Om Helene Cheret

This author has not yet filled in any details.
So far Helene Chéret has created 116 blog entries.

Broad alliance warns: EU proposal risks weakening protection of Danish environment, drinking water and health

An upcoming suggestion from the European Commission on food and feed safety risks significantly weakening the EU's pesticide rules. This is warned by a wide range of Danish organisations in a new joint letter to the government.

The organizations assess that the proposal could have far-reaching consequences for public health, consumer safety, nature and the protection of Danish drinking water, which has been a central issue during the Danish election campaign.

“This proposal is not a simplification, but a weakening of the EU's pesticide legislation, and it limits Denmark's ability to respond to new knowledge. It is a step in the wrong direction, both for the environment, health and for our drinking water,” says Emilie Ellesøe, advisor, Green Transition Denmark.

Can keep dangerous pesticides on the market

The organizations warn that the proposal will weaken key elements of EU pesticide regulation by:

  • pesticides can in practice be approved without a time limit
  • remove the requirement for continuous reassessment of pesticide active ingredients
  • limit the ability of Member States to incorporate new knowledge
  • pesticides with proven risks may remain on the market for longer
  • use unclear definitions and expand exceptions

Consequences for the environment, drinking water and consumers

Overall, the proposal is assessed to weaken the precautionary principle and reduce the protection of the environment, groundwater and public health.

"We need to resort to a precautionary principle and prevent more pesticides, nitrates and other sources of pollution from finding their way into our drinking water," says Jesper Fisker, CEO of the Danish Cancer Society.

The lack of reassessment and limitation of new knowledge could mean that harmful substances remain in the environment longer and increase the risk of soil and groundwater contamination. The organizations warn that the proposal goes against the EU's own goals of reducing pesticide use and protecting the aquatic environment.

“It would be a disaster for the protection of the groundwater we extract for drinking if we were unable to ban pesticides and chemicals. The approval system is in no way a guarantee, because new knowledge and more sophisticated techniques are constantly changing the status of the substances used. Last year alone, the state banned 33 pesticides that were found to be leaching into the groundwater, but which otherwise had gone through the approval system,” says Carl-Emil Larsen, CEO of DANVA, the water companies' trade association.

At the same time, it is criticized that the proposal maintains a double standard, where pesticide residues that are not permitted in the EU can still occur in imported foods.

Calls on the government to resign

The organizations call on the government to clearly oppose the parts of the proposal that weaken pesticide legislation when it is considered in the EU, and instead to work for stronger legislation and sustainable alternatives such as organic and agroecology.

The organizations behind the letter are the Green Transition Denmark, Danish Waterworks, the Consumer Council Think, the Danish Cancer Society, the Association for Regenerative Agriculture, Free Farmers – Living Land, Greenpeace, the Danish Organic Association, DANVA, the Danish Ornithological Association and the WWF World Wildlife Fund.

The letter has been sent to the acting Minister of the Environment and Minister for Equality Magnus Heunicke (S), Minister for Food, Agriculture and Fisheries Jacob Jensen (V), Minister for the Green Tripartite Jeppe Bruus (S), Minister of the Interior and Health Sofie Løhde (V) and Minister for European Affairs Marie Bjerre (V).

The letter can be read here..

Contact 

Emilie Ellesoe Nielsen

Advisor, Food and bioresources

+45 41114142
emilie@rgo.dk

or

Christian Ege

Senior Consultant, Food and Bioresources

+45 2858 0698
christian@rgo.dk

By |2026-06-01T12:48:07+01:00June 1 2026|Press release|Comments closed to Broad alliance warns: EU proposal risks weakening protection of Danish environment, drinking water and health
READ MORE

21 green organizations demand nature and biodiversity law

We are in a global biodiversity crisis, where we are losing species at a rate never seen before in human history. Over 1.900 species are threatened and at risk of disappearing from Denmark, and despite decades of efforts, the trend has not yet been reversed.

The main reason for the poor state of nature on land is that nature lacks space, because we use too much of the land area for intensive agriculture, forestry and other human activities. In the sea, nature is threatened by, among other things, bottom-dragged fishing, nutrient discharge and many other activities that destroy marine ecosystems. There is a consensus among biodiversity researchers that the solution is to allocate space for nature, where it is effectively protected and managed.

The current government promised a nature and biodiversity law in its government charter. A law that, like the Climate Act, would set targets for how large a proportion of Denmark's land and sea area should be protected and strictly protected nature. But this law has unfortunately not been passed.

Therefore, 21 green organizations have now joined forces in a joint appeal to politicians that a biodiversity law remains a crucially important task for a future government:

Give Nature the Law – A Biodiversity Act. We want a biodiversity act that will stop the loss of species, ensure better protection of nature and give wild nature more space.

We therefore have three important demands for the Biodiversity Act: 

  1. The law must ensure 30% protected nature on land and at sea. Protected nature must be natural areas where nature is effectively protected from threats to biodiversity. In protected nature, for example, there cannot be intensive agriculture, forestry and fishing with bottom trawls.
  1. The law must ensure 10% strictly protected nature on land and at sea. This means that one third of the protected nature must be strictly protected. Strictly protected nature must be large, continuous natural areas where wild nature is restored. Here, nature has priority over other interests, but with new opportunities for fantastic nature experiences.
  2. The Biodiversity Council must be guaranteed by law. The Council's tasks must be to continuously assess the government's efforts and goal achievement.

Senders: 

  1. Danish Society for Nature Conservation
  1. WWF
  1. Danish Ornithological Society/BirdLife Denmark
  1. Forests of the World
  1. Green Transition Denmark
  1. Greenpeace
  1. Crazy with Will
  1. The Species Association
  1. Denmark's Wild Nature
  1. The young biodiversity ambassadors
  1. FLOWER
  1. Plan B
  1. Nature & Youth
  1. The climate movement
  1. Lepidopterological Society
  1. Danish Mammal Society
  1. Danish Natural Grazing
  1. Danish Botanical Association
  1. Biology Association
  1. The Green Youth Movement
  1. Entomological Society
By |2026-03-11T12:37:13+01:0011. March 2026|Press release|Comments closed to 21 green organizations demand nature and biodiversity law
READ MORE

Solution in sight for polluted port cities: Power the ferries

Aarhus–Sjællands Odde, Hirtshals–Larvik and Hirtshals–Kristiansand. These three routes are on the list of the 50 most climate-intensive ferry routes in Europe. At the same time, Danish ferries overall rank tenth among Europe's largest CO₂-emitting ferries. And as a result, pollution with harmful sulfur oxides (SOx) is high in several Danish coastal cities.

Now showing a new analysis from Transport & Environment that the solution is right in front of us: a switch from diesel to electricity.

“Electrification of ferry routes is one of the fastest ways to reduce CO₂ emissions from maritime transport, while improving air quality for local citizens. The battery technology is ready. With the right policy measures and investments in charging infrastructure in ports, Denmark can accelerate the transition and make many ferry routes emission-free within the next decade,” says Katerina Davidova, advisor to the Green Transition Denmark.

Electrification is particularly promising on short ferry routes of less than 100 km, which make up a large part of European ferry traffic. Ferries are a central part of Europe’s transport network, carrying around 400 million passengers each year and connecting islands and coastal areas with the mainland. But most ferries still run on diesel engines, contributing to both climate change and air pollution. In ports such as Barcelona, ​​Dublin and Naples, ferries are responsible for more toxic air pollution than all the cars in the cities combined.

For Denmark, which has more than 60 ferry routes connecting the country's islands and creating connections to neighboring countries, electrification of ferries represents a great opportunity to reduce both air pollution and climate footprint. And it makes sense to consider it from the start. A Danish ferry lasts an average of 27 years. Several are already underway. In addition to a number of smaller ferries, Molslinjen is having three electric ferries built for routes on the Kattegat. Scandlines has an electric ferry sailing between Rødbyhavn from Lolland to Puttgarden. And the Øresundslinjen's ferries between Helsingør and Helsingborg are also powered by electricity.

High levels of sulfur oxides in Aarhus, Frederikshavn and Rønne

Diesel ferries emit pollutants such as nitrogen oxides (NOx), sulfur oxides (SOx) and particulate matter. Electrification of ferries could significantly reduce air pollution in Danish port cities such as Rønne, Aarhus, Frederikshavn, Sjællands Odde and Spodsbjerg on Langeland, where ferries sail frequently and often close to residential areas. These five Danish ports with intensive ferry traffic have the highest concentrations of SOx emissions, often higher than emissions from road traffic in the cities in question.

Short and frequent ferry routes, common in the Baltic and North Seas, are particularly well suited to electrification because the ferries can charge quickly while passengers and vehicles are boarding. Denmark is also well-positioned thanks to strong renewable energy production, existing experience with electric ferries and a dense network of short ferry routes connecting islands such as Bornholm, Samsø and Ærø.

Political action is crucial to the pace of the transition. At the moment, the biggest obstacle to electrification is not batteries – it is the charging infrastructure in ports. However, the challenge is far from insurmountable. Most ports will only need relatively small chargers of less than 5 MW to support the operation of electric ferries.

In addition to investments in high-capacity charging infrastructure in Danish ports, a review of electricity tariffs and grid connection costs for ferry operators could create further incentives for electrification. Finally, using public procurement rules to prioritize zero-emission vessels when renewing the aging ferry fleet could accelerate the entire development.

By |2026-03-10T09:25:31+01:0010. March 2026|Press release|Comments closed Solution in sight for polluted port cities: Power the ferries
READ MORE

To the new government: Our common future is green, electric and balanced

To create change, you have to be able to imagine the future. For us at the Green Transition Council, our shared future is green, electric, and where there is a balance between people, nature, and the environment. Below you can see how we get there by focusing on four crucial areas.

In recent years, we in Denmark have been through a roller coaster ride in the climate and environmental field. We have seen progress, decline and stagnation. In some cases, politicians have taken active action and got things done, while other cases and decisions have pulled us far back. Therefore, the three words climate, environment and biodiversity must be lifted right into the middle of politicians' field of vision again. We must act now - together - and we must do so for several reasons: for the climate, the environment, nature and biodiversity and thus also our health, economy, cohesion and security. It can also be said more briefly: for our own sake, our children and grandchildren.

Most of what we are pointing to has already been proven to have a big impact on our society. Now we need the right politicians and cooperation to make it happen. The next four years will make a big difference.

The greenest greetings

Green Transition Denmark

Four focus areas on the path towards a shared green future

Clean drinking water and a healthy ocean

If we want to be able to tap clean drinking water and bring life back to our oceans, we must address a particularly sore spot for our society: our consumption of chemicals. Substances like PFAS have been a kind of wonder chemical, making our kitchenware easier to wash, our clothes drier and industrial processes easier to run. But unfortunately, the chemicals have a serious downside. Study after study shows that they harm our health and environment, and they find their way into every corner of our society: drinking water, the marine environment, crops, livestock and our blood. Now, joint efforts must be made to turn off the tap, ban the harmful chemicals, develop alternatives, and clean up and tidy up.

Food for people with respect for nature

Agriculture must find the balance again, so that good quality food is produced for people and with respect for nature, climate and the environment. We must gain experience from those who are already taking action. The farmers who are converting to organic farming and working to reduce their climate footprint. The young people who are joining forces to produce food in a way that takes into account the aquatic environment, biodiversity, the soil and the well-being of animals. The Green Tripartite Agreement must reduce some of the nitrogen emissions to the aquatic environment and reduce agriculture's CO2 footprint further. But we must also have agriculture free of harmful pesticides, and that produces more plant-based food and has fewer cows, pigs and poultry. This benefits our environment, climate and health.

Green transport on the roads

Can you imagine walking through a city without the noise of car engines and smoke and smells from exhaust pipes? The way to get there depends on us getting more electric cars and buses on the roads, while fossil fuels have to put down their clogs. Unfortunately, many forces in the automotive industry are pulling the opposite way in the EU. At the same time, efforts are needed to get trucks and ferries to run on electricity, and to develop more green fuel for large ships and aircraft. Self-driving technology has great potential and can reduce the number of cars on the roads. A transformation of the transport sector will make a big difference to health, the environment and the climate, because today the sector is responsible for more than a quarter of the climate impact in Denmark and the EU.

Clean energy – a joint project

To slow down climate change, protect our environment, increase biodiversity and ensure cleaner air, we must completely end fossil fuels. We must stop extracting coal, oil and gas from the ground and burning biomass in heating plants. Instead, we must get all our energy from the sun, wind, water and geothermal energy. And we must save energy and use it more efficiently. The good news is that we have the technologies to base our society on renewable energy, but it must be rolled out, and it must be done in a way that makes sense − also for local communities. The green transition will only be fully successful when it is anchored and becomes a joint project.

By |2026-06-11T09:02:00+01:004. March 2026|Comment|Comments closed To the new government: Our common future is green, electric and balanced
READ MORE

Christmas greetings from the Green Transition Denmark

The Christmas holidays are approaching, and a year with many events, progress and obstacles on the road to a greener society is coming to an end. We would like to say a thousand thanks to all of you who support us, our partners and to the many people who have participated and contributed to our events. Your involvement and green spirit make a big difference to our work for climate and environment in Denmark and internationally.

The secretariat is closed between Christmas and New Year.

See you in the new year.

Many greetings

Green Transition Denmark

Ps: If you missed a conference or webinar, we have collected key points and video recordings from a selection of the events here:

Collections from events in 2025

The EU's plans for PFAS and Denmark's role

Webinar focusing on the EU's upcoming PFAS restriction proposal – one of the most comprehensive chemical interventions in history. The question is whether the EU's pace and transition periods are sufficient, and whether Denmark should take the lead with national regulation in specific product areas. READ MORE.

Methane reductions: Our lifeline to limit global temperature increases?

Despite global promises to reduce emissions of the greenhouse gas methane, concentrations are still rising. Fortunately, we have many buttons to turn – both in agriculture and in the energy sector, and Denmark should show the way forward. Summary from conference at Christiansborg. Read more.

Solar farms, local concerns and citizen engagement – a webinar focusing on causes and solutions

Frustrations over energy parks and other climate initiatives seem to be growing in Europe. In this webinar, we looked at resistance in the EU, but also at solutions. For how can we shape the transition so that it makes sense for local communities around the countries? Read more. Click

Reducing Pesticides, Eliminating PFAS Pesticides, Protecting Water: Denmark Leads the EU Presidency

Pesticides affect human health, ecosystems and biodiversity. Yet half of our land is sprayed every year. There is a need for recognition of the seriousness of the problem, more regulation and more knowledge sharing – also across the EU. Conference at Christiansborg. Read more.

By |2026-01-14T13:22:51+01:0010. December 2025|Article|Comments closed to Christmas greetings from the Green Transition Denmark
READ MORE

Our consumption is the blind spot in climate policy

Political negotiations have been called for a revision of the Climate Act, and a 2035 target is to be set for Denmark's territorial CO2 emissions. Unfortunately, however, territorial emissions only cover emissions that occur within Denmark's borders. It is therefore crucial that we also begin to address consumption emissions, which have so far been a blind spot in Danish climate policy. If we measure consumption-based CO2 emissions, which include all emissions associated with Danes' consumption patterns, regardless of where in the world the emissions occur, it is difficult to see the green pioneer that the Climate Act otherwise stipulates that Denmark should be.

The argument against a consumption-based climate target is often that we have difficulty influencing emissions outside Denmark, and that there are no political tools to address them. But circular economy is one tool that can both help reduce consumption-based CO2 emissions and at the same time contribute to strengthened competitiveness and resilience in a geopolitically uncertain world.

Together, we have therefore prepared a catalogue for waste prevention and circularity with a wide range of concrete initiatives that can also contribute to reducing consumption-based CO2 emissions. The catalogue is based on a strong understanding of circularity, where the first and most important principle is to prevent waste and pollution. Here, we will highlight a few initiatives that are an obvious place to start in terms of reducing consumption-based CO2 emissions, and present a number of conservative estimates of the effects.

Durability and recycling
According to CONCITO, 18 percent of Denmark's consumption-based emissions come from the public sector. Therefore, there is a lot to catch up on if you look at public procurement of over 400 billion kroner annually.

The Climate Council also points to public procurement as an obvious tool for reducing consumption-based climate emissions and notes that the government's lack of focus on the area contrasts with the government's basic promise to reduce the climate footprint from public procurement.
Therefore, we propose that public procurement should, as a standard, demand quality products with long lifespans and warranty periods, take-back schemes, repair services, and guarantees for the availability of spare parts and upgrades, where relevant.

Recycling should also be included in all tenders for contracts where recycling solutions are available, and the state, municipalities and regions should establish material banks so that used furniture and other equipment can circulate and get a new life. If we switch to quality goods with a 30 percent longer lifespan in the state's purchases of, for example, furniture and IT equipment, there will be fewer new purchases. This alone will save around 90.000 tonnes of CO2 equivalents (CO2e) annually compared to the amount purchased in 2023. This corresponds to approximately three percent of the climate footprint from state purchases, and the proportion will increase if we also require recycling and repair. If we include municipalities and regions, the potential will be much greater.

In addition, public kitchens, with over a million meals a day, can play a key role in the green transition of Danes' eating habits if clear political goals for climate and sustainability are set. CONCITO proposes, among other things, a new climate goal of a maximum of one kilo CO2e per kilo of purchased raw material in 2050, with a benchmark of reaching below 1,5 kilo CO2e per kilo already in 2030. Reaching below one kilo CO2e per kilo of purchased raw material will in some cases mean reductions of 40-70 percent of the current climate footprint.

If we follow the proposal, public kitchens alone could reduce emissions by around 83.000 tonnes of CO2e per year by 2030 and around 142.000 tonnes of CO2e annually thereafter. This is a conservative estimate, and the real gains could be considerably greater.

Achieving the climate goals requires significant efforts with more plant-based food, less food waste, local seasonal ingredients, and better data and tools to measure climate footprint. A proposal prepared by the Danish Food and Nutrition Association, the Frej think tank, and CONCITO highlights a number of levers such as updated and transparent procurement agreements, reduction targets for food waste and climate impact, further training for nutrition professionals, and a stronger involvement of kitchen expertise in decisions about the content and quality of food.

We must preserve and renovate
According to CONCITO, construction and maintenance of private homes accounts for nine percent of consumption-based emissions. This does not include public construction and construction projects, which are included in the public sector category.

New construction and renovation of buildings in Denmark is largely carried out with materials produced abroad, which are therefore not included in the territorial calculations. However, we have good opportunities in Denmark to regulate the climate emissions associated with our construction. Here, we propose, among other things, that a 'preserve or explain' requirement be introduced in the building regulations, so that demolition of our existing building stock only takes place in cases where it can be justified on health or safety grounds. If we introduce a 'preserve or explain' requirement and can thus avoid demolition of 50 percent of the buildings that are demolished simply to build new ones for the same purpose, we will save at least 44.000 tons of CO2e per year. In practice, the gain will be significantly greater, because the requirement not only extends the lifespan of existing buildings, but can also reduce the need for new construction: More square meters will be renovated and transformed instead of being demolished and rebuilt.

'Use and throw away''culture
Things like clothes, shoes and electronics account for about ten percent of Danes' consumption-based CO2 emissions. We must therefore move away from the 'use and throw away' culture, where we constantly buy new, and instead become better at buying good quality products with a long lifespan, buying used and having them repaired if they break. For example, if we halve our consumption of textiles, we can save about 1.000.000 tons of CO2e per year and at the same time cut the enormous amounts of textile waste that follow our consumption. But this requires political regulation that makes the greener choice the easy choice and, among other things, makes it easier and cheaper to have our products repaired.

This means, among other things, that we should not be constantly bombarded with advertisements on social media that encourage us to buy new things. A British study has shown that 32 percent of the British people's consumption-based CO2 emissions can be attributed to advertisements that make us buy things that we would not otherwise have bought. A possible measure could include a ban on advertising for fast fashion, as is underway in France, and limiting influencer-based marketing. A benchmark for consumption-based CO2 emissions should also be followed up with a national strategy and action plan that, among other things, focuses on circularity.

In connection with the government's climate program, the Climate Council has criticized the government for not presenting measures "that explicitly intend to reduce consumption-based emissions."
We are therefore happy to enter into dialogue about the means to reduce these emissions.

This debate post was published in Information on 3/12 2025.

Senders: Mette Hoffgaard Ranfelt, Sebastian Jung-Wederking, Lone Mikkelsen, Malene Høj Mortensen and Michael Søgaard Jørgensen – Representatives of the Danish Nature Conservation Association, the Circular Industry Association, the Green Transition Denmark, Plastic Change and IDA's Society for Technology Assessment, respectively.

By |2025-12-03T10:08:35+01:003. December 2025|OP-ED|Comments closed to Our consumption is the blind spot in climate policy
READ MORE

Support is failing us both in agriculture and nature

Every month, more than one billion is given in support to Danish agriculture, and the majority of that money comes from the EU's agricultural support. Two-thirds of the money is paid out according to how many hectares a landowner has. This means that large farms get the biggest gain, which is getting bigger and bigger. At the same time, 1,3 full-time farms closed every day in 2024, and there are currently fewer than 5.800 full-time farms left. The hectare support, as it is now, is therefore helping to drive the negative structural development we see in agriculture today, and is one of the main reasons for the challenge of generational change in agriculture. On top of that, Denmark is the country in the EU that spends by far the least money on supporting rural areas, nature and small-scale agriculture. Let's take some examples.

A new scheme in agricultural support is the so-called organic schemes, where farmers can receive extra support to do something good for the environment, climate or nature. The organic schemes are intended as the carrot that will get agriculture to take green initiatives. But Denmark's implementation of these organic schemes has been a resounding failure. We are the country in the EU that spends the second least money on these schemes, and the money we spend has almost no effect. Why? Because we have designed the schemes inappropriately. Danish farmers can only choose between four organic schemes – the lowest number in the entire EU. In comparison, Lithuania offers 16 different schemes that have a much broader scope.

At the same time, the four Danish organic schemes rarely benefit small and medium-sized farms. The organic schemes are therefore designed more for large farms. Our few schemes are so unattractive that only 60 percent of the allocated budget was used in 2023. Instead, one could imagine an organic scheme that supported organic fruit and vegetable production in Denmark. Only 0,6 percent of Denmark's cultivated area is currently used to grow fruit and vegetables for human consumption. In a time of talk about the importance of self-sufficiency, it is strange that our own food supply is not prioritized.

Denmark is a bottom-scraper when it comes to redistributing support from large to small farms. To support small and medium-sized farms, the EU has just created a tool for member states, where they must use at least 10 percent of the hectare support for redistribution, but the Danish government, together with only one other EU country, has chosen to ignore this mandatory tool completely. The result? The largest farms swallow by far the majority of the billions in support, while small and medium-sized farms – the backbone of many local communities – struggle to survive. This promotes land concentration, so that Danish soil is distributed in fewer and fewer hands.

This increases indebtedness, as the individual farmer needs more and more capital to buy a farm. And it makes it more difficult for young farmers to start their own farm, as the per hectare subsidy encourages speculation in land and continues to push up prices. In short, all other EU countries are doing better than Denmark.

We can start by creating more and better organic schemes that actually reward close-to-nature and agro-ecological farming that takes care of our drinking water and the micro-life in the soil. And then we can activate redistributive support so that small and medium-sized farms get a fair chance, while ensuring that the new generation has access to land by ending the per-hectare support. We don't need to reinvent the wheel. We just need to use agricultural support as it was intended: to create common goods for common money.

This opinion piece was published in Jyllands-Posten on 27/11/2025. 

The senders are: 

ANDERS LED BEHREND Deputy Chairman, Free Farmers – Living Land, JACOB WESTERGAARD ​​MADSEN Association Director, Andelsgaarde, MICHELLE SKELSGAARD ​​SØRENSEN Food Policy Advisor, Green Transition Denmark, TOBIAS UNGER COFF Board Member, Copenhagen Food Community, EMMA LETH Secretary, Association for Regenerative Agriculture, LOTTE NYSTRUP LUND Co-founder of the Biomagine community, HARALD KRABBE Farmer and co-founder of the Biomagine community.

By |2025-12-01T13:58:39+01:0027 November 2025|OP-ED|Comments closed to Support fails us both in agriculture and nature
READ MORE

Turn off the tap in time: Municipalities must take responsibility for chemical pollution of drinking water

PFAS and pesticide residues threaten our drinking water. However, the pollution does not start in the waterworks, but when chemicals are discharged into the environment. Therefore, municipal decisions are needed on permits, control and land use. Only in this way can we ensure clean drinking water in the future. For the benefit of citizens' health, the environment and the economy.

In Denmark, we have long taken clean drinking water for granted. We can no longer do that. Findings of PFAS, pesticide residues and other harmful chemicals in groundwater wells across the country have shown us that we face a challenge that is not only about technical handling and legislation – but also about will and prioritization, especially in municipalities.

When Ingeniøren now focuses on water in connection with the upcoming municipal elections, it is an obvious reason to ask: Who actually takes responsibility before the pollution hits our tap? All too often, chemical pollution has been something that people react to after the damage has occurred. A discovery in a borehole, a shutdown of a supply, a cleanup paid for by the citizens. But the pollution does not start in the waterworks – it starts on the ground surface, in old industrial areas, at fire drill sites, in fields, and in treatment plants, where municipalities have both regulatory responsibility, planning tools, and political influence. This is where the effort must be made if we want to secure our drinking water for future generations.

Municipalities must take stronger, proactive responsibility

The eternal chemicals – PFAS – have received well-deserved attention, and several municipalities have already acted quickly when detected. But that does not change the fact that large parts of the chemical effort are still characterized by firefighting and ad hoc solutions. What we lack is systematic prevention, and here it is crucial that the municipalities take on stronger responsibility.

This requires that the chemical threat be considered in both physical planning, environmental approvals and efforts around vulnerable groundwater areas. When permits are granted for facilities and activities close to extraction areas, much stricter requirements should be set for which substances may be used and how risks are assessed. It also requires that old maps of landfills, industrial sites and fire stations not just gather dust, but are actively used to map and monitor potential risk zones.

Municipalities today have both the knowledge and the data needed to prevent new pollution – but this requires proactive, not reactive action. Targeted monitoring and ongoing assessment of whether current uses and discharges pose a risk must be carried out. Municipalities should require extended analyses from waterworks and ensure that the relevant chemicals are tested – including those not yet covered by national limit values. And most importantly: there must be transparency about findings and risks, so that both citizens and professionals can act in a timely manner.

Clean water now or a sky-high bill later?

It is also crucial that municipalities start thinking long-term and financially responsible. Cleanup and remediation measures are expensive – and the longer we wait, the more expensive it will be. If municipalities do not invest in prevention now, the bill will hit. And it should not hit utilities and consumers as it does today. It should hit the polluter, so that it becomes what the law dictates; that the polluter pays.

In the Green Transition Denmark, we therefore call on municipalities to make chemical pollution a central theme in the election campaign. Politicians must take responsibility and set clear demands for their administrations and supplies. They must ensure that citizens' health comes before short-term economics or administrative convenience. Drinking water is not just a technical resource - it is a societal task. And if we want to avoid clean water becoming a luxury in the future, we must act now. Not the next time PFAS is found in a well - but today, in the municipal council, in the local plan, in the permit, in the election promise.

We know what is needed. And we know where the problems lie. So the question is no longer whether we can secure our drinking water. The question is whether we will. Whether the municipalities will.

This debate post was published in Ingeniørens WasteTech on November 11th. 

By |2025-11-13T10:04:02+01:0013 November 2025|OP-ED|Comments closed to Turn off the tap in time: Municipalities must take responsibility for chemical pollution of drinking water
READ MORE

The construction industry needs a clear national strategy against PFAS – we can't wait for the EU

It recently emerged that building products such as rubber tape, surface-treated wooden floors, and glass and rock wool may contain PFAS – building products that can be purchased in regular hardware stores, for example when renovating and building new. PFAS is extremely difficult to break down. When it is included in building products, we risk spreading pollution to soil and groundwater for decades after the building has been built. It is an invisible pollution that we pass directly on to future generations.

In connection with the report 'PFAS in building materials – challenges and solutions on the path towards circular construction' PFAS was found in 25 percent of the tested building products. The level of PFAS in some samples is so high that it exceeds the limit value proposed in the PFAS restriction proposal. A proposal that is under negotiation in the EU system. However, a strong lobbying effort from the chemical industry is watering down the bill as revealed by 'The Forever Lobbying Project'.

This is despite the fact that PFAS increases the risk of kidney cancer and high cholesterol, among other things, and can reduce the effectiveness of vaccines in children. PFAS are also suspected of being endocrine disruptors. In addition to the problematic health effects of PFAS, another big question is pressing: What do we do with the requirements for more reuse and recycling of materials and the large amounts of construction waste when these contain PFAS? According to a report from the Nordic Council of Ministers, PFAS-related health and environmental impacts cost European society between 52 and 84 billion euros annually.

There is new legislation on the way that deals with chemicals more broadly. This includes the Waste Regulation and the Construction Products Regulation, but only harmful chemicals are mentioned here and not PFAS separately. We need innovative developers. But in order for them to act, clarification is needed in the PFAS area. We must therefore take other paths while we wait for the EU's decision on the PFAS ban. Denmark should create a national strategy for phasing out PFAS in construction.

Requirements for the content of harmful chemicals should be tightened so that information about ingredients, including PFAS, becomes available to everyone. This would be an important step towards circular construction.

Photo: Henning Larsen / Ramboll Adobe stock license for #78118528

This debate post was published in Information on 13/11/2025. It was written by: 

  • The senders are: Anna-Mette Monnelly, specialist, Søren Jensen,
  • Martha Lewis, Head of materials, Henning Larsen
  • Lone Mikkelsen, senior advisor at the Green Transition Denmark
By |2025-11-13T09:49:40+01:0013 November 2025|OP-ED|Comments closed The construction industry needs a clear national strategy against PFAS – we can't wait for the EU
READ MORE

Politicians should stop burning wood in the municipality's supply

You need a strong cause that will generate support among the population, strengthen your municipality's green profile and make a difference to society. So while you're busy making election posters, Facebook videos and participating in various debates, we'd like to help you with a strong cause: Stop burning wood in the municipality's supply. Why, you might ask?

1) Citizens' wallets: Imports of wood pellets and wood chips have increased dramatically – more than 95 percent of wood pellets and 50 percent of wood chips come from abroad. Danish overconsumption makes us dependent on the global raw materials market, where prices fluctuate and are expected to increase, because wood biomass is a limited resource that must be used in many places in the transition. Electrification of heat production helps make heat cheaper for citizens in your municipality than when it is based on wood burning.

2) Climate: Although it looks green on paper, the burning of wood in Denmark has added over 120 million tons of CO2 to the atmosphere. Wood actually emits more than coal, even when it is burned. The damage (increased drought, floods, forest fires) caused by increased warming will not be removed, even if a new tree absorbs the same amount of CO2 after a few decades.

3) Nature: At the same time, we are putting massive pressure on foreign forests – often far beyond our control. Countless bad examples show that certification is no guarantee of nature conservation, and a large part of the biomass is also undocumented today. This speaks against the fact that promises to use “sustainable biomass” ensure nature and climate conservation. In Denmark, the high demand for wood has led to a large removal of branches, tops, roots and dead wood. Danish forests have an average of 6,3 m³/ha of dead wood, and approximately 2/3 of the area has none at all. This is far below the levels necessary if the forests are to have any biodiversity value, where far more than 50 m³/ha is needed.

So you are helping both the climate and biodiversity by stopping the burning party.

4) Self-sufficiency: In these times, it is important to make oneself independent from geopolitical power struggles. Electrification with local self-sufficiency of renewable energy not only provides more security, but also allows the city's energy generation to benefit the local community and can contribute to the financing of local needs, such as the renovation of the village school, a cycle path or recreational areas. There are already many examples of this - including at Vejle, where a large solar park also benefits citizens with new paths, the clearing of watercourses and increased biodiversity.

Why now, you think? A lot has happened since biomass was introduced as a transitional solution to get rid of coal. In the meantime, we have increased the consumption of biomass to three times the globally sustainable level and burn around 90pct. of all the wood we consume in Denmark directly. Last year, the world passed 1,5 degrees of warming for the first time. When we burn wood, it immediately releases more CO2 into the atmosphere, which causes damage and increases the risk of serious, irreversible changes in the climate system. The time it takes for a newly planted tree to absorb the amount again is a growing problem in an already overheated world. Therefore, we should prioritize solutions that reduce emissions now – rather than those that will only work in decades.

At the same time, technological developments in heat pumps and renewable energy have boomed. That's the good news. Because there's no longer any need to burn wood for lukewarm water and electricity.

Therefore, it makes political and economic sense to set a clear course away from burning and towards electrification. But is it possible to avoid burning wood when we currently produce heat and electricity from wood? The answer is yes. It is possible to produce energy without burning trees and fossil sources.

There are now many good alternatives to wood. In Svendborg, wood burning has been replaced with heat pumps. Skærbækværket and Studstrupværket, two of the country's largest combined heat and power plants, will also abandon wood burning after Kredsløb, TVIS and EWII have decided that the heat they receive in the future should not come from wood, but from electricity-based solutions such as heat pumps that use local energy sources such as air, seawater, wastewater and geothermal energy.

Things are not going so well in Copenhagen, where there is talk of building a CCS plant at the Amagerværket. That is, the biomass plant, which is Denmark's largest consumer of wood. Over one million tons of wood, primarily from abroad. The large investment will be a big mistake that will lock the city into excessive wood consumption far into the future.

Now that we can electrify, it's crazy to ship millions of tons of wood in from forests around the world, just to burn it, spend billions on capturing and possibly storing the emissions, and thus delay the implementation of future truly renewable energy sources in your municipality's supply.

Your role as a politician

So what is your role as a local politician? As a local politician, you have a unique chance to secure the green supply of the future, protect citizens from price shocks and at the same time help our nature and climate. As you know, transforming the energy supply takes time. That's why it's important that you help make the decisions that put your local community on the right track, now.

Therefore, you must work to: 1) Adopt a municipal phase-out date for wood biomass in district heating – with a realistic milestone plan. 2) Prioritize investments in electrification with large electrically powered heat pumps, surplus heat and storage. 3) Stop investments in combined heat and power based on biomass combustion. 4) Drop plans for CCS at biomass plants.

We have the technology and the economics in place – now it’s about direction. With a clear plan for phasing out wood biomass, you can strengthen the municipality’s green credibility, ensure stable and competitive heating prices and create local value. It’s a hot topic that can win votes – and that makes a difference. If you need more knowledge, we’re happy to help you get through the topic.

The article was published in Avisen Danmark 1/11 2025. The senders are: Lars Bonderup Bjørn, CEO, EWII. Christina Ihler Madsen, Climate Movement in Denmark. Erik Tang, Green Transition Denmark. Jakob Kronik, Secretary General, Verdens Skove. Asbjørn Haugstrup, Chief External Relations Officer, Innargi. Helene Hagel, Climate and Environmental Policy Manager at Greenpeace.

By |2025-11-03T09:32:04+01:003 November 2025|OP-ED|Comments closed to Politicians should stop burning wood in the municipality's supply
READ MORE

Contact

Green Transition Denmark
Kompagnistræde 22, 3
1208 Copenhagen K
Denmark

CVR: 15428376

Find staff

Privacy Policy

info@rgo.dk

Support the green and sustainable transition

Disclaimer: This website has been translated using automated translation software powered by third-party services. We will continuously make efforts to improve the translations from Danish.

Do you want to follow our work?

A fast path to green knowledge!

Go to Top