"The Climate Council's report is a very significant and courageous innovation that deserves great praise. It is a head-on showdown with silo thinking, where in Denmark in recent years we have focused rather one-sidedly on the climate and greenhouse gases, while the other environmental and natural crises have been pushed into the background. A pure climate focus will not save our water environment or biodiversity. It is high time that we find joint and coherent solutions to these challenges,” says Bjarke Møller, director of the Green Transition Denmark.

Need for new holistic thinking
"The report shows that you can reduce society's costs by 8-20 per cent if you coordinate efforts instead of splitting efforts into three separate tracks. A policy with a focus on biodiversity and the aquatic environment, where one third of the agricultural land is removed, much more forest is planted and the aquatic environment is protected, will provide a major climate gain of 6,8 million. tons of CO2e. These good proposals for a new holistic approach should be included in the ongoing tripartite negotiations for agriculture, so that you do not just create a greenhouse tax,” recommends Bjarke Møller.

RGO has long called for a structural restructuring of agriculture, where animal production is reduced and more emphasis is placed on plant-based foods. RGO has also recommended wetting the carbon-rich low-lying soils, more and faster afforestation, less fertilization of the soils and protecting the drinking water from pesticides.

"The industrialized and intensive agriculture in Denmark has for many years caused great damage to the climate, the water environment and the biodiversity, and it is high time to make binding legal requirements for agriculture, so that in the future it does not damage nature in Denmark, but operates safely within the planetary borders,” says Bjarke Møller.

It is urgent to strengthen biodiversity
Denmark is the country in Europe where nature and biodiversity are most exposed. Only 1,6 per cent of Denmark's area is strictly protected nature, and in the EU Denmark is the worst in terms of the protection of our nature. Only approximately 5 per cent. of nature on land is in good ecological condition, the marine environment suffers from historically high levels of oxygen loss, and only 1 per cent of the coastal waters are in good ecological condition. The leaching of nitrogen should be reduced by at least a third if Denmark is to live up to the EU's water framework directive, and this year agriculture plans to spread even more nitrogen on the fields.

It is unsustainable, and that is why the Green Transition Denmark supports the Climate Council's biodiversity proposal, where 630.000 hectares of agricultural land are taken out of use for biodiversity, and that at least 250.000 hectares of forest are raised and more production forest is laid out as untouched forest, so that more carbon can be sequestered in the wild. "Today, natural carbon sequestration, through uptake in forests, is the cheapest and most efficient way to extract carbon from the atmosphere, and we should invest much more in Danish climate policy instead of spending billions of tax kroner investing in unsafe technical fix with bovas in agriculture or CO2 capture systems on the chimneys", says Bjarke Møller.

Green Transition Denmark agrees with the Climate Council that Denmark cannot live up to the EU's water framework directive in 2027 and not live up to the EU's nature regulation of 30 per cent. protected nature in 2030, if no action is taken to limit agricultural areas.

Today, agriculture and forestry take up 72 per cent. of Denmark's land area, and the majority is used to produce feed for cows, pigs and other production animals in agriculture.

Climate tax is important, but not decisive
"It would be very good if the politicians could agree on a high and uniform climate tax for agriculture, because it could give all players in agriculture a strong incentive to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases. But the Climate Council's report actually documents that even if the politicians cannot agree on the greenhouse tax, you can actually achieve the same climate effect and remove 6,8 million tonnes of CO2e if you follow the Climate Council's proposal to protect the aquatic environment and biodiversity. It would be a very good idea here to create a state land fund to buy up land from landowners and start discussions on a major land reform, which can add extra speed to the transition,” says Bjarke Møller.

The costs of the Climate Council's biodiversity scenario are DKK 409 measured per ton reduced CO2e, and viewed in isolation, the climate price is higher than if you simply introduce a climate tax in agriculture, or if you simply focus unilaterally on protecting the water environment. But in the biodiversity scenario, there are, on the other hand, a number of positive economic side benefits that have not been taken into account, because it will strengthen biodiversity, protect drinking water, so that we avoid costly clean-up bills in the future, and it will increase the recreational value of Denmark's nature.