system. As the stock is moved frequently, there is little time to compact the soil by trampling. Becky also highlighted the importance of earthworms for soil health. Earthworms are a key indicator of good soil health as they provide a multitude of benefits. Their burrowing increases spaces within the top layers of the soil which allow in water and air which promotes root growth for pastures through reduced compaction. Additionally, as Becky mentioned, their powers of nutrient cycling cannot be understated. Earthworms feed on organic matter which is excreted into plant available nutrients, speeding up pasture growth.
After Becky’s talk on soil qualities Niels took over to discuss a few practical methods (without the use of fancy gadgets) farmers can use to assess their soil health. With only the use of a spade and an inspection of what’s going on below the grass you can tell a lot about the soil. Niels encouraged the guests to go out into their fields and start to collect samples. He demonstrated the method of collecting a core sample by inserting a spade to a depth of around 30 cm on three sides and used the last side as a hinge to lever up a block of soil to inspect. Once the sample was out of the ground, he highlighted the relative ease of which the soil broke up as well as pointing out the abundance of earthworms, noting that this isn’t the case for a lot of agricultural soils.
Neils showing the group the simple ways in which soil samples can be taken
Livestock and mob grazing – chaired by Stefan Marks (FCT)
In this talk we heard from Tom Burge, an upland beef and sheep farmer, Billy Lewis, the host farmer, as well as Dan Smith, a farm manager running a commercial, net zero livestock farm alongside being a facilitator at the Herefordshire Rural Hub. They talked about their experiences with mob grazing, grass quality and the lessons they have learned experimenting with grazing systems.
Billy, Tom, and Dan discussing the benefits of mob grazing in front of one of his Hereford mob
In this session, Billy, Tom, and Dan discussed the benefits as well as the challenges involved with mob grazing while drawing on their shared experience of experimenting with this type of grazing system.
Tom Burge is a 4th generation farmer, owning an upland grazing farm in North Exmoor rearing over 1,000 Romney X ewes and 500 Scottish Blackface ewes. As well as 100 Angus suckler cows. After setting aside a 150 acre field trial with the aim of reducing fertiliser application, he began experimenting with mob grazing. He found that moving stock regularly (in his case every 2-3 days) and long resting periods resulted in improved grass quality and increased grass growth. All the panellists concurred that long resting periods for the grassland is crucial for increased grass quality and plant diversity which leads to more resilient grasslands.
In terms of economics, all the panellists agreed that the switch to mob grazing resulted in higher live weights and milk yields from their cattle and sheep. However, it was interesting to hear that these yield increases were marginal compared to the reduction in costs which resulted from the change of system. Dan found that within his new system, he could keep sheep outside all year round, including during lambing. He noticed that less bacterial infections and instances of pneumonia were occurring when he made these changes. Billy also noted the lack of fly related infections on his cattle on his mob grazing system which resulted in lower veterinary costs and better welfare. Although Billy still has periods through the winter where cattle are kept inside, these periods have reduced and therefore feed costs have decreased as a result. All the panellists concluded that optimising for a low input system was of great benefit to not only their pockets but the health of the stock as well.
An insightful question came from one of the listeners of the talk, who asked; how do you measure the changes in pasture performance? All three panellists admitted that they didn’t formally measure or record grass growth or quality of. Through anecdotal evidence and multiple decades of experience growing grass and farming on their respective farms they could see the difference in the quality of their grass which has translated into the quality of their stock and produce. Dan Smith added to this, highlighting that the preferred measure of performance is through financial gains, where all three of panellists have found a financial benefit.
A second question was fielded around the time consuming nature of mob grazing after Billy mentioned his rotations may only last 6-12 hours on some of his more intensely grazed meadows. He has found that frequent livestock movement isn’t as unmanageable as one might think. He proceeded to demonstrate the ease of which he can move electric fencing hexagonal fence posts (as seen in the picture below). These structures rotate along the ground as Billy moves the end of the fence, saving time by not having to take out every fence pole and place it in a different location in the field. Through experience, Billy often decides when to move his cattle by eye and knows that a system that incorporates flexibility works best for him. This certainly helps with the weather challenges that the three panellists agreed was a main limiting factor to their system. Droughts and periods of heavy rain (which were wonderfully demonstrated throughout the day) are challenges where flexibility is a crucial mitigator. Billy with his free moving electric fence pointed out that he can avoid waterlogged areas in order to protect the soil and grassland from trampling which is even more of a danger in wet conditions.
The easily movable electric fencing which saves Billy time when moving his stock
Arable/ Herbal Leys – chaired by Tilly Kimble-Wilde
We heard from Angus Gowthorpe (mixed farmer and Soil Farmer of the Year 2018 finalist), Edward Gent (Cambridge arable farmer who has been no-till for 16 years) and FCT’s Anthony Ellis (FCT farm carbon and soil advisor and mixed farmer). The talk focussed on their experiences with diversifying arable rotations, sometimes with herbal leys as well as their different approaches to grazing these areas.
Panellists in one of Billy’s arable fields – note the agroforestry alleys in the background
Angus Gowthorpe, who manages a mixed farm in North Yorkshire, spoke about his transition from conventional to regenerative farming and how herbal leys have played a crucial role in this shift. By integrating a mix of species into his rotation, including deep-rooting herbs such as chicory and plantain, he has seen significant improvements in soil structure and organic matter. Angus highlighted how the diversity of plant species in the herbal leys helps build resilience in the system, reducing reliance on chemical inputs. He highlighted how grazing these leys with his cattle further stimulates root growth, enhancing the biology of the soil, contributing to a more productive and resilient farm ecosystem. The sentiments of this approach were echoed by both Edward and Anthony who had implemented similar systems.
Afternoon Sessions: The economic and climate impact of ‘regen’
Following lunch, we moved into a panel discussion Chaired by James Daniel with presentations from Anthony Ellis (FCT), Angus Gowthorpe, Tom Burge & Nick Down (Velcourt Farming Ltd).
James Daniel – Founder of Precision Grazing, whose primary objective is to optimise performance from pasture, James works across the UK helping farmers to implement and manage their grazing systems alongside ensuring family quality of life for farmers.
Angus Gowthorpe – mixed farmer and Soil Farmer of the Year 2018 finalist. Angus has been at the forefront of the regenerative transition in the UK and continues to push the envelope on what defines a sustainable farming system.
Tom Burge – Upland beef and sheep farmer whose move to a regenerative, grazing-based system has helped to eliminate inputs and transform the finances on his challenging Exmoor farm
Nick Down – Nick is the Head of Sustainability for Velcourt Ltd. Velcourt directly manages 57,000 hectares and provides advice in both the arable and dairy sectors across the UK. Nick oversees the farming operation of the Yattendon Estate in West Berkshire. The estate is going through a transition to a more sustainable farming system, incorporating more space for nature and enhancing carbon sequestration under an ambitious environmental delivery program. The farm is also a LEAF demonstration farm.
First each of the panel members presented an overview of their farming system, the regenerative practices they’ve employed and the subsequent improvements this has made to their business carbon footprint, resilience and profitability.
Angus sharing with us the financial benefits of his regen system
Angus shared with us a side by side comparison of his arable operations between his previous conventional system and his current low-input regen system for winter wheat production. From this slide it is obvious to see what financial benefits arise from converting to a regen system. Firstly, his in-field operations have reduced from four operations to only using direct drilling on his fields. This saves him a total of £142 per hectare. Additionally, a reduction of his fertiliser inputs saved his business £189 per hectare. Through soil analysis he found that his past applications of P and K were superfluous to crop requirements. He has also reduced reliance on fungicides and plant growth regulators by £103/ha. The reduction in inputs has given Angus an ability to withstand a lower yield without reduction in enterprise margin. At current prices he calculated that this was equivalent to around 2.3 tonnes/ ha or around a 30% reduction in yield.
A perspective of the greenhouse gas emissions reductions and financial benefits of regenerative agriculture from livestock farming came from Tom Burge who kindly shared his numbers before and after adopting his new farming strategy.
Tom Burge’s projections on how his emissions will change while continuing on his regenerative farming journey.
From starting his journey in 2017, he has eliminated use of fertiliser on his pastures, significantly reduced reliance on external feed and fuel, as well as reduced the number of hours of manhours worked on his farm. This has all translated into a steady reduction of on-farm emissions (expressed as kgCO2e per kg live weight of his stock). Due to implementing mob grazing strategies, pasture growth has increased by 0.9 tonnes of dry matter per hectare, displacing 36 tonnes of fertiliser and 72 tonnes of feed between 2017 and 2022. On top of the 1.66kgCO2e per kg of live weight, this has saved Tom’s business financially, to a tune of £24,000 per year. By 2022, Tom realised that the increasing cost of inputs outweighed the potential added value of his outputs, making these inputs un-economical to use.
Breakout workshops on field trials, weatherproof farming and composting
Billy showing the guests the resulting compost after he uses his windrow compost turner
Composting: Billy Lewis
Billy Lewis showed us his farm-yard manure composting process. After buying a windrow compost turner second hand, Billy is able to easily turn the compost pile to aerate it. Ensuring good air flow is key to creating compost, as aerobic microorganisms feed on the organic components and convert them into a nutrient rich soil amendment. Composts are much more stable than farm yard manures, providing a more consistent and slow release of nutrients, therefore, benefitting soil health in the longer term. This slow release enhances soil health and pasture growth by reducing the amount of leaching and volatilisation that occurs. Billy explained how he adds different components to his compost depending on what is available, such as wood chips and apple peel from a nearby orchard.
Research Trials: Hannah Jones
Hannah Jones (Senior Soil and Carbon Advisor with FCT) led an insightful discussion on effectively planning and conducting field trials in a scientifically robust yet practical way. She began by explaining the essentials of multi-year farm trials, covering aspects like choosing crop options for trial strips, combining various tests within one field, and structuring controls to minimise the effects of natural variations on trial results.
A major focus was on understanding how different factors can influence outcomes and the importance of controls. For instance, in a trial introducing beans into crop rotation, it’s crucial to have both fertilised and unfertilised areas to determine if observed benefits are due to the nitrogen contribution from beans, the fertiliser itself, or just field characteristics. In livestock research, increasing population size reduces the impact of natural variation (e.g. individual susceptibility to disease), thereby making the data more statistically reliable. Randomly assigning animals to control and trial groups is also key, as it prevents biases that could affect outcomes; for example, having the first ewes going through the hurdle enter one field and the latter half go into another could unintentionally separate the flock by skittish and lazy animals, skewing results because they have different temperaments.
Hannah also shared ideas and trials setups which some of the attending farmers were considering. The conversation highlighted the value of data sharing—each farm is unique, but insights from one trial can benefit many. By participating in groups like the Innovate funded Nitrogen Climate Smart agriculture (NCS) project, farmers can connect, share findings, and collaborate on new practices. FCT advisors are available to help with planning and can connect participants with like-minded farmers to optimise trial efforts.
Weatherproof Farming: Niels Corfield
Niels delivered a presentation which demonstrated to us the importance of improving soil health for sustainable farming. Niels Corfield is a farm advisor interested in regenerative farms and landscapes.
He shared video examples of how compacted soils, often mistakenly thought to be saturated due to standing water, were actually preventing deeper water infiltration and leaving dry soil underneath. Healthy soil, with proper porosity, was shown to allow water to penetrate, “banking” moisture for dry periods, which is crucial for crop resilience in hot summers.
Niels made a case for weatherproofing farms to both rain and drought through a mixture of practices including soil management, mechanical interventions e.g sub soiling, mineral, and biological interventions. We looked at some of these in detail. A key takeaway was that root health is central to improving soil structure, and managing grazing or cropping practices to encourage root mass and density is a fundamental part of improving soil resilience and health.
The evidence presented showed that a move away from set stocking and changes in pasture management was able to extend grazing seasons, reduce the need for winter housing, and boost grass production. Data from various drought years showed how drought severely impacted grass growth across the UK. However, farms with better-managed soil saw increased productivity due to better water retention, emphasising the benefits of improving soil structure and retaining water during wet seasons for use during dry spells.
We were left with the idea that land provides honest feedback which can be seen and acted upon: It reveals the effectiveness of farming practices through direct observation and we were encouraged to inspect the land regularly ourselves in real-time with a range of tests, rather than solely relying on lab results.
Carbon Farmer of the Year 2024
This very interesting and insightful field day concluded with the presentation of carbon farmer of the year. It is the second year of the competition and is awarded to a farmer who is engaged with and passionate about reducing their business’s climate impact. The award focuses not only on changing management practices to reduce greenhouse gas emissions but also on understanding and enhancing carbon storage in farmland. We were delighted to be joined by the three finalists. Andrew Brewer was awarded the Carbon Farmer of the Year Award for 2024, presented by Steve Dunkley, our sponsor from HSBC Agriculture (seen in the picture below). Andrew is part of the Farm Net Zero project and low GHG farming has been a top priority for him and his farm for a number of years. He manages 500 Jersey X dairy cows across his 400 Ha farm in Fraddon, Cornwall. He stood out to the judges for his understanding and application of a range of practices to enable his pasture-based dairy farm to remove atmospheric carbon into soil, trees, and hedges, while simultaneously minimising farm GHG emissions by focusing on maximising forage intake for his dairy cows and minimising inclusion of supplementary concentrate feeds. Andrew also selectively breeds his cows to work well within his pasture-based system. There is an opportunity to tour his farm during a farm walk he is hosting on November 8th.
Carbon Farmer of the Year 2024 Winner Andrew Brewer, Ennis Barton (right) presented by Steve Dunkley, HSBC UK Agriculture (Left)
The other two finalists, Tom Burge and Jason Mitchell were praised for their continued efforts to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions in their businesses. The finalists awards were presented by David Cope, Head of sustainability at the Duchy of Cornwall who was also on the panel of judges (seen below). Tom Burge, who featured in the mob grazing workshop has done fantastic work cultivating a low input grazing system which has seen vast improvements in his grass quality and sequestration potential.
Similarly, Jason Mitchell is a Director of Greenville Dairies Ltd based in Newton Stewart, Northern Ireland. He has also been recognised for his continued effort to farm in a low carbon management system. At Greenville Dairies they have reduced emissions from their 850 strong dairy herd, largely through the application of genomics leading to greater feed efficiency alongside the development of a significant Anaerobic Digestion facility which sees them now taking in food waste alongside utilisation of cow manure to produce electricity, liquid natural gas (LNG) and digestate. Electricity and LNG are sold to the grid and to Companies such as Lakeland Dairies (their customer for their milk).
Carbon Farmer of the Year 2024 Finalists Tom Burge (middle), Adel Tajouri representing Greenville Dairies (right), presented by David Cope (left)
Watch a replay of this webinar held on the 11th September 2024 where representatives of the three major farm carbon calculators shared more details of the work they are doing together: Work to support UK agriculture to measure GHG emissions using the most up-to-date and accurate tools possible, harmonising the methodologies and outputs of their carbon calculation tools.
We received a great list of questions during the webinar event and teams from the various calculators will look to address those queries in due course.
The three major farm carbon calculators featured in the Defra Report Harmonisation of Carbon Accounting Tools for Agriculture – SCF0129 have announced a collaboration by signing a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), intended to harmonise the methodologies used in calculating the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from agriculture.
The three companies are looking forward to their joint work on this major challenge, to fulfil the requirements outlined in the comprehensive Report, compiled by ADAS throughout 2023. It is generally agreed that the overarching goal should be to reduce the overall greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture through resource efficiency improvements, optimising production practices and mitigating environmental impacts.
Liz Bowles, Farm Carbon Toolkit CEO, said:
We are not seeking to reach a point where all three calculators will produce the same answer for any given dataset. As the Defra report put it, “ there is no single ‘right’ answer”. Rather we are striving to make it possible for users to fully understand why different calculators produce different answers.
We plan to align with the Science-Based Targets initiative Forestry Land and Agriculture Guidance (SBTi FLAG) and draft Greenhouse Gas Protocol Land Sector Removals Guidance (GHGp LSRG) through our collaborative actions. This commitment underscores our dedication to maintaining high-quality standards and ensuring environmental sustainability in our operations, and in calculation outputs.
Scott Davies, Agrecalc CEO, said:
It is intended that we agree on a common set of data sources which all three calculators will use. All calculators can go beyond these baseline requirements, and all parties to this MOU will retain their commercial independence. We will also involve the relevant government and other organisations’ teams with our work plan as we develop it.
This collaborative approach supports a joint understanding of industry requirements and advancing consistency in our tools and methodologies. Our goal is collaboration with industry, trade bodies, and fellow calculator providers in the UK and internationally, so that we can actively contribute to the development of more consistent approaches to on-farm carbon calculation.
Richard Profit, Cool Farm Alliance CEO, said:
We are looking forward to this collaboration, as it will help align methodologies where that makes sense and that will especially allow us to look into new areas that require attention. How we then incorporate the new information in our calculators will vary from calculator to calculator as a result of our different base approaches.
We will also ensure that the tools include the latest and most robust scientific findings into their frameworks and roadmaps.
The calculators are seeking that this joint work become the “agreed way” and at some point, become a minimum required standard for all calculators to adopt. The companies will engage in consultations with Defra, Welsh Government, Scottish Government, and Northern Ireland Government to reach a practical and realistic form of ongoing validation of their harmonisation work.
Methodologies or other harmonisation solutions developed as a direct result of the MOU will be published transparently, or will otherwise be made available for others to use.
Although this MOU currently only involves the three major companies in this space, the group is open to other calculators joining the coalition so long as they publicly provide transparency in their Calculator methodologies.
We will be holding a joint webinar on the 11th September 2024 at 1pm – 2pm to share more details of the work we are doing together. Please register here if you would like to join us
Notes to Editors
Farm Carbon Toolkit is an independent, farmer-led Community Interest Company, supporting farmers to measure, understand and act on their greenhouse gas emissions, while improving their business resilience for the future.
The Farm Carbon Calculator uses the IPCC 2019 and UK GHG Inventory methodologies and is aligned with the GHG protocol agricultural guidance. Recent development has allowed us to provide greater interoperability with other data platforms through our Report Export API and Carbon Calculation Engine API. This represents a step-change in the industry’s ability to provide trustworthy carbon footprints with transparent methodologies on platforms where farmers already collect data, thus reducing the data inputting onus on farmers. This new functionality has been warmly welcomed by supply chain businesses who are now using our Calculation Engine to support their customers without need for further data entry.
The Farm Carbon Calculator is used across the UK and on four continents with global usage growing at around 20% per year.
For over a decade, Farm Carbon Toolkit has delivered a range of practical projects, tools and services that have inspired real action on the ground. Organisations they work with include the Duchy of Cornwall, First Milk, Tesco, Yeo Valley and WWF. The Farm Carbon Calculator is a leading on-farm carbon audit tool, used by over 8,000 farmers in the UK and beyond. To find out more visit www.farmcarbontoolkit.org.uk
Agrecalc, a carbon footprint tool developed by combining practical expertise with world-class agricultural science, is a precise instrument that offers both breadth and depth of on-farm and through-the-supply-chain calculations of GHG gas emissions.
Agrecalc is the largest source of collated farm benchmark data from thousands of farms, having been used as the designated tool to deliver carbon audits under various schemes since 2016. It is recognised as the preferred carbon calculator in many of the emerging government programmes.
With a mission to increase efficiency and business viability of food production, the scientists, consultants, and developers who work on Agrecalc, strive to constantly upgrade the calculator according to the most up-to-date available research results and recommendations.
Media contact: Aleksandra Stevanovic, Head of Marketing; ([email protected]; 07551 263 407)
Cool Farm Alliance Community Interest Companyis a science-led, not-for-profit membership organisation (community interest company) that owns, manages, and improves the Cool Farm Tool and cultivates the leadership network to advance regenerative agriculture at scale.
For over fifteen years, the Cool Farm Alliance has worked to put knowledge in the hands of farmers and empower the full supply chain to understand and support agro-ecological restoration by providing a respected, standardised calculation engine to measure and report on agriculture’s impact on the environment. The Cool Farm Tool has established widely endorsed, science-based metrics for water, climate, and biodiversity, supported in 17 languages and used in more than 150 countries around the world.
Cool Farm Alliance members share the need for a respected, consistent, standardised, independent calculation engine and have joined the Alliance to ensure the Cool Farm Tool meets this need, now and in the future. To find out more visit https://coolfarm.org/
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. This includes analytics cookies to understand website traffic and how users interact with our website. We do not use any advertising cookies.
You may accept or refuse our use of cookies, or learn more at the link provided.
Strictly Necessary Cookies
Strictly Necessary Cookie should be enabled at all times so that we can save your preferences for cookie settings.
If you disable this cookie, we will not be able to save your preferences. This means that every time you visit this website you will need to enable or disable cookies again.
Recent Comments