WESTERN PRODUCER — In late February, the European Union approved use of a feed additive that can reduce methane emissions from cattle by 30 to 40 percent or more.
In Canada, the product may not be on the market for years because Health Canada and the Canadian Food Inspection Agency have classified the additive as a veterinary drug.
As a result, Canadian dairy farmers and beef producers could fall behind farmers in other regions of the world when it comes to sustainability and cutting greenhouse gas emissions.
The decision to regulate it like a drug is “definitely a barrier to GHG mitigation in Canada,” said Karen Beauchemin, an Agriculture Canada scientist in Lethbridge, who specializes in ruminant nutrition and the environment.
The EU has authorized its use on dairy cows, but a registration for beef cattle may be in the works.
Brazil and Chile also approved the feed additive last fall, for use in beef cattle, dairy, sheep and goats. JBS, the Brazilian meat packer, has partnered with the maker to use the technology and cut methane emissions in its supply chain.
DSM, the Dutch company behind the feed additive, has spent about a decade developing the technology. Marketed as Bovaer, it supresses an enzyme in a cow’s gut that triggers the production of methane, a potent greenhouse gas.
In simple terms, cows given a quarter teaspoon of the feed additive powder, per day, will burp out less methane.
“Bovaer, across all the different studies, a conservative average would be about a 30 percent reduction in methane, in terms of grams per day of methane,” said Beauchemin, who conducted a two-year study of Bovaer, where she measured the methane emissions from about 15,000 head of cattle in Alberta.
Some cattle in that study, eating a grain-based diet of corn or barley and given a regular dose of Bovaer powder, achieved methane reductions of 70 percent. That would be at the high end of potential benefits. But reducing methane from cattle by 30 to 40 percent would be massive.
“Definitely, Bovaer is in a category of its own,” compared to other ways to cut emissions from cattle, Beauchemin said.
The Alberta study was just one of many trials that DSM has conducted in 13 different countries.
The CFIA said in an email that it has classified Bovaer as a drug because its “mode of action (is) considered to be in line with a veterinary drug.”
“Products such as additives to reduce methane production can be regulated as veterinary drugs, or as feeds in Canada, depending on the product itself,” the CFIA said. “Product classification for feed or drugs depends on many criteria.”
Any product that “changes the digestive process is treated as a drug in Canada, regardless of what it is,” Beauchemin explained.
Health Canada may believe that Bovaer is a drug, but Europe has taken a different approach.
Its regulatory system has a special category for feed additives that offer an environmental benefit. That provided DSM with a shorter path to commercialization.
In Canada, DSM must spend millions on extensive safety testing and livestock trials to commercialize Bovaer because it is being regulated as a drug.
DSM hasn’t yet started the approval process in Canada.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration, through its Centre for Veterinary Medicine, is also treating Bovaer as a drug. For the last five years, DSM has worked with American regulators on a new drug application for Bovaer, which is technically known as 3-nitrooxypropanol, or 3NOP.
The U.S. testing could take several more years.
Some U.S. scientists and environmental groups are questioning why it takes eight years to get such a product to market, given the potential benefits.
“The problem is, the FDA process is so slow, and the climate crisis is not waiting for anybody,” Ermias Kebreab, a sustainable animal agriculture professor at the University California, Davis, said to eenews.net.
Cattle feeders could be one of the first users of Bovaer in Canada, but if they don’t get to use it for four to five years, beef and dairy producers in other nations may get a competitive edge.
“In general, the Canadian industry is always concerned when producers in other jurisdictions have access to products that we don’t,” said Casey Vander Ploeg, vice-president of the National Cattle Feeders’ Association. “Whether this product is going to constitute a competitive advantage or not, is the big question.”
It is surprising that European farmers will be using Bovaer before Canadian producers, given the EU’s rejection of many ag technologies, such as gene-edited crops and growth hormones for beef cattle.
“We all know the EU is less inclined for these types of innovative things, and here we have them approving it (Bovaer),” Vander Ploeg said.
“Dairy Farmers of Canada is aware of the 3-NOP ingredient that is currently being used in several other countries. Building on the great progress we have made, we are always looking for innovative solutions to reduce our environmental footprint even further,” said Pierre Lamprom, Dairy Farmers of Canada president. “Thus far, 3-NOP appears to be a promising option for our sector, provided it is ultimately deemed safe for both humans and livestock by the federal government. We look forward to learning more.”
The Health Canada decision to regulate Bovaer as a veterinary drug comes at a time when the federal government is opening its wallet to programs designed to cut greenhouse gas emissions on Canadian farms.
“In the past year, the Government of Canada has announced $550 million over 10 years to help Canada’s agriculture and agri-food sector meet its emission targets,” says an Agriculture Canada news release from early March.
By 2030, Ottawa wants to reduce national GHG emissions by 40 to 45 percent, relative to 2005 levels. Achieving that goal will require cuts in agriculture, which represents about eight to 10 percent of national emissions.
Methane from cattle produces around 25 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalents in Canada, or 42 percent of all emissions from agriculture. If dairy farmers and cattle producers had access to Bovaer, emissions from cattle might drop by three or five million tonnes, depending on use. That decline is comparable to taking 900,000 to 1.2 million cars off the road annually.
